I happened to be in there when this interview was taking place, and what I heard was something like "Your team missed such and such number of lay-ups in the closing minutes, not using the backboard, is this something that you will work on in the off season?"

 

It doesn't matter how many people are watching a game, I see this as a legitimate question. The fact is, if they made some of those easy lay-ups, LexCath would have been in the finals.

 

Also behind the scenes just before the press conference, there was a lot, and I do mean a lot, of complaining going on about the officiating, stating that the calls/no calls cost LexCath the game. But again, facts are facts, if they made those lay-ups, a difference outcome.

 

They said "Is that something you teach?" Its on Kentucky.com... You can listen to it if you want... I don't care if that affected the game or not, because it may well have, but I don't think you say this to HS kids... Maybe if this was a college or pro game, but its not. Those kids busted their tails and they don't need to be told how they are inadequate... Not at that moment...

They said "Is that something you teach?" Its on Kentucky.com... You can listen to it if you want... I don't care if that affected the game or not, because it may well have, but I don't think you say this to HS kids... Maybe if this was a college or pro game, but its not. Those kids busted their tails and they don't need to be told how they are inadequate... Not at that moment...

 

Ok, I did listen to it. Maybe the guy should have asked it another way and not ask if it was something that they teach, but again they did miss crucial lay-ups at the end.

 

And it was towards the coach, not the players, they asked a question, that's all. And I think that the coach also responded appropriately.

 

But as I also mentioned, there was a lot being said behind the scenes about balme just before this.

 

But, congratulations to Lex Cath on a great season. LexCath is Lex Cath, they will be just reload. :thumb:

 

And I give credit to Holmes as well, 17 points down early on and they didn't give up, they did what they had to do to chip away at that lead to come back and win. :thumb:

I wonder where all the LC fans are who laughed when I said Holmes would be the deepest and most athletic team LC saw? (Mortgagegeek, Knightsdad, SuperB)

 

When LexCath loses, I try to wait a while so as not to make an emotional response which I later regret.

 

The foul disparity won for Holmes. Perimeter fouls were called, nothing was called in the paint.

 

LexCath didn't wear down, they ran out of players because of above.

 

Holmes out rebounded the Knights which indicates they played harder underneath. Novosel got zero free throws which is amazing considering the banging going on inside.

 

Henderson had 11 rebounds to 1 for Sanford. He outscored Sanford 10-8. They both had one assist. Neither was called for a foul. Sanford is the fourth option for LexCath after Stewart, Novosel and Smart. Henderson is the center of Holmes offense.

 

If Holmes is so athletic compared to LexCath, why did they fall behind 19-4 when neither team was in foul trouble? LexCath's production diminished when the fouls accumulated. Both teams played hard but one got a disparate number of calls.

 

Holmes won a close game. It wasn't a blowout as Eta Rho seems to think.

When LexCath loses, I try to wait a while so as not to make an emotional response which I later regret.

 

The foul disparity won for Holmes. Perimeter fouls were called, nothing was called in the paint.

 

LexCath didn't wear down, they ran out of players because of above.

 

Holmes out rebounded the Knights which indicates they played harder underneath. Novosel got zero free throws which is amazing considering the banging going on inside.

 

Henderson had 11 rebounds to 1 for Sanford. He outscored Sanford 10-8. They both had one assist. Neither was called for a foul. Sanford is the fourth option for LexCath after Stewart, Novosel and Smart. Henderson is the center of Holmes offense.

 

If Holmes is so athletic compared to LexCath, why did they fall behind 19-4 when neither team was in foul trouble? LexCath's production diminished when the fouls accumulated. Both teams played hard but one got a disparate number of calls.

 

Holmes won a close game. It wasn't a blowout as Eta Rho seems to think.

 

So I guess Holmes won because of the refs calling it one sided?

 

I never once said it was a blow out, just stated facts.

 

Lexcath got in foul trouble because Holmes was smart and used their athleticism to get by the slower LC players and draw a foul inside by using good head fakes and getting their man in the air, whereas Lexcath started settling for jumpers once they got a big lead. When you play defense with your hands, rather than your feet, many fouls are going to be called.

 

The LC players got in foul trouble because Holmes was quick off the dribble causing them to be a step too late and forcing them to foul to prevent easy layups. If you want to use the foul disparity as the motive for Lexcath's loss, go ahead, but Holmes was clearly the better TEAM and their depth was what won it.

 

I believe Ricardo Johnson fouled out in this game as well and Clark had 3. Pittman stepping in with 15 off the bench was the X-factor.

LexCath gets all the calls in the 11th Regions. So to start complaining now is a BIG JOKE! It is no fun when the rabbit got the gun! Remember you can not take the 11th Region officiating with you to the Sweet 16.

 

Where have all the calls been since 2002?

 

I thought Stewart's 4th foul summed up the game. Less than a minute to go in the 3rd, and why he was on the floor I don't know, but he gets beat off dribble and sticks two hands in the guys chest. Obvious foul that Salsman didn't even complain about.

LexCath gets all the calls in the 11th Regions. So to start complaining now is a BIG JOKE! It is no fun when the rabbit got the gun! Remember you can not take the 11th Region officiating with you to the Sweet 16.

Are you really serious about this?

 

Lexcath got in foul trouble because Holmes was smart and used their athleticism to get by the slower LC players and draw a foul inside by using good head fakes and getting their man in the air, whereas Lexcath started settling for jumpers once they got a big lead. When you play defense with your hands, rather than your feet, many fouls are going to be called.

 

I reviewed the stats after your post calling me out and gave my read on what happened. I did not say I disagreed with a specific call(s). The totals were disturbing to me. Henderson especially was all over Novosel with his body on missed layups and rebounds but fouls only occur outside the paint in some games. Either call them both ways or don't call them. LexCath wins either case. Call them one way, the team on the short end loses.

 

Holmes is so much quicker than LexCath but so much slower than Mason County maybe?

 

I agree about LexCath settling for long shots instead of going inside being another reason we lost. LexCath should have continued going inside and sooner or later we would have won. LexCath gave away the game with missed threes when they should have been working the ball in. This is also true of our other losses.

 

Lexcath got in foul trouble because Holmes was smart and used their athleticism to get by the slower LC players and draw a foul inside by using good head fakes and getting their man in the air, whereas Lexcath started settling for jumpers once they got a big lead. When you play defense with your hands, rather than your feet, many fouls are going to be called.

 

I reviewed the stats after your post calling me out and gave my read on what happened. I did not say I disagreed with a specific call(s). The totals were disturbing to me. Henderson especially was all over Novosel with his body on missed layups and rebounds but fouls only occur outside the paint in some games. Either call them both ways or don't call them. LexCath wins either case. Call them one way, the team on the short end loses.

 

Holmes is so much quicker than LexCath but so much slower than Mason County maybe?

 

I agree about LexCath settling for long shots instead of going inside being another reason we lost. LexCath should have continued going inside and sooner or later we would have won. LexCath gave away the game with missed threes when they should have been working the ball in. This is also true of our other losses.

 

 

Which is how Mason County won their game with Holmes. 1-6 from 3-point range, then quickly adjusted. Beat Holmes inside with a huge rebounding edge and getting the lion's share of their points in the paint and at the line.

 

 

Which is how Mason County won their game with Holmes. 1-6 from 3-point range, then quickly adjusted. Beat Holmes inside with a huge rebounding edge and getting the lion's share of their points in the paint and at the line.

 

Dead on.