Jump to content


SHG vs. CGHS


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
8 replies to this topic

#1 cyclones2793

cyclones2793

    Silver Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 215 posts
  • Location:Springfield

Posted 22 September 2007 - 12:57 PM

19-8 Glenwood. They pretty much just manhandled us, it wasn't a pretty sight

#2 Teetime

Teetime

    Platinum Member

  • Super Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 861 posts

Posted 22 September 2007 - 02:48 PM

Ouch.

I think last years freshman also dropped one to Chatham (but on a last second pass completion).

It will be interesting to see how those kids do in the JV game Monday.

#3 Steve

Steve

    THE

  • Admin
  • 2,245 posts
  • Location:Springfield

Posted 22 September 2007 - 03:52 PM

I heard that the frosh scored late in the game to make it 19-8.  Talking with a Chatham freshman parent, this class of kids is very good...

#4 jdurham

jdurham

    Elite Member

  • Super Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,337 posts
  • Location:peoria, il

Posted 22 September 2007 - 07:08 PM

QUOTE (Steve @ Sep 22 2007, 04:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I heard that the frosh scored late in the game to make it 19-8.  Talking with a Chatham freshman parent, this class of kids is very good...



So, it was 19-0 until late?  Wow, they must be pretty good.  Or was it 19-2?  Or 12-8 until late?

Thanks,
josh

#5 Seahawk86

Seahawk86

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 22 September 2007 - 07:39 PM

I was told SHG dd not play well and the play calling had a lot to be desired.  I understand when you loose the officials do not have a huge part in the game, but this time I believe at least one did.  The official that called back one touchdown and a run to the two yard line was one of Dan Rourke's coaches.  I am baffled why an athletic director would even want one of his own coaches to referee, knowing that it would create controversy.  I think Rourke needs to read the inside of his program in which he talks about honesty, sportsmanship and other words he does not value.

#6 cyclones2793

cyclones2793

    Silver Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 215 posts
  • Location:Springfield

Posted 22 September 2007 - 11:20 PM

it was 19-0 until about a minute or so left in the game

#7 duke39

duke39

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 26 September 2007 - 12:30 AM

QUOTE (valvino @ Sep 22 2007, 08:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I was told SHG dd not play well and the play calling had a lot to be desired.  I understand when you loose the officials do not have a huge part in the game, but this time I believe at least one did.  The official that called back one touchdown and a run to the two yard line was one of Dan Rourke's coaches.  I am baffled why an athletic director would even want one of his own coaches to referee, knowing that it would create controversy.  I think Rourke needs to read the inside of his program in which he talks about honesty, sportsmanship and other words he does not value.


hey valvino we need to get something straight. Unless you have your own football crew, I think you need to back off. There is such a shortage of crews, it's not funny. The official that did that game does not coach with Dan. He happens to coach another sport. I can tell you this he is not going to cheat for anyone. If you look around all the sports, there are quite a few officials that have some tie to a school. It's just the way it is.

#8 Seahawk86

Seahawk86

    Forum Member

  • Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 26 September 2007 - 07:04 AM

QUOTE (duke39 @ Sep 26 2007, 01:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
QUOTE (valvino @ Sep 22 2007, 08:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I was told SHG dd not play well and the play calling had a lot to be desired.  I understand when you loose the officials do not have a huge part in the game, but this time I believe at least one did.  The official that called back one touchdown and a run to the two yard line was one of Dan Rourke's coaches.  I am baffled why an athletic director would even want one of his own coaches to referee, knowing that it would create controversy.  I think Rourke needs to read the inside of his program in which he talks about honesty, sportsmanship and other words he does not value.


hey valvino we need to get something straight. Unless you have your own football crew, I think you need to back off. There is such a shortage of crews, it's not funny. The official that did that game does not coach with Dan. He happens to coach another sport. I can tell you this he is not going to cheat for anyone. If you look around all the sports, there are quite a few officials that have some tie to a school. It's just the way it is.

Duke, I do not care if he coaches the pom squad, it is wrong for any coach who coaches or works for that school to officiate in a game they play.  Then you are saying its ok for Leonard to umpire any SHG game, or Klunick could ref a soccer game between SHG and another school.  Also, get pissed at someone else besides me.  I never called Moomey a rat or homer like others have in other postings.  I do not know him and could care less.  Rourke could have gotten some of the JFL guys who are always looking for more games.

#9 Newbie

Newbie

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 93 posts

Posted 26 September 2007 - 10:54 AM

QUOTE (duke39 @ Sep 26 2007, 01:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I can tell you this he is not going to cheat for anyone. If you look around all the sports, there are quite a few officials that have some tie to a school.

But it doesn't have to be SUCH a direct tie?  

I consider myself an honest, objective person.  I admit - I don't know much about football.  I saw the game.  I am not accusing anyone.  I am not casting a doubt.  But the timing of the whistle was different, depending on who had the ball, if the whistle was blown, at all.  I wouldn't care if the SHG WON the game -  I'd still say the same thing.  What I saw and heard is what I saw and heard.  Anyone who wants to challenge me in person - let me know and I will meet you anywere anytime and say the same thing, face to face.

Edited by Newbie, 26 September 2007 - 10:56 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users