"In disputable video evidence" redefined

#51
#51
Aerie Vol said:
Watch the video- BOTH side officials ran in and marked his progress short of the yellow line. Not just the one closest to us, but also the far one as well. But yeah, the man upstairs could "indisputably" see the ball was past the line.

/sarc

AV
Click to expand...

This. Replay official is in no position to overturn it.
 
#52
#52
T.N. Buckingham said:
You can't judge the spot of a ball by looking at where the carrier's back is positioned at the end of a play.

If you can't see the ball, then you can't make the call.

Replay official in the A&M/LSU game got it right. The one we had decided he possessed X-ray vision.
Click to expand...

No, it was clearly the correct call. And you sound like an idiot. The announcers said it was the correct call, the replay official said it was the correct call, the head of replay officials said it was the correct call, everyone, even the Knoxville media have said it was the correct call.

We lost, it sucks, but that call was correct
 
#54
#54
volchemist11 said:
Yes I do believe he crossed the line but the ball was spotted short and there was no replay that actually showed the ball. You can assume the ball was somewhere but if you can't actually see it then you cannot overturn the spot no matter how bad it was.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. The officiating tonight was the worst I have seen in many years. Every call that could possible go against Tennessee went in Vanderbilt
favor. The play where Dobbs scored in the end zone in the fourth quarter a block in the back was an incorrect call. Also the call in the third quarter where the receiver was ruled to not have control of the ball was incorrect. If there was any doubt the review booth went in favor of Vanderbilt.
On another subject if Dobbs is the best Quarterback we have then we are truly undermanned. He looked like a deer in the headlights most of the night. He is nowhere near being ready to play in the SEC and I am not sure he ever will be. I wish we had a top rated quarterback in this years recruiting class. In hope Worley can carry the team next year.
From a positive perspective the game was much closer than last year. I guess the players and coaches will be home for the holidays.

:whistling:
 
#58
#58
It was absolutely 100% a bad spot, but at the same time, it was absolutely 100% not an overturnable call. The fact is, the rules are that the call on the field stands unless there is indisputable video evidence that it was the wrong call and that evidence simply didn't exist. The replays provided simply did not show the ball, and as such, the review booth should not have overturned the call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#59
#59
Replay is there to get the call right, and they did. You guys complaining sound really pathetic...

They got the call right
 
#60
#60
UT_Tix79 said:
No, it was clearly the correct call. And you sound like an idiot. The announcers said it was the correct call, the replay official said it was the correct call, the head of replay officials said it was the correct call, everyone, even the Knoxville media have said it was the correct call.

We lost, it sucks, but that call was correct
Click to expand...

Indisputable evidence with regard to the spot of a football cannot be determined where one cannot see the football.

The replay official never sees the football. On what terms can he determine the exact location of the spot in better fashion than the two linesmen who made the original call when he cannot see the football?

You haven't answered that question yet, genius.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#61
#61
rx7outkast said:
It was absolutely 100% a bad spot, but at the same time, it was absolutely 100% not an overturnable call. The fact is, the rules are that the call on the field stands unless there is indisputable video evidence that it was the wrong call and that evidence simply didn't exist. The replays provided simply did not show the ball, and as such, the review booth should not have overturned the call.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

They are supposed to say the play "stands", not that it is confirmed.

There is a difference. It means they can't confirm the call on the field but also cannot overturn it.
 
#62
#62
volmoon said:
Until tonight, the rule for overturning a call on the field required "indisputable video evidence." Tonight, the call was reversed without video evidence of THE BALL advancing for a first down. There was no video evidence of the ball crossing the first down line.
Click to expand...

You're kidding right? He got that first down by half a body length .... it was the correct call. How about starting a thread asking where the hell our 6'8" 350 lb D lineman was on that play, maybe getting a little penetration, not getting pushed off the ball.
 
#66
#66
UT_Tix79 said:
The head of officiating said the overturn was the correct call...

As did everyone else who saw the play. He would have had to have the ball between his feet for the spot he got. We lost, it sucks, but that was 100% the correct call
Click to expand...

That's akin to asking Obama if the ACA was the correct call.
 
#70
#70
Interpret how you want - rule from NCAA 2013/2014 Rules and Interpretations document.

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#71
#71
doublec5 said:
Interpret how you want - rule from NCAA 2013/2014 Rules and Interpretations document.

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.
Click to expand...


In other words. It was inexcusable for that booth official to do that.

Completely inexcusable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#72
#72
doublec5 said:
Interpret how you want - rule from NCAA 2013/2014 Rules and Interpretations document.

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.
Click to expand...

It did, he was 1-2 yards across the line. It convinced the replay official without a doubt in his mind. And everyone agrees, you don't have to see the ball. If his whole body is across the line, and he didn't fumble the ball, or contort himself in anyway trying to grab it near his feet, he crossed the line
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#73
#73
BoroVol20 said:
Even as a Tennessee fan, Carta-Samuels clearly crossed the line.
Click to expand...

I agree, but based solely on "video evidence", I don't think there was enough there to call it indisputable. His head and shoulders were definitely over the line, but the ball couldn't be seen. Not to mention, that line is "not official".
 
#74
#74
We were outplayed and outcoached and we deserved to lose.

However, there was not enough evidence to overturn the call. Carta-Samuels head was over the line, but there was no telling where the ball was. That in addition to overturning the Pig Howard reception were extremely questionable.
 
#75
#75
It was a terrible spot; so I have no problem with the overruling.

You want to split hairs and grasp onto something to piss and moan about, go right ahead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top