Ain't that the truth! LOL!

Paintsville played hard nosed and scrappy for all of the 1st half and most of the 2nd half. When the game started slipping away at the end, Paintsville went from very aggresive to somewhat dirty. Holmes did a great job maintaining their composure. Given the extent to which Paintsville was trying to goad the Dawgs into a scrap, I think I would have pulled out the starters a bit sooner. I was concerned that Holmes might lose a player or two for Saturday.

First off, Congrats Holmes and good luck the rest of the way. Second, Paintsville is not a dirty team, the first intentional foul was not an intentional ,just a hard foul on a break away. Bundy was clearly going for the ball and when two players are going full speed there is going to be hard contact.

 

I'm not referring to that foul. that play was just hard full speed action.

BUT at with about 1:20 to go in the game #4 and # 45 for paintsville show what kinda class they have... NONE

 

Dirty play at the sweet 16 is uncalled for.

show some class and take the loss and go on.

I really hate to see their Coach leave like that. After watching them wednesday, I thought, what a nice Team. But after today, not so nice. Shame on them for trying to bait the superior Team. I'm glad this wasn't last years Holmes Team they were playing. Had it been, some of those Paintsville players would of been ten rows deep, and visiting their dentist. Has this always been their style of play?

 

I think that is what is so great about this years Holmes team. They actually play with a lot of class, and don't let other things get in the way of what is most important and that is winning the game. That is why I believe this years Holmes team is better than last years team, even though last years team might have been more talented.

I think that is what is so great about this years Holmes team. They actually play with a lot of class, and don't let other things get in the way of what is most important and that is winning the game. That is why I believe this years Holmes team is better than last years team, even though last years team might have been more talented.

 

 

I agree with everything except talent. Last years Team may of had more "experienced" talent, but in my opinion there's a few D-1 players on this squad.

It's funny how mountain and private schools play scrappy and hard-nosed, but that kind of play from Louisville or inner city schools is considered thug. Things will never change in Kentucky and think that is why the University loses out on a lot of recruits nationwide because of that image.

Yep, I know what you're saying... You can't replace the top three from last year (Rice, Hill and Jefferson) but a few remained that actually contributed last year and they've continue to build off the success from last year's run... I'll be down in LEX in the AM for sure...

It's funny how mountain and private schools play scrappy and hard-nosed, but that kind of play from Louisville or inner city schools is considered thug. Things will never change in Kentucky and think that is why the University loses out on a lot of recruits nationwide because of that image.

 

well said :thumb:

It's funny how mountain and private schools play scrappy and hard-nosed, but that kind of play from Louisville or inner city schools is considered thug. Things will never change in Kentucky and think that is why the University loses out on a lot of recruits nationwide because of that image.

 

I'm not sure that I follow. The theme running throughout the entire thread is how "dirty" Paintsville played and how classy Holmes played. I say that from the perspective of being a Cov. Cath. fan who is darn tired of being eliminated by the Dawgs. I plan on being at Rupp again tomorrow to root for Arrez et. al.

It's funny how mountain and private schools play scrappy and hard-nosed, but that kind of play from Louisville or inner city schools is considered thug. Things will never change in Kentucky and think that is why the University loses out on a lot of recruits nationwide because of that image.

 

Paintsville was playing a team in Holmes that almost has always been considered as a team who plays dirty. Just about everyone across the state usually when they think of Holmes thinks of a team that might play dirty. That is the reputation they have. So when people are talking about how the team Holmes played against as being dirty, that really shows how that team really must have been playing dirty, for people to say that about the other team, instead of Holmes like in most years. So that is really saying something about how dirty Paintsville obviously played.

It's funny how mountain and private schools play scrappy and hard-nosed, but that kind of play from Louisville or inner city schools is considered thug. Things will never change in Kentucky and think that is why the University loses out on a lot of recruits nationwide because of that image.

 

I don't get what you are saying? Everyone who saw the game but one called the Mountain team dirty. Get the chip off of your shoulder.

Paintsville was playing a team in Holmes that almost has always been considered as a team who plays dirty. Just about everyone across the state usually when they think of Holmes thinks of a team that might play dirty. That is the reputation they have. So when people are talking about how the team Holmes played against as being dirty, that really shows how that team really must have been playing dirty, for people to say that about the other team, instead of Holmes like in most years. So that is really saying something about how dirty Paintsville obviously played.

 

Or what a special groups of kids Holmes has this year.

Or what a special groups of kids Holmes has this year.

:thumb:

Paintsville was playing a team in Holmes that almost has always been considered as a team who plays dirty. Just about everyone across the state usually when they think of Holmes thinks of a team that might play dirty. That is the reputation they have. So when people are talking about how the team Holmes played against as being dirty, that really shows how that team really must have been playing dirty, for people to say that about the other team, instead of Holmes like in most years. So that is really saying something about how dirty Paintsville obviously played.

 

I have never heard that.

 

I think of Holmes I think of an inner city school, with a great coach, and uber athletic players.

 

Seen them my entire life and I can't think of an instant I have ever characterized the program, the team, the school as being "dirty".

 

No clue where that reputation started.

Paintsville was playing a team in Holmes that almost has always been considered as a team who plays dirty. Just about everyone across the state usually when they think of Holmes thinks of a team that might play dirty. That is the reputation they have. So when people are talking about how the team Holmes played against as being dirty, that really shows how that team really must have been playing dirty, for people to say that about the other team, instead of Holmes like in most years. So that is really saying something about how dirty Paintsville obviously played.

 

I've watched Holmes since the 70s. I've never once thought of them as dirty or thugs.