#3 Oklahoma @ Kansas

[05_never_again]

There is no doubt, no doubt, this review will go Oklahoma's way

 

[Switch 625]

Don't think that part is reviewable

I think they might be seeing if the transfer of the ball was moving forward (which would make it an illegal forward pass)

They came back and declared forward progress on the scoop and score against Ole Miss last week.

 

[feathersax]

Forward lateral! Penalize Sooners!

 

[bamawriter]

They came back and declared forward progress on the scoop and score against Ole Miss last week.

They claimed that was the call on the field, thus not reviewable.

 

[hUTch2002]

That’s such BS. The runner’s forward progress was stopped. Had he fumbled that ball would not go to Kansas.

 

[GBO18]

Dude was knocked back two yards but nah his forward progress wasn’t stopped. Refs are bad everywhere.

 

[Switch 625]

Shocker, call goes for OU.

 

[05_never_again]

They came back and declared forward progress on the scoop and score against Ole Miss last week.

Not as the result of a review though. After the play was over, they decided their ruling on the field was forward progress was stopped

 

[MSCE09]

He crossed the LOS prior to the hand off though. BigXII protecting the bell cow.

 

[Switch 625]

They claimed that was the call on the field, thus not reviewable.

They claimed that after the review. That was NOT the call on the field.

 

[OrangeEtBlanc]

Screw-job by the refs against Kansas. So sick of this crap in college football. Illinois had 2 TDs taken off the board by highly questionable calls against Penn State. It’s almost just blatant now.

 

[05_never_again]

They claimed that after the review. That was NOT the call on the field.

There was no review. They let it play out, then decided their ruling on the field was that his progress was stopped.

 

[GetEmVols]

So last week against ole miss that is a forward progress stop of possession. Today it is legal. Got it.

 

[05_never_again]

So last week against ole miss that is a forward progress stop of possession. Today it is legal. Got it.

There was a review of the play in this game. There was no review of the play last week.

It was still BS given that they let our play continue then decided after the fact that his forward progress was stopped, but it's a different deal once you initiate a review because forward progress isn't reviewable.

 

[GetEmVols]

There was a review of the play in this game. There was no review of the play last week.

And they still messed it up.

 

[MSCE09]

That has to be forward progress. If Kansas had stripped it there they don’t get the ball OU should t be given the opportunity to advance the ball in that case either.

 

[bigdaddy]

So last week against ole miss that is a forward progress stop of possession. Today it is legal. Got it.

That was clearly forward progress stopped. But hey gotta protect the number one chance for the playoffs

 

[Switch 625]

There was no review. They let it play out, then decided their ruling on the field was that his progress was stopped.

Bull. They got together after the play and made up the forward progress call. There was no whistle.

 

[05_never_again]

And they still messed it up.

Oh, I'm not saying it wasn't BS. But that is how they were able to rule that Corral's forward progress was stopped...that was their ruling on the field, not an overturned call as a result of a review.

 

[OrangeEtBlanc]

So last week against ole miss that is a forward progress stop of possession. Today it is legal. Got it.

Have to protect the ranked teams, especially those in contention for the CFP.

You have to beat the other team AND the refs nowadays.

Upsets are bad for business.

 

[Voltopia]

Typical "protect the special team" crap. Now watch ESPN spend the last three minutes blowing smoke up Kansas's rear end talking about how special they are. They won't give you a fair game, but they'll praise you while they rob you.

 

[05_never_again]

Bull. They got together after the play and made up the forward progress call. There was no whistle.

No bull. There was no review initiated. They let the play play out, then made a ruling. It didn't go to a booth review. It was BS, but that is how they were able to make the call they did because it didn't go to a video review.

 

[Switch 625]

No bull. There was no review initiated. They let the play play out, then made a ruling. It didn't go to a booth review. It was BS, but that is how they were able to make the call they did because it didn't go to a video review.

Why was there a ruling to be made? No flag. No whistle. No reason at all to even get together to discuss that play.

 

[05_never_again]

Why was there a ruling to be made? No flag. No whistle. No reason at all to even get together to discuss that play.

It's happened before when there are questions about forward progress. That was a horrendous call, but that is by no means the first time officials have let a play play out (no flag, no whistle), then have come back and said "no, his forward progress was stopped."

 

[Switch 625]

It's happened before when there are questions about forward progress. That was a horrendous call, but that is by no means the first time officials have let a play play out (no flag, no whistle), then have come back and said "no, his forward progress was stopped."

Again, there was no question of forward progress until after UT scored.