Glad it's someone else this week re:officiating

#5
#5
Go to Tigers Den to see the meltdown in person. That was a horrible call. I can't wait to see how Les Miles handles this one.
 
#6
#6
Lost in Gatorland said:
Go to Tigers Den to see the meltdown in person. That was a horrible call. I can't wait to see how Les Miles handles this one.
Click to expand...

Perhaps Miles should be a bit more concerned that his offense could only get 9 total yards in the fourth quarter (punt, punt, interception...), and his so-called "great" D gave up nearly 500 yards of total offense during the game.
 
#7
#7
There is no full-blown conspiracy, although fans don’t want to hear it. It’d be impossible for the SEC to get all these refs who earn around $500 a week and maintain full-time jobs to risk federal imprisonment and fix games. Even suggested favoritism is unlikely.

Slives 30,000 dollar slap on CUM was a discreet way of passing the cash to the refs. Thats my thoughts...and I'm always right haha.
 
#8
#8
Bamagradnyc said:
Perhaps Miles should be a bit more concerned that his offense could only get 9 total yards in the fourth quarter (punt, punt, interception...), and his so-called "great" D gave up nearly 500 yards of total offense during the game.
Click to expand...

Not taking away from this fact, BUT, they should've been given the chance on that INT to go down and score.
 
#10
#10
Bamagradnyc said:
Perhaps Miles should be a bit more concerned that his offense could only get 9 total yards in the fourth quarter (punt, punt, interception...), and his so-called "great" D gave up nearly 500 yards of total offense during the game.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should be concerned after all that they still had a chance to win the game. Alabama should give a game ball to the ref.
 
#11
#11
tin-foil-hat.jpg
 
#12
#12
Tidal Surge said:
tin-foil-hat.jpg
Click to expand...
Conspiracy or not, how many calls are you guys going to get playing at home? Seems like when it gets tight down there you guys get a scratch on the back. A team as good as Bama supposedly is shouldn't need that much help staying unbeaten should they or not? What's the excuse for yesterday? Replay booth guy blind?
 
#13
#13
@Tidal Surge - that's weak, throwing a tinfoil hat up trying to dismiss the issues with officiating by marginalizing it with a silly photo.
 
#15
#15
Cartervol said:
Conspiracy or not, how many calls are you guys going to get playing at home? Seems like when it gets tight down there you guys get a scratch on the back. A team as good as Bama supposedly is shouldn't need that much help staying unbeaten should they or not? What's the excuse for yesterday? Replay booth guy blind?
Click to expand...

The edge of Peterson's foot might have been touching the edge of the boundary line, which may have been the reason the official on the field ruled it incomplete. If so, then by rule the video evidence to the contrary must be indisputable in order to overturn the ruling on the field. Due to the camera angle(s) the video evidence is inconclusive.

From the NCAA rules:

ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player possession, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is on or outside a boundary line."

Julio Jones was out of bounds. Perhaps the ruling was that he touched the ball simultaneously with Peterson's initial contact with the ball, making the ball out of bounds (dead) at that instant. I'm not saying that is the case, but it might be.

Just because Gary Danielson (CBS commentator) said he thought the officials got it wrong does not mean they definitely got it wrong. For example, Gary also said on the air right after Cody blocked UT's game winning FG try vs UA, that Cody should have been flagged for removing his helmet and that UT should have gotten a rekick. Gary learned later that he (like Lane Kiffin) did not know the rules pertinent to the situation. Gary Danieson at least showed enough class to come on the air and make an apologetic statement that he did not know the rules and was wrong in stating that UT was due a rekick opportunity.

It'll be interesting to see if the SEC issues any kind of statement about this controversial call from the UA vs LSU game as to whether the officials definitely got this right due to the rule I cited above or that it's a case of the foot having been ruled on the line and that the video evidence could not support overturning the call.
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
Why don't you start a thread and post this so we don't have to see it spammed in every thread today like your little conspiracy picture yesterday.

You have typically not bugged me as a 'Bama fan, but you're getting awful close to my ignore list (I know I know, you don't care).


Tidal Surge said:
The edge of Peterson's foot might have been touching the edge of the boundary line, which may have been the reason the official on the field ruled it incomplete. If so, then by rule the video evidence to the contrary must be indisputable in order to overturn the ruling on the field. Due to the camera angle(s) the video evidence is inconclusive.

From the NCAA rules:

ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player possession, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is on or outside a boundary line."

Julio Jones was out of bounds. Perhaps the ruling was that he touched the ball simultaneously with Peterson's initial contact with the ball, making the ball out of bounds (dead) at that instant. I'm not saying that is the case, but it might be.

Just because Gary Danielson (CBS commentator) said he thought the officials got it wrong does not mean they definitely got it wrong. For example, Gary also said on the air right after Cody blocked UT's game winning FG try vs UA, that Cody should have been flagged for removing his helmet and that UT should have gotten a rekick. Gary learned later that he (like Lane Kiffin) did not know the rules pertinent to the situation. Gary Danieson at least showed enough class to come on the air and make an apologetic statement that he did not know the rules and was wrong in stating that UT was due a rekick opportunity.

It'll be interesting to see if the SEC issues any kind of statement about this controversial call from the UA vs LSU game as to whether the officials definitely got this right due to the rule I cited above or that it's a case of the foot having been ruled on the line and that the video evidence could not support overturning the call.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top