About those free throws

[06wildcat]

A simple review of the box score/play-by-play offers a more realistic view of the game than douchenozzles like DeArmond. Quick recap: K-State shot 34 FTs, MU 13.

Of K-State's 34:
8 came in the final minute when MU was intentionally fouling (little i intentional)
4 came on 3-point shots from Pullen (these aren't even really in question are they?)
4 came on Intentional fouls

The first one is as solid as solid gets for an intentional foul. I guess one could argue that the MU player was "going for the ball" on the second one. If "going for the ball" includes being so far out of position that you have to wrap both arms around CK an butt hump him into the tunnel, sure it's a "questionable call.

So 14-16 fouls really distort the final box score, but don't show that refs were incredibly biased against MU. The actually difference in fouls was 5: KSU 19, MU 24. That shows pretty well that K-State was aggressive/getting fouled in unusual ways to get 1.4 FTA/foul.

[kcchiefdav]

Your logic is fine so you are right, however, we don't have to answer for this kind of crap. We aren't a team that's owned the conference on the back of getting all the calls in all the big games...a la KU. The way I see it, the refs owe us about 15 years worth of make up calls...I AM KEEPING TRACK, YOU ZEBRA BASTARDS.

[CatMission]

Thank you.  I am now going to return to my bosses office armed with the knowledge to stop his whining about the free throw margin.

Before you ask, I am not making egg mcmuffins.  I have a real job and just happen to work for a mu guy.

[EMAWzified]

Thank you.  I am now going to return to my bosses office armed with the knowledge to stop his whining about the free throw margin.

Before you ask, I am not making egg mcmuffins.  I have a real job and just happen to work for a mu guy.

You need to find another job. Sure the money looks good now, but cooking meth has no real future.