Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Paintsville VS. Lawrence Co. ROUND II!
#48
"PUPS 52" Wrote:sportwhiz that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life, the color of the floor and the lighting. The DAWGS won fair and square so leave it at that and get over the loss.
Like I said earlier, LC outplayed PHS. I didn't say PHS lost because of the lighting or floor. If you go back and read what I said first, then you will see that. PHS did not have an answer for Thompson. But, Thompson is not the only good player the Dogs have.

Hopefully PHS's home court advantage (hot gym) will help them. If it does, then great. But that doesn't make it an excuse for LC. No one will come on here for the Dogs and say that LC got beat because of the heat. Just like no one said PHS lost because of the LC's home court advantage. PHS lost because they flat out got outplayed period. Too many people try to read between the lines or I don't know, maybe they don't have anything else better to do than to argue and make absurd acusations.

You better wear a short sleeve shirt Friday night. I have a feeling it's going to be HOT.:BigLaugh: :BigLaugh: :BigLaugh:
Messages In This Thread
Paintsville VS. Lawrence Co. ROUND II! - by #_4 - 12-04-2005, 01:02 AM
Paintsville VS. Lawrence Co. ROUND II! - by ACE - 12-07-2005, 12:01 AM
Paintsville VS. Lawrence Co. ROUND II! - by sportwhiz - 12-07-2005, 10:39 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)