Josh Heupel on tonights “Officiating”

#151
#151
Elhanan said:
He’s probably not allowed to criticize the refs without a fine.
Click to expand...
Austin Peay is not worth it. We won. If they are SEC Officials or a job interview crew, then we know the SEC will not hire them.
They looked like a bunch of HS Refs that forgot which pocket their flag was in and could not keep up with the SPEED of the game.
They were Amateurs at this level.
The review of this game will ensure that we will not see them again this year and probably the league will not either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skclark, feathersax, Elhanan and 1 other person
#152
#152
tcash051 said:
As a vol fan living in Florida, looking forward to this weekend with cautious optimism. Regarding the game, a few observations:

1. AP played great, Tennessee did not.
2. Joe Milton did not play well and combined with the drops from the receivers, it added to our frustration and uninspired play.
3. There was never a point in the game where the outcome of the game was seriously in doubt.
4. I would question the use of the expression, the worst officiated game that I have ever seen. The officiating was very bad. It did not affect whether or not we were going to win the game. I do think it affected the score by at least two touchdowns. The replay on the fumble recovery will be very hard to justify. I am curious if there will be an "official" explanation." Generally, avoid the use of words like always, never, worst ever or best ever. I would not have a problem with an expression such as one of the 10 worst officiated games that I have seen. Recency bias tends to elevate current events over past events.
5. I thought our defense played well. AP's lone touchdown occurred when our DB fell down. It seemed to me that there was obvious holding multiple time on the offensive line of AP that was not called. Regarding the PI calls, I would compare this to an umpire's strike zone. Somewhat subject to interpretation. We would "hope" that the interpretation would be consistent both ways. This did not seem to be the case in my opinion.
6. For the AP players, this was probably the dream of a lifetime, most are probably UT fans and dreamed of playing for the vols. The combination of their inspired play, our lack of it., being fortunate with high-risk plays (4th down gambles, etc) inconsistent (yes bad) officiating, all contributed to AP actually achieving the elusive "moral" victory that no one ever admits that they want.
7. We have good running backs.
8. God is great, beer is good, people are crazy.

We are 2-0, with a lot of talent on our team. This is a crucial weekend for us and I will be pulling hard for the Vols from my home in South Florida.
Click to expand...

1. Played great?? By lining up offsides and being handed yards on both offense and defense (crap holding calls against receivers), by fumbling a ball after 3 steps and the refs saying it was incomplete, by being able to run over receivers and not have PI called, by being able to yank defensive linemen to the ground with no flags… yeah amazing!
2. Joe admitted post game there were things to clean up, no one denied that.
3. No one thought it was, still doesn’t excuse piss poor officiating.
4. I will unequivocally state that was the worst officiating I have seen since I started watching football in the early 1980s.
5. Regarding PI calls if it’s PI on one team, it’s PI on the other team. No room at all for difference in calls here.
6. Again, see statement one; maybe dream of a lifetime, still doesn’t excuse the worst excuse for officials I’ve ever seen.
7. Agreed.
8. God is absolutely great! People are crazy, I can take or leave the beer…

Go Vols!! Speaking of South Florida, will be pulling for Coach Golesh and his group against little Nicky this week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna, orangebloodgmc, Lankykong and 2 others
#153
#153
volmoon said:
Targeting includes launching with upward thrust. The APU player clearly did both.
Click to expand...
But, there has to be contact in the head or neck area, not the shoulder. I saw the contact to the shoulder area, not head or neck.
  • Launch — a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#155
#155
LAVol1 said:
But, there has to be contact in the head or neck area, not the shoulder. I saw the contact to the shoulder area, not head or neck.
  • Launch — a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
Click to expand...
“To make” does not mean “to contact.”
 
#159
#159
volmoon said:
The preposition “to” is used to express motion. So, “to make” can mean intent rather than outcome.
Click to expand...
So, according to your theory, it a player "launches" at another player and whiffs completely, he is guilty of targeting. I don't think so. There has to be "contact to the head or neck area".
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#164
#164
I will agree to disagree.

The 2019 NCAA Rule Book defines targeting as when a player "takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or legal block or playing the ball."

Targeting doesn’t require all of the below rule example bullets in the below text. Notice the nuance in the varied prepositions “to” vs. “with”. It is either or.
  • Launch — a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
  • A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
  • Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
  • Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top