Lawson hurt??

[Stray Gator]

Well, if you're disputing (a) and (b), then you are admitting that you think there's some kind of grand conspiracy being perpetuated. It's one thing to think that an injury is being blown out of proportion, and it's another thing entirely to blatantly fabricate events.

Therefore, I'll refer you to my initial post arguing that such a grand conspiracy simply doesn't make sense.

I don't think it's a "grand conspiracy"--just a purposeful exaggeration. That said, it's apparent that we have different perspectives, and I'm satisfied to leave it at that. Congrats again on the win. Your guys have the upper hand on ours this season, and no one is making excuses or suggesting there is anything fluky about it. Here's hoping everyone is healthy for the upcoming tournaments.

[BD80]

Well, if you're disputing (a) and (b), then you are admitting that you think there's some kind of grand conspiracy being perpetuated. It's one thing to think that an injury is being blown out of proportion, and it's another thing entirely to blatantly fabricate events.

Therefore, I'll refer you to my initial post arguing that such a grand conspiracy simply doesn't make sense.

Lawson was obviously NOT seriously injured. Did he inject? Don't know. Is there any evidence he did? Doesn't matter.

The FACT is that unc made more of the injury than was warranted. The same thing that got 'ol roy so dadgum defensive last year.

We are not saying the injury was fabricated. It was exaggerated.

You wouldn't be so defensive if there weren't truth there.

[devildeac]

Nobody makes mountains out of molehills quite like UNC and Duke fans. Its actually one of the things I like least about this rivalry. People will read into Lawson's toe, or Coach K's injury comment last year , etc whatever they want to. I do have one question for fans of both sides to which this nonsense is such serious business. When you start having to question the integrity and intent of every single action some player or coach on the other team makes, do you get a complimentary tinfoil hat in the mail?

FWIW, one of the local journalists (cough, cough) inserted the "...unlike some other schools" into K's statement last year about Duke's policy about discussing/publicizing injuries. Someone on the board here linked it last year and again this year, IIRC. Nothing like a little "yellow" (or light blue) journalism/inaccurate reporting to stoke those rivalry fires a bit more.

[throatybeard]

I can't believe this argument about Lawson's injury is still going on. I guess I'll repeat what I said in the thread in which Ziggy was trying to be nice to us, but we turned it into a pee fight.

There's a serious failure of logic in the "UNC fake injury" conspiracy theory. What, exactly, are they supposed to gain by exaggerating some kid's injury? Presumably, Mike Krzyzewski prepares our guys same for UNC irrespective of whether Ty Lawson plays or not. It's not like Jon Scheyer and Gerald Henderson walk out on the court, see Ty Lawson unexpectedly, and then soil their britches.

They may be doing it, but I don't see how it benefits them. So who cares?

[roywhite]

I can't believe this argument about Lawson's injury is still going on. I guess I'll repeat what I said in the thread in which Ziggy was trying to be nice to us, but we turned it into a pee fight.

There's a serious failure of logic in the "UNC fake injury" conspiracy theory. What, exactly, are they supposed to gain by exaggerating some kid's injury? Presumably, Mike Krzyzewski prepares our guys same for UNC irrespective of whether Ty Lawson plays or not. It's not like Jon Scheyer and Gerald Henderson walk out on the court, see Ty Lawson unexpectedly, and then soil their britches.

They may be doing it, but I don't see how it benefits them. So who cares?

Some of the fans care, however rational or not. You cared enough to comment.

It's spin, gamesmanship, and part of their playbook that was authored by Dean Smith.

Big deal? No.

I'm done on this topic.

[BD80]

Nobody makes mountains out of molehills quite like UNC and Duke fans. ... I do have one question for fans of both sides to which this nonsense is such serious business. When you start having to question the integrity and intent of every single action some player or coach on the other team makes, do you get a complimentary tinfoil hat in the mail?

No dadgum it. Do you get a hat for each post that questions the integrity and intent of other posters?

Hmm. If I recall the long thread a while ago, this would qualify as irony.

[throatybeard]

Some of the fans care, however rational or not. You cared enough to comment.

I often care enough to comment about whether we're comporting ourselves in a rational, reasonable, and dignified manner (or not). Often, we aren't.

I don't care that much about Lawson's foot, at all, no offense to him.

[dukegirlinsc]

I have to agree there. I didn't know about the shot though.

In reference to your picture in your signature, I can't wait to have kids...the main reason is so I can dress them in all Duke clothes, all of the time. (Half-way kidding.)

[RelativeWays]

FWIW, one of the local journalists (cough, cough) inserted the "...unlike some other schools" into K's statement last year about Duke's policy about discussing/publicizing injuries. Someone on the board here linked it last year and again this year, IIRC. Nothing like a little "yellow" (or light blue) journalism/inaccurate reporting to stoke those rivalry fires a bit more.

And that's kind of the point. You can discuss the ethics of gamesmanship such as mysterious injuries or using scrub players to antagonize the opposing team's pg (and hope they get a technical/ejected) or whatever scenario you can dig up, I'm sure both teams have skeletons in their closet where they've tried to push questionable advantages, there are no white knights here. As with K's comments, i think the media took a hold of Lawson's toe injury and ran it into the ground, as they do everything with this rivalry. Did UNC build it up bigger than it was, maybe, but does it pass the common sense test. Uhhh, no.
As mentioned before, nobody at Duke is dumb enough to fall for such a ruse, and they knew Lawson would play. Some people have mentioned that this was an attempt for Huckleberry Hound to maintain his image and curry favor for his team with...the media? fans? Santa Claus? You might have have string of credibilty with the sole exception that his team is playing the most hated college basketball team in America. All Roy has to do to curry favor is show up. K's performace in Beijing has earned him alot of goodwill whereas before he was probably one of the most hated men in sports behind the Steinbrenner clan and Bill Belichick. Despite the fact that the media has mellowed on him a bit doesn't change the fact that a lot of people just do not like and do not trust Coach K. Too bad for them, but there it is nonetheless.
To bring this back to the media a bit, there's a little secret that some of you might know but maybe some don't. As far as the rise of the "Duke gets all the calls" phenomenon, this is an issue largely maintained not by Len Elmore, Jimmy Dykes or whatever announcer you can think of, but by the networks they work for. ESPN, Fox sports, they give their announcers talking points to focus on during the game, whether its the heart and hard work of Timler Tebrough, Lawsons toe, or those questionable calls Duke always seems to get. Why? To get people emotionally attached, thats why, objective observations are for schmucks and do little for ratings. Why not cast Duke as the villain, insinuate they cheat and guarantee that the average viewer will stick around to see those white boy snobs get whats coming to 'em. Sensationalism is where its at, sports coverage is just following age old trends. Me, I just don't care.

[RelativeWays]

No dadgum it. Do you get a hat for each post that questions the integrity and intent of other posters?

Hmm. If I recall the long thread a while ago, this would qualify as irony.

Actually I wasn't questioning any poster's integrity or intent, I was questioning their gullibility and paranoia. There are plenty of people who sincerely believe every accusation placed on either Coach K, Huckleberry and their respective programs. I feel sorry for them, honestly.

[OldSchool]

I don't know why people can't wrap their minds around why a team or its media sycophants would ever exaggerate a player's injury.

It has nothing to do with Ol' Roy trying to somehow "game" Coach K, and it doesn't require some "grand conspiracy."

It simply has to do with influencing the fan perceptions of that player.

If Lawson manages to play well, even with his "turf toe-like" injury, it makes his efforts seem even more heroic -- what a warrior, to play so well with such an injury!

And if he plays poorly, well after all he was injured.

Which is not of great concern to me as a Duke supporter, except that I found the disproportionate media coverage of Lawson's stubbed toe (I am sure it hurt; I know it hurts when I stub my toe) relative to the injuries Duke was dealing with somewhat annoying.

Even here on DBR, we had posters criticizing Lance's play without even acknowledging that he played the game on a sprained ankle!

[CameronBornAndBred]

Earlier this evening Lawson was seen riding down Franklin Street in a wheelchair after a vicious bout with a pair of toenail clippers.

[Biscuit]

As mentioned before, nobody at Duke is dumb enough to fall for such a ruse, and they knew Lawson would play.

There were a lot of people on this board last year that "knew" the exact same thing prior the the first UNC-Duke game at the Dean Dome last year. How did that turn out?

Really, that's the only thing I find off-putting about this whole thing. If you want to launch conspiracy theories about UNC injuries generally, rather than acknowledging that players on all teams get hurt and some play through it and some don't, that's fine. But as far as this particular player goes, I was a lurker around here last February and I remember all the threads about how there was no question Lawson would play in the game after he got hurt vs. Florida State. I think it was even discussed by DBR in its front page content. And now you are making the same allegations that were proven false last year. It makes no sense, and it doesn't reflect well.

I commented on this matter initially only because the DBR included a discussion of Lawson's injury in its game recap, and actually made it the longest paragraph of its recap. I like DBR generally as an enlightened and interesting view of things from the Duke perspective, but that read like something off a UNC-obssessed version of truthaboutduke.com instead of a decent, rational blog, and I just wanted to point it out to the site's owners. I recognize that in the comments, people should be free to launch whatever tinfoil hat theories they wish.

[UrinalCake]

I do think that Carolina had something to gain by drawing attention to the injury - if they had lost the game, the Selection committee would take into account the injury when assigning the tournament seedings. It might not have made a difference, and they won the game anyways, but I do think that media coverage can affect the tournament seedings.

That said, you can't blame the local media for harping on the injury. It's an intriguing story line because of the fact that Lawson missed last year's game and Duke won. Also, while it would have been nice to give more coverage to Duke's injuries, the announcers also did not rehash the fact that Ginyard and Graves were out too, or that Zellar missed most of the season. I really think a bigger deal was made of it only because it was Lawson.

[Biscuit]

I do think that Carolina had something to gain by drawing attention to the injury - if they had lost the game, the Selection committee would take into account the injury when assigning the tournament seedings. It might not have made a difference, and they won the game anyways, but I do think that media coverage can affect the tournament seedings.

That said, you can't blame the local media for harping on the injury. It's an intriguing story line because of the fact that Lawson missed last year's game and Duke won. Also, while it would have been nice to give more coverage to Duke's injuries, the announcers also did not rehash the fact that Ginyard and Graves were out too, or that Zellar missed most of the season. I really think a bigger deal was made of it only because it was Lawson.

UNC was a #1 seed unless they lost Sunday's game and their first round ACC tournament game. Even then they might have gotten a #1 seed if Oklahoma didn't win the Big 12 tournament. As Heelo said, if they wanted to make some sort of sympathy play, this would be a silly time to use it.

You're right about the media coverage. This was a huge game with significant conference and national implications between two top-ten teams, and Duke has never won a game against UNC when Lawson is on the court. If the media hadn't made a big deal of his injury, they wouldn't have been doing their job. If you're not gonna cover a Ty Lawson injury in a UNC-Duke game, why bother having media coverage at all?

[RelativeWays]

There were a lot of people on this board last year that "knew" the exact same thing prior the the first UNC-Duke game at the Dean Dome last year. How did that turn out?

Well the huge difference is that anyone who saw the FSU-UNC game saw Ryan Reid wrestle Lawson to the ground thus resulting in the high ankle sprain, there was little doubt that the injury was real, the only question was the severity and if Lawson could go for the Duke game, did anyone think he'd miss it. If memory serves, the Duke game WAS the next game and people on the UNC staff wouldn't know right away if Lawson would be able to move with that ankle, let alone play, I doubt anyone at Duke would know more than they did at the time. I'm sure people doubted UNC's intent when they waited a couple of days before ruling Lawson out, but you have to reason that you would want to wait as long as possible before ruling out your starting PG for one of the big games of the year.
As far as the toe injury, I see it like this. Lawson is believed to be the most important UNC player, an injury to his toe is going to affect his speed and cutting ability. So it didn't surprise me to see the media blather on an on about an injury to most important player of the team most favored to win the NC as they play their arch rival and most hated college team in the US. This is little more than media exploitation of their audience, they done it with other teams and other sports, I don't see the big deal.

[Biscuit]

Well the huge difference is that anyone who saw the FSU-UNC game saw Ryan Reid wrestle Lawson to the ground thus resulting in the high ankle sprain, there was little doubt that the injury was real, the only question was the severity and if Lawson could go for the Duke game, did anyone think he'd miss it. If memory serves, the Duke game WAS the next game and people on the UNC staff wouldn't know right away if Lawson would be able to move with that ankle, let alone play, I doubt anyone at Duke would know more than they did at the time. I'm sure people doubted UNC's intent when they waited a couple of days before ruling Lawson out, but you have to reason that you would want to wait as long as possible before ruling out your starting PG for one of the big games of the year.

My point was that the reaction on this board, and even from this site's writers, was the same last year as it was this year. Skepticism, doubt, poking fun at the severity of UNC player injuries. It was fine then, to be expected at a Duke basketball site I suppose. I just couldn't believe that after having completely missed the mark last time, they would do it again one year later.

If you think someone's doing something that you consider unsavory or immoral or whatever negative adjective you choose, and it turns out they are very clearly not doing whatever it was that you disliked, why would you turn around and accuse them of the very same thing at the next available opportunity?

[OldSchool]

Skepticism, doubt, poking fun at the severity of UNC player injuries.

Oh, come on, Biscuit. Surely even you must have chuckled when they compared Lawson's stubbed toe to "turf toe."

The wikipedia page on turf toe has a link to a photo of Deion Sanders' real turf toe. OUCH!!

http://www.btls.com/joomla/component...2_itemId=43542

Watching the breathless media coverage of Lawson's big toe reminded me of the famous statement by Oscar Wilde, speaking of a characteristically lachrymose passage by Dickens: "You would need to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the death of Little Nell."

[RelativeWays]

If you think someone's doing something that you consider unsavory or immoral or whatever negative adjective you choose, and it turns out they are very clearly not doing whatever it was that you disliked, why would you turn around and accuse them of the very same thing at the next available opportunity?

Its a dumb thing to do, but I think its pretty idiotic to point out the flaws and inequities in one team, when your own team is just as guilty of the same thing. Thats one thing I've had a hard time dealing with when it comes to UNC fans, at least on message boards and the like. How can you begrudge Duke for "getting all the calls" when the stats show UNC benefits from a far better foul call ratio than any other team in the ACC? How can you point to the amount of FTs Duke takes versus their opponents as proof they get all the calls when a) UNC leads the league in amount of FTs taken, b) your star player just broke the NCAA record for FTs made? You can't reconcile that logic without looking like a hypocrite. Duke fans are guilty as well. We'll whine and cry about Hansbrough benefitting from questionable fouls when JJ was great at jumping into defenders and drawing contact. Thats what they're supposed to do, even if we don't always like it when the opposition gets away with it.

[Biscuit]

Oh, come on, Biscuit. Surely even you must have chuckled when they compared Lawson's stubbed toe to "turf toe."

The wikipedia page on turf toe has a link to a photo of Deion Sanders' real turf toe. OUCH!!

http://www.btls.com/joomla/component...2_itemId=43542

Watching the breathless media coverage of Lawson's big toe reminded me of the famous statement by Oscar Wilde, speaking of a characteristically lachrymose passage by Dickens: "You would need to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the death of Little Nell."

Sure, the comparison was out of hand, and even I got a chuckle out of it, especially since there's not turf on a basketball court.

The coverage, not so much. He's arguably been the difference in every single UNC-Duke game since he stepped on campus. You couldn't cover the game without covering his toe injury, plain and simple.

Also, the stuff I was talking about was this paragraph from the DBR game review, which has no basis whatsoever in fact:

"As we pretty much assumed, the ancient UNC stunt of saying that a player is highly questionable after a practice injury, only to turn around and have a starring role was whipped out again: Ty Lawson, who was said to not be able to walk after practice on Friday and who sat out Saturday, predictably had a big game, finishing with almost a triple double (13 points, nine from the line, eight boards and nine assists). If it hadn’t happened so many times over the years, it would be more believable. You can assume that a Michael Jordan or Christian Laettner or a guy who’s just exceptionally tough-minded can ovecome an injury like that, but it just happens so often that it has to be a strategy, and a rather old one now at that. He showed absolutely no effects of an injury."

1. Roy doesn't do this. Certainly not enough to call it a "strategy." I've brought it up several times, as has Heelo, and nobody's provided a list of similar incidents in the Williams era in response.

2. You would think folks around here would be particularly wary about making ridiculous claims like this after calling out Roy and the UNC athletic department and making the exact same allegations with respect to the exact same player last season ... and being 100% wrong. That's what I thought was amateurish and below the usual standards of the DBR.