"In disputable video evidence" redefined

#276
#276
utvolCO said:
Ok I didn't notice them in relation to the player when I watched the game, but then again I haven't found a good video of it except for the full game online and I didn't want to search through it to find the exact spot.
Click to expand...

I really don't like the yellow line. On possession downs, I try to make a point to look up at the stick. It drives me nuts when commentators look at the line on their screen and say "It's 3rd and a short one" when it's more like 3rd and one and a half.
 
#277
#277
however you look at it, imo, they got the call right. I didn't see any UT player grabbing for the ball and if it was below his waist there would be guys grabbing it.
Initial spot was bad. Overturning the call was bad as well, but the correct call was made in the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#278
#278
Boca Vol said:
If you look at the replay, you can clearly see where the ball is NOT. It is not:

1) between his legs, or
2) behind him

So if his body is past the point needed for the 1st down and he didn't fumble it, then the ball had to also be beyond the point needed for a 1st down.
Click to expand...

So without seeing the football and adding where the football was not, we can remove all doubt?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#280
#280
bamawriter said:
I really don't like the yellow line. On possession downs, I try to make a point to look up at the stick. It drives me nuts when commentators look at the line on their screen and say "It's 3rd and a short one" when it's more like 3rd and one and a half.
Click to expand...

I got it.

GPS chip inserted into the football. :peace2:
 
#282
#282
Spartacavolus said:
however you look at it, imo, they got the call right. I didn't see any UT player grabbing for the ball and if it was below his waist there would be guys grabbing it.
Initial spot was bad. Overturning the call was bad as well, but the correct call was made in the end.
Click to expand...

UT should have won the game regardless. Given 2 weeks to prepare we dropped the ball.
 
#283
#283
LWSVOL said:
I will link the NCAA case study PDF file. I can't find the rule book online but can purchase one. I don't wish to purchase one. :)

this is the purpose and "philosophy: from the NCAA case study document:

Purpose

ARTICLE 1. Instant replay is a process whereby video review is used to confirm, reverse or let stand certain on-field decisions (Rule 12-3) made bygame officials.

Philosophy

ARTICLE 2. The instant replay process operates under the fundamental assumption that the ruling on the field is correct. The replay official may reverse a ruling if and only if the video evidence convinces him beyond all
doubt that the ruling was incorrect. Without such indisputable video evidence, the replay official must allow the ruling to stand.

the link to this document:

http://tbfoc.org/2013_14_InstantReplay_Case_Book.pdf

The replay official only has to be convinced by the evidence to over turn. No where does it reference the ball in the first down sections.
Click to expand...

How can the official be convinced beyond all doubt that the runner got the first down when he doesn't know with 100 percent certainty where the ball was at? How does he know the runner even possessed the ball when his body crossed the line to make?

If the burden of proof is beyond any reasonable doubt, then yes based on the totality of the circumstances, it can be argued he got the first down.

But, by rule it's indisputable video evidence which means he has no doubt the the ball carrier passed the line to make with the ball. Based on only the video evidence, and I think most reasonable observers will agree that you can't see the ball reach the line to make; therefore, it should have never be over ruled.
 
#284
#284
BeecherVol said:
So without seeing the football and adding where the football was not, we can remove all doubt?
Click to expand...

As I mentioned earlier, can you see the ball on every play? No.

If it was UT driving and the exact same scenario played out would you be saying Vandy got screwed?
 
#285
#285
Boca Vol said:
As I mentioned earlier, can you see the ball on every play? No.

If it was UT driving and the exact same scenario played out would you be saying Vandy got screwed?
Click to expand...

Id take the reversal and laugh all the way to the gate.:) if that answers your question.
 
#286
#286
gunner said:
How can the official be convinced beyond all doubt that the runner got the first down when he doesn't know with 100 percent certainty where the ball was at? How does he know the runner even possessed the ball when his body crossed the line to make?

If the burden of proof is beyond any reasonable doubt, then yes based on the totality of the circumstances, it can be argued he got the first down.

But, by rule it's indisputable video evidence which means he has no doubt the the ball carrier passed the line to make with the ball. Based on only the video evidence, and I think most reasonable observers will agree that you can't see the ball reach the line to make; therefore, it should have never be over ruled.
Click to expand...

He uses common sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#288
#288
BeecherVol said:
Speaking of Boca.

That would be nice right now. Got family in West Palm.
Click to expand...

Nice place!

The weather in FL this time of year is great. The only thing that ruins it are the damn yankees that spend the winter down here!
 
#289
#289
DarthVisor said:
He uses common sense.
Click to expand...

This. Process of elimination is fairly simple in a case like this. If the ball isn't between his legs, and the entire upper half of his body is beyond the marker, and no one stripped the ball from him, then he had to have picked up a first down.

There is an argument to be made about how one can determine the exact spot. But there is no rational argument to be made that it didn't get beyond the sticks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#290
#290
BeecherVol said:
UT should have won the game regardless. Given 2 weeks to prepare we dropped the ball.
Click to expand...


no doubt. Could have even overprepared to the point of robotic instead of playing ball with speed and instinct.
Could've won the game with 30 carries from Lane, 10-12 from Dobbs and 6-8 touches for Pig.
 
#291
#291
Listen you can't re-spot the ball if you can't see it. It's that simple. If you can't see that you're just being dense.

As I've said before, I can't be mad cause I feel he made it but the fact is that video isn't close to indisputable for a spot. Which is what was being challenged.
 
#292
#292
Spartacavolus said:
no doubt. Could have even overprepared to the point of robotic instead of playing ball with speed and instinct.
Could've won the game with 30 carries from Lane, 10-12 from Dobbs and 6-8 touches for Pig.
Click to expand...

That was the most disappointing part of the game for me. I felt like we would look sharpe and better prepared. We didn't look either. Some of that is on the players (specifically those not returning) and some on the staff.

Nothing against Neal, but if I had to pick 1 of the 2 to come back Id take Lane and not really put much thought into it..
 
#293
#293
Boca Vol said:
Nice place!

The weather in FL this time of year is great. The only thing that ruins it are the damn yankees that spend the winter down here!
Click to expand...

Ha!

Mine moves between West Palm, Middle TN and Western NC. Needless to say they are in FL right now and won't be back for a few months.
 
#294
#294
BeecherVol said:
Ha!

Mine moves between West Palm, Middle TN and Western NC. Needless to say they are in FL right now and won't be back for a few months.
Click to expand...

They're fine. They're welcome any time. It's those arse holes from Jersey and NY that need to stay up North!
 
#295
#295
Boca Vol said:
They're fine. They're welcome any time. It's those arse holes from Jersey and NY that need to stay up North!
Click to expand...

Yeah. They are hard to dodge down there for sure. We ran into them in West Palm, Miami, and Key West.

Hoping to go back this summer.
 
#297
#297
gunner said:
Common sense??? Really? Common sense is if you don't see the ball past the first down line, it's not a first down. That's common sense.

Y'all keep making my argument for me over and over again.
Click to expand...

Well, if you know who has the ball, and you know that he has it somewhere north of his groin, and his entire upper body is past the marker, common sense says he got the first down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#299
#299
gunner said:
How can the official be convinced beyond all doubt that the runner got the first down when he doesn't know with 100 percent certainty where the ball was at? How does he know the runner even possessed the ball when his body crossed the line to make?

If the burden of proof is beyond any reasonable doubt, then yes based on the totality of the circumstances, it can be argued he got the first down.

But, by rule it's indisputable video evidence which means he has no doubt the the ball carrier passed the line to make with the ball. Based on only the video evidence, and I think most reasonable observers will agree that you can't see the ball reach the line to make; therefore, it should have never be over ruled.
Click to expand...

Because the phrase leaves up tot he human being to determine what is beyond all reasonable doubt to him. that is different for different people. Just like in trials. 12 people determine reasonable doubt and many times they do not agree on what it is.

All he has to do is determine in his mind that the play was called wrong based on video evidence. If he feels doubt on it, he can't reverse it.

But the fact is, it comes down to his judgment on reasonable doubt.

I agree with another poster, the right conclusion was reached even of some of the process was executed incorrectly. I certainly think the written rule, leaves room for the replay official to have some latitude on the doubt
 
#300
#300
Cdywolfe said:
Listen you can't re-spot the ball if you can't see it. It's that simple. If you can't see that you're just being dense.
Click to expand...

This. To overrule an on the field spot you have to be able to respot the ball. If you cannot see the damn ball you cannot respot it.

Indisputable proof is video evidence that definitively overturns a call. If it was "common sense" and all about "getting it right" UT wouldn't have been dicked by this "process" in the past.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top