"In disputable video evidence" redefined

#153
#153
bowlinggreenvol said:
Stop suspending them and start firing them. These guys rake in close to $10k+ a season. Send a message, that if you continue to be incompetent or perceived to be throwing games you're done and we guarantee you'll never receive another officiating job on any level.
Click to expand...

Amen!!
 
#155
#155
arkansasvol3 said:
I heard it when I was driving into work on a XM sports channel. Don't have a link, sorry. Just forwarding what I heard
Click to expand...

There's no record of that anywhere else. The SEC office has been bombarded with questions about the replay from our fans. But, so far everyone has said the refs were correct in all their reviews
 
#156
#156
tim said:
This exact call literally happened hours before during the LSU and TAMU game. LSU brought in a backup qb, he ran the sneak, it was called short even though he obviously made it, it was not over turned. Why? Because there was no video evidence.
Click to expand...

Been saying the same since it happened. Gary Danielson even said of that play "if you can't see the ball then you can't assume it was over the line."
 
#158
#158
gunner said:
I'm not saying he didn't cross the line, I'm saying that based on the video evidence there was no proff that the ball crossed the line. In fact based on the replay it was completely inconclusive.

The replay official ignored the rule book when he overturned the call on the field as by rule there must be indisputable video evidence to reverse the call on the field.

On the replay you can not see the ball, just the player so one must make an assumption the ball crossed the line to make the first down. Let me be completely clear, There was not indisputable video evidence that the ball crossed the line to make so by rule, the play can't be overturned!

I know it's a technicality but that's the rule plain and simple.
Click to expand...

Well put - the only idiots are the ones that cant comprehend the facts in your post and the rule.
 
#159
#159
tim said:
This exact call literally happened hours before during the LSU and TAMU game. LSU brought in a backup qb, he ran the sneak, it was called short even though he obviously made it, it was not over turned. Why? Because there was no video evidence.
Click to expand...

Of course the amazing Kreskin was in the booth at Neyland
 
#161
#161
volatil said:
Been saying the same since it happened. Gary Danielson even said of that play "if you can't see the ball then you can't assume it was over the line."
Click to expand...

The commentators last night said the review is to ensure that the ball was placed where the line judge spotted it and it was clearly was at that spot. With the new rules and the emphasis being placed on protecting the QB no one but the line judge knows when he ruled forward progress stopped. When in his mind forward progress is stopped the spot should be where was the ball at that moment. Two different officials came running in to the same spot so I have to think whether the QB moved forward more after forward progress was stopped that they were marking the ball where they thought it should be placed.
 
#162
#162
508mikey said:
Probably not true as it was the clown in the booth that bungled the calls
Click to expand...

I think that the official on the field botched the spot in the first place but by rule the official in the booth cannot turn it over without inconclusive evidence.
 
#163
#163
The same thing happened in the LSU A&M game and they didn't overturn it because you couldn't see the ball.

Did he get it - most likely. But, going by the rule, you could not verify because the ball couldn't be seen. Therefore, they had to assume where the ball was to overturn. To me, that seemed wrong because there was not indisputable evidence.

We should have never been in that situation to begin with. We have to play to win, not play to not lose. Everybody in the world knew we were going to run the ball on 3rd and 2 and nearly everyone was in the box. That was a perfect time for a slant pattern to Pig. Game over. Assuming of course Dobbs could hit Pig in the hands :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#164
#164
BoroVol20 said:
Even as a Tennessee fan, Carta-Samuels clearly crossed the line.
Click to expand...

His head and shoulders we up at the line .....the ball was down around his crotch.....never made it to the line and that the way the ball was marked before the blind officials upstairs stepped in.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#166
#166
orangeslice13 said:
He guessed. But that does not mean the guys in the booth get to guess too. They have to see proof to overturn the call. There was none. They didn't even have a shot straight down the line. All replays were from an angle.
Click to expand...

This is an excellent point. They overturned it without a straight view, replays were at an angle. That makes it even more crazy! We've all been in the situation where we saw something at one angle, thought we knew what we saw, only to see a different angle or straight shot and see we were wrong.
 
#167
#167
bowlinggreenvol said:
This. I was 4 rows from the top of the stadium and i was screaming in exuberance because we tackled them for a 2 yard loss. Then the random guy next to me pointed out they spotted the ball for no gain. That ball should've been spotted at about the 36 and instead ended up back at the 34.
Click to expand...

Another fact right here! Didn't know it at the time but that was a game changer. Terrible spot!
 
#171
#171
volfan411 said:
I think that the official on the field botched the spot in the first place but by rule the official in the booth cannot turn it over without inconclusive evidence.
Click to expand...

hendersonvillevol said:
it was a bad call marking him short of the first down, but to change that call you need video evidence
Click to expand...


And there was absolutely no evidence of the ball past the line. Clearly, The replay official did not follow the rule. By rule the call should not be overturned without indisputable video evidence.
 
#172
#172
This is still going? Obviously, this is a losing battle for both sides, because everyone agrees to disagree. I still stand as it being a bad overturn by rule, but that doesn't convince those who still believe it was a good overturn. Non believers of the indisputable evidence I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#173
#173
The shot from above appeared to show his head and maybe shoulders crossed the line and he was leaning forward. But where was the ball? With all our guys clawing and scratching, I doubt he stretched it out. That may be what the ref was able to see that we, and clearly the replay, could not see. That he had it tucked into his belly, which may have not crossed the line.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top