LSU just became a victim

#3
#3
tin-foil-hat.jpg
 
#4
#4
Looked like a pick to me. Looked like 2 feet in bounds instead of 1 also.
 
Last edited:
#7
#7
Slive did not do it. The officiating over all is not good this year. Just awful.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
IPorange said:
Anyone who follows sports knows this quote will come back to haunt you. Heck, it's already ironic given what your fan base has went on about in the past.
Click to expand...
:good!: It is so hard to reason with an idiot but I do applaud your effort! :)
 
#14
#14
Whichever troll set loses in ATL won't be anywhere near this board.. book that!
 
#15
#15
No doubt a bad call, but I don't think it changed the final result of the game this time around. LSU was losing at the time, it didn't take points off or put them on the board, LSU still would've had to go down the field and score a TD with Lee (not that Jefferson reminds anyone of Joe Montana) at QB, and Alabama still had roughly 200 more yards of O than LSU at the end of the day.
 
#16
#16
Tidal Surge said:
Whining about officiating is what losers do.
Click to expand...

Ignoring multiple BS calls is what people who know they get lucky with officiating do. Not even from a 'fan' standpoint...just a blown call. This thread would've pointed it out even if it went against Alabama (not that it ever would)

My question is... HOW will the referees decide in the SEC-CG?
 
#19
#19
"The fourth-quarter interception that LSU corner Patrick Peterson did (according to video) or didn't (according to the SEC officials) make enthralled conspiracy theorists. I think they need a hobby. If the Tigers had gotten the ball, they would have been on the Alabama 37, trailing 21-15, with a backup quarterback and a backup tailback. On the Tigers' last two possessions, Jarrett Lee went 1-for-7 with two sacks and one pick. In other words, that call didn't decide the game."
 
#20
#20
It didn't "decide" the game but it prevented LSU from having a great opportunity to build on the momentum from the pick and try to drive down the field.

LSU has lots of playmakers on O that could have taken it to the house. It is amazing to me how hard it is for the Gators and Bammers to admit it when calls go in their favor.
 
#22
#22
HolyTider said:
"The fourth-quarter interception that LSU corner Patrick Peterson did (according to video) or didn't (according to the SEC officials) make enthralled conspiracy theorists. I think they need a hobby. If the Tigers had gotten the ball, they would have been on the Alabama 37, trailing 21-15, with a backup quarterback and a backup tailback. On the Tigers' last two possessions, Jarrett Lee went 1-for-7 with two sacks and one pick. In other words, that call didn't decide the game."
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure if the roles weren't reversed that bammers wouldn't be in uproar mode, would they?

Being fans of college football, I'd think we'd all want a fairly called game, but we already know the gators and bammers stance. Take any help you can get, fair play be damned.
 
#23
#23
The edge of Peterson's foot might have been touching the edge of the boundary line, which may have been the reason the official on the field ruled it incomplete. If so, then by rule the video evidence to the contrary must be indisputable in order to overturn the ruling on the field. Due to the camera angle(s) the video evidence is inconclusive.

From the NCAA rules:

ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player possession, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is on or outside a boundary line."

Julio Jones was out of bounds. Perhaps the ruling was that he touched the ball simultaneously with Peterson's initial contact with the ball, making the ball out of bounds (dead) at that instant. I'm not saying that is the case, but it might be.

Just because Gary Danielson (CBS commentator) said he thought the officials got it wrong does not mean they definitely got it wrong. For example, Gary also said on the air right after Cody blocked UT's game winning FG try vs UA, that Cody should have been flagged for removing his helmet and that UT should have gotten a rekick. Gary learned later that he (like Lane Kiffin) did not know the rules pertinent to the situation. Gary Danieson at least showed enough class to come on the air and make an apologetic statement that he did not know the rules and was wrong in stating that UT was due a rekick opportunity.

It'll be interesting to see if the SEC issues any kind of statement about this controversial call from the UA vs LSU game as to whether the officials definitely got this right due to the rule I cited above or that it's a case of the foot having been ruled on the line and that the video evidence could not support overturning the call.
 
Last edited:
#24
#24
Tidal Surge said:
The edge of Peterson's foot might have been touching the edge of the boundary line, which may have been the reason the official on the field ruled it incomplete. If so, then by rule the video evidence to the contrary must be indisputable in order to overturn the ruling on the field. Due to the camera angle(s) the video evidence is inconclusive.

From the NCAA rules:

ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player possession, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is on or outside a boundary line."

Julio Jones was out of bounds. Perhaps the ruling was that he touched the ball simultaneously with Peterson's initial contact with the ball, making the ball out of bounds (dead) at that instant. I'm not saying that is the case, but it might be.

Just because Gary Danielson (CBS commentator) said he thought the officials got wrong, does not mean they definitely got it wrong. For example, Gary also said on the air right after Cody blocked UT's game winning FG try vs UA, that Cody should have been flagged for removing his helmet and that UT should have gotten a rekick. Gary learned later that he (like Lane Kiffin) did not know the rules pertinent to the situation. Gary Danieson at least showed enough class to come on the air and make an apologetic statement that he did not know the rules and was wrong in stating that UT was due a rekick opportunity.

It'll be interesting to see if the SEC issues any kind of statement about this controversial call from the UA vs LSU game as to whether the officials definitely got this right due to the rule I cited above or that it's a case of the foot having been ruled on the line and that the video evidence could not support overturning the call.
Click to expand...
lot of words to try and convince yourself that it wasn't an atrocious call. I'll assure you that you're convincing no one else.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top