How was that not a TD?

#126
#126
If one watches the different camera angle just posted, it is clear that the ball is jarred loose from Pig's fingertips after it has crossed the plane by the hit of the UGA player.
 
#127
#127
NMVol said:
If one watches the different camera angle just posted, it is clear that the ball is jarred loose from Pig's fingertips after it has crossed the plane by the hit of the UGA player.
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary, that angle is less conclusive than the one we already have.
 
#129
#129
I did not see the game after halftime because I was at the Gators game. I heard about what happened but I hadn't seen it until I got home and watched the replay. You guys were ROBBED! That was a touchdown. I swear UGA wins more games out of dumb luck than any team I know.
 
#132
#132
I am kinda thinking the replay official was loathe to give the Vols both the North catch and the Pig extension.

Edit: I should add that I think both are TDs after having studied the replays tonight.
 
#133
#133
Lawrence Wright said:
The video that's been posted is the best angle of the play.
Click to expand...

the camera angle its not directly in line with the goal line...so if he broke plain we'll never know.

Thats always been my beef with replays, sure a lot of the of the time they get it right, but sometimes camera angles are difficult to determine whether the ball broke the plain before fumble because it was so close. It wasn't like he fumble a yard out. While I'll say that it was "most likely a fumble", "likely" isn't enough to overturn the call on the field. However it happened and there simply nothing anyone can do.
 
#134
#134
NMVol said:
I am kinda thinking the replay official was loathe to give the Vols both the North catch and the Pig extension.

Edit: I should add that I think both are TDs after having studied the replays tonight.
Click to expand...

thats actually a pretty good point. The North catch was awfully close to being ruled incomplete. At what point did North go from not possessing the football to possessing it? When it "touched" his hands? Because if you look at the replay its a wham-bam play. He barely touches the football before his feet leave the field. But there wasn't enough video evidence to overturn the call of the field. Very similar in terms of either gaining or losing "possession" of the football.

However I say all this with a grain of salt. There were many opportunities to win this game (before the end of regulation). Stupid pass interference/personal foul penalties gave Georgia too many chances and moved them closer to the goal line.
 
#135
#135
Aday25 said:
the camera angle its not directly in line with the goal line...so if he broke plain we'll never know.

Thats always been my beef with replays, sure a lot of the of the time they get it right, but sometimes camera angles are difficult to determine whether the ball broke the plain before fumble because it was so close. It wasn't like he fumble a yard out. While I'll say that it was "most likely a fumble", "likely" isn't enough to overturn the call on the field. However it happened and there simply nothing anyone can do.
Click to expand...

That's the thing that I haaaate about replay. I'm only posting here bc I'm a Vol homer. But I see this in other games and it frustrates the heck out of me.

... If its not absolutely positively 100% indusputible and without assumption, then do NOT overturn the call. Had this been the approach here, then we are up 7 with UGA attempting to tie in OT.

I wish college football would fix this!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#136
#136
Lawrence Wright said:
That's a fumble.

If you think that's a TD, then Gaffney made the catch in 2000.

I was the biggest UT fan on the planet today, but Pig fumbled.
Click to expand...

Lawrence, you're comments are normally very well thought out. This time, you are not really looking at the evidence step by step.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#137
#137
hog88 said:
Reverse angle? Never shown!
Click to expand...

A local TV station in caught on in the end zone. Shows Pig clearly shifting ball into left hand, holding it on the tip, and reaching it fwd on purpose, not losing control until the hit, which occurred just after crossing the plane.

Should not have been overturned. Was not indisputable, but obviously appeared to be a loss of control before the goal line from the one camera angle on CBS.

Too bad.
 
#138
#138
Insunseri said:
I meant to say he was gripping the nose of the ball, not necessarily "palming"...like when you palm a basketball, you're still gripping strong with your fingers..
Click to expand...

Local TV angle shows exactly that. Jolt from hit jars loose from fingers, but that is about 1/2 way across the goal line.

It's a TD. Fact. ... It's a fumble on the scoreboard. :banghead2:
 
#139
#139
That was a f'n TD, Pig controlled it in his left hand at the plane.... who can't see that is blind as a bat... there is no rule that says one hand on the ball is not possession, and there is no continuation rule like a catch in the NFL. This is a f'n TD, much less a reversible call. Refs FU'd!
 
#140
#140
Pig and the rest of the team give their all for Tennessee against Georgia. Played a complete game. We are still learning but I love what I see in this team and coaching staff.
 
#143
#143
Lawrence Wright said:
If UGA was awarded a TD on an identical play, you'd accept that call?
Click to expand...

The way those refs were working last night, that's exactly what would've happened lol. And whether you care or not, the number 6 team should have list that game last night on that play.
 
#144
#144
TennesseeJet said:
The line judge called a TD watch the video of him raising his hands. The SEC didn't want us to win.
Click to expand...

I don't buy conspiracy theory at all but I was watching the game with several UGA fans and a UF and a FSU fan. UF and FSU fans said they didn't see indisputable evidence that it was clearly a fumble. Because it was ruled a TD on the field I think it should have stayed a TD
 
#146
#146
Words have meaning. Could you use a preponderance of the evidence standard to overturn the call? Yes. Could you use the beyond a reasonable doubt standard to overturn the call? No you could not. Indisputable evidence is even a more strict standard. These words require proof that is not disputable or can't be questioned. The fact that people still argue whether or not he crossed the goal line is proof that the "indisputable" standard was not appropriately applied. If the call on the field had been a fumble, that call could not be overturned under the supposed rule of indisputable proof. My belief is that the NCAA officials do not apply the indisputable proof standard but uses the what the replay official "believes" standard. Whether or not this would have cost Tennessee a win, however, cannot be stated. No one can say that the call cost us a victory; it cost us a chance at victory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#148
#148
Whether it was a fumble or not, they didn't have enough evidence to overturn that call. It was ruled a touchdown and it should have standed. We got robbed and Georgia stole a win. That's my theory.
 
Last edited:
#150
#150
Specs said:
It doessent look like the ball came out until his wrist snapped, where it was clearly over the plane...

Indisputable, looks pretty disputable to me.

Had it been ruled the other way on the field I would have no problem with it being upheld.
Click to expand...

The fact that so many people are disputing it kinda means it's disputable doesn't it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top