ADVERTISEMENT

Anybody else see…

Scene 1: a player makes a shot and then does the 3 goggles thing as they run down the court away from the opposing players.

Scene 2: a player makes a shot and immediately runs over and stands 2 feet in front of an opposing player and mimics the 3 goggles thing.

Are these the same?
I'm a fan of Caitlin, she talked that talk and walked that walk the entire tournament, on multiple occasions, before, during, and after games. She lost, and it was given back to her in spades. She knows it's all good, and has said so.

The immediate crazed reaction to LSU, was rightfully called out for the absurd double standard that was used.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlaTarHeel
I'm a fan of Caitlin, she talked that talk and walked that walk the entire tournament, on multiple occasions, before, during, and after games. She lost, and it was given back to her in spades. She knows it's all good, and has said so.

The immediate crazed reaction to LSU, was rightfully called out for the absurd double standard that was used.

You completely avoided speaking to my post. But that’s alright. I definitely don’t care enough about this situation or women’s basketball to press the issue.
 
You completely avoided speaking to my post. But that’s alright. I definitely don’t care enough about this situation or women’s basketball to press the issue.
I do find it interesting how people have chosen to look at the two can’t see me instances as the same. Not even close imo. I also find it interesting that Caitlin is not near as phased by the hype as much as the lsu player, and she has said as much.
 
You completely avoided speaking to my post. But that’s alright. I definitely don’t care enough about this situation or women’s basketball to press the issue.
I thought I addressed it, the scenario did not fit. Caitlin went to Van Lith gestured, told her to shut up, referenced kicking her ass by 15, waved bye‐bye to South Carolina after the upset, gave LSU some pre game "can't see me". She talked that talk in all areas, and backed it up. Not a random undirected 3 to herself. All good to me and most.

She got it back when she was on the other end of the score. Oh, that was over the line to some, not to Caitlin though, which I also like about her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlaTarHeel
I thought I addressed it, the scenario did not fit. Caitlin went to Van Lith gestured, told her to shut up, referenced kicking her ass by 15, waved bye‐bye to South Carolina after the upset, gave LSU some pre game "can't see me". She talked that talk in all areas, and backed it up. Not a random undirected 3 to herself. All good to me and most.

She got it back when she was on the other end of the score. Oh, that was over the line to some, not to Caitlin though, which I also like about her.

If that's indeed how it went down, then what's good for the goose...

I didn't know really how it went down because as I said, I think women's basketball is a bore and didn't really pay attention. So again, if Caitlin Clark was up in people's faces doing the same thing, then I have no problem with the response by the LSU girl.

With all that said, the invoking of race and/or gender into every discussion is so f*ckin tiresome and lazy (I'm looking at you Dawn Staley). It shows a lack of thoughtfulness and nuance and is the low hanging fruit. Furthermore, the chip on the LSU girl's shoulder is unattractive TO ME and obviously to a lot of other people. You can't cry about how you're being received when you approach situations the way she did. It's ok to act that way. It's not ok to act indignant when people don't like the way you act. I don't guess there's anything inherently wrong with it. But if it's objectionable to most people, then oh well. Thems the breaks.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT