"In disputable video evidence" redefined

#178
#178
VolsSportsFan said:
The official on the field made one of the worst spots in history, so I don't find him particularly credible.
Click to expand...

How do you know? Are you saying you had a better view than both officials who were on the field, and right on top of the play?

Keep in mind the angle of the camera can be extremely deceiving and often times delusional.

But, if you had a better view than the officials, I would like to know where you were at on the play.
 
#179
#179
gunner said:
How do you know? Are you saying you had a better view than both officials who were on the field, and right on top of the play?

Keep in mind the angle of the camera can be extremely deceiving and often times delusional.

But, if you had a better view than the officials, I would like to know where you were at on the play.
Click to expand...

He doesn't. Plain and simple. He is going based off his opinion. What ran through his mind when he saw the play. If he says otherwise, he is lying. I've said it once already, everyone agrees to disagree in this thread, because we all have different opinions on what happened.
 
#181
#181
gunner said:
How do you know? Are you saying you had a better view than both officials who were on the field, and right on top of the play?

Keep in mind the angle of the camera can be extremely deceiving and often times delusional.

But, if you had a better view than the officials, I would like to know where you were at on the play.
Click to expand...

I used my eyes. I watched it 5 times. It was a horrible spot.

The only ones that don't think it was are the minority on here trying to build some case that we got royally screwed.

And I'm laughing at this back and forth where sometimes the word of the ref is suddenly infallible but others they are idiots who can't see anything. Are you seriously trying to act like just because he was down there that it means he couldn't make a horrible spot?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#182
#182
VolsSportsFan said:
I used my eyes. I watched it 5 times. It was a horrible spot.

The only ones that don't think it was are the minority on here trying to build some case that we got royally screwed.

And I'm laughing at this back and forth where sometimes the word of the ref is suddenly infallible but others they are idiots who can't see anything. Are you seriously trying to act like just because he was down there that it means he couldn't make a horrible spot?
Click to expand...

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, and so am I.

IMO, the official is a trained professional who had the best view in the house to spot the ball.

I don't always agree with officials, but neither of us can deny that he was in much better position to spot the ball after the play than anyone else.
 
#183
#183
gunner said:
Well, you are entitled to your opinion, and so am I.

IMO, the official is a trained professional who had the best view in the house to spot the ball.

I don't always agree with officials, but neither of us can deny that he was in much better position to spot the ball after the play than anyone else.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
#184
#184
1) It should have been spotted as a first down.
2) There wasn't indisputable evidence. Bottom line. If he called it a first down, it should have stayed one. If he called it short, it should have remained short.

Any other argument is moot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#186
#186
I finally saw the play this morning for the 1st time.

It was a horrible spot by the ref. But I see how the argument can be made by both sides. You can't see the ball itself but you can see that from the waist up including his bent arms (with the ball) are over the line.

At the end of the day they got the call right, I'm not sure they can make that determination without actually seeing the ball, even though it had to be over the line.
 
#187
#187
But that wasn't even the only play that they called back without indisputable evidence. I'm more pissed about the 3rd down pass for a first down that Dobbs completed. There was no indisputable evidence that the receiver did not have control of the ball before stepping out of bounds yet it still got turned over.
 
#189
#189
Ooltewah vols said:
He did but did the ball.
Click to expand...

That's the tricky part. He didn't fumble the ball. From his waist up (including his bent arms with the ball) crossed the line. You can't see the ball but he had to have it as he didn't fumble it.
 
#190
#190
EricFreakingBerry said:
1) It should have been spotted as a first down.
2) There wasn't indisputable evidence. Bottom line. If he called it a first down, it should have stayed one. If he called it short, it should have remained short.

Any other argument is moot.
Click to expand...

This pretty much sums up the entire situation. Someone asked me at work last night how I felt about the ending of the game. I told them I realize this will sound ambiguous but I feel like the refs screwed up where they initially spotted the ball and then screwed up again by overturning it.

Let me preface this statement by saying replay is probably what kept us in the game. If it wasn't for instant replay overturning a couple of bad calls we probably would've been down two scores at the end of the game anyway. With that said the older I get the less I like instant replay. It often screws up the flow of the game. Whether it be a penalty, a bad spot, or even too much or too little time running off the clock after a play something probably goes wrong on about half the plays throughout the course of a football game. We can't fix them all. So to me it just seems a little silly to pick and choose the ones that we are going to fix. If we're gonna review a questionable spot on 4th down with a minute left then we need to to review questionable spots on 2nd down in the 1st quarter. Some will say that is silly but in a game that was as close as Saturday night's yards given or taken by bad spots totally could make the difference in a win in a or a loss no matter when they occur.

I can't be mad with the outcome because ultimately it was the appropriate one but Saturday night's game has made me seriously question the instant replay rules in football.
 
#191
#191
Cdywolfe said:
This pretty much sums up the entire situation. Someone asked me at work last night how I felt about the ending of the game. I told them I realize this will sound ambiguous but I feel like the refs screwed up where they initially spotted the ball and then screwed up again by overturning it.

Let me preface this statement by saying replay is probably what kept us in the game. If it wasn't for instant replay overturning a couple of bad calls we probably would've been down two scores at the end of the game anyway. With that said the older I get the less I like instant replay. It often screws up the flow of the game. Whether it be a penalty, a bad spot, or even too much or too little time running off the clock after a play something probably goes wrong on about half the plays throughout the course of a football game. We can't fix them all. So to me it just seems a little silly to pick and choose the ones that we are going to fix. If we're gonna review a questionable spot on 4th down with a minute left then we need to to review questionable spots on 2nd down in the 1st quarter. Some will say that is silly but in a game that was as close as Saturday night's yards given or taken by bad spots totally could make the difference in a win in a or a loss no matter when they occur.

I can't be mad with the outcome because ultimately it was the appropriate one but Saturday night's game has made me seriously question the instant replay rules in football.
Click to expand...

Even with the opportunity to review the play, it seems that the replay officials do not understand the rule and the way it is written.
 
#192
#192
Boca Vol said:
I finally saw the play this morning for the 1st time.

It was a horrible spot by the ref. But I see how the argument can be made by both sides. You can't see the ball itself but you can see that from the waist up including his bent arms (with the ball) are over the line.

At the end of the day they got the call right, I'm not sure they can make that determination without actually seeing the ball, even though it had to be over the line.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day as you say, they didn't follow the rules of the replay system.

If you think they missed the call on the field that's your opinion. But, keep in mind the only opinion that matters is the linesmen on the field who marked the ball. Not yours or mine.

If he spotted it short then by rule it is short. The evidence on video was completely inconclusive. So they replay official overstepped his authority with the overturn.

At the end of the day the call on the field should have never been overturned!
 
#193
#193
gunner said:
At the end of the day as you say, they didn't follow the rules of the replay system.

If you think they missed the call on the field that's your opinion. But, keep in mind the only opinion that matters is the linesmen on the field who marked the ball. Not yours or mine.

If he spotted it short then by rule it is short. The evidence on video was completely inconclusive. So they replay official overstepped his authority with the overturn.

At the end of the day the call on the field should have never been overturned!
Click to expand...

If that were the case, then a coach shouldn't be allowed to challenge a spot. It's a tricky situation, no doubt, with no clear-cut answers.
 
#194
#194
DarthVisor said:
Even with the opportunity to review the play, it seems that the replay officials do not understand the rule and the way it is written.
Click to expand...

I agree they don't get it and neither do a lot of the folks on this board.

But, I bet Butch gets it, and he is probably working on his formal complaint to the SEC head of Officials right now.
 
#195
#195
Personally I thought it was a bad spot as well, but I didn't think they would be able to overturn it based on the rules.

I also thought we got a couple of generous spots for first downs as well.
 
#196
#196
Is anyone arguing that the replay official got the call wrong following his review?

I haven't seen it, but I didn't read all 13 pages of this thread, nor most of the numerous other threads on the subject and I'm simply curious.
 
Last edited:
#197
#197
Boca Vol said:
If that were the case, then a coach shouldn't be allowed to challenge a spot. It's a tricky situation, no doubt, with no clear-cut answers.
Click to expand...

In this play the coach did not challenge the spot. The replay official has the authority to review every play in a game which he did.

To overturn a call on the field the replay official must have indisputable video evidence, the replays on this play are inconclusive at best because you can't see the ball only the runners body is visible. Therefore, the evidence isn't on the video.

No evidence = no overturn, it's that simple.
 
#199
#199
The spot was terrible but there is no way they could see the ball on the replay. I'm almost positive that the call was on replay was right but it didn't follow the rules of replay which is indisputable evidence. These are usually the calls that we get jobbed on when the shoe is on the other foot.
 
#200
#200
bamawriter said:
Is anyone arguing that the replay official got the call wrong following his review?

I haven't seen it, but I didn't read all 13 pages of this thread, nor most of the numerous other threads on the subject and I'm simply curious.
Click to expand...
Since when has indisputable proof been open to interpretation?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top