DooleyOrangePants
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2011
- Messages
- 4,490
- Likes
- 5,620
At best his foot was equally OB / IB. The ref had to dodge him to make the call. Ridiculous. Should have reviewed at minimum. Certainly had not reestablished himself IB.I recorded the game but it was already going on when it started to record, so I didn't see the particular incident, but just a question out of curiosity; when the player established himself out of bounds, wouldn't that mean if he touched the ball while out of bounds without having come back in bounds, it's the other teams ball? And for what it's worth, wasn't his foot on the floor when he threw the ball back in? Looked like it could have been.
Yes. He is out of bounds, never establishes both feet back in bounds, and is the first player to touch the ball. That should have been the easiest freaking call in the entire game, but is an example that if you pretend you know what you're doing, you can convince almost anyone of anything. The player completed the play, acted as if it was clearly legal and his team's ball, and the officials never questioned it, even after being approached by two Tennessee players.I recorded the game but it was already going on when it started to record, so I didn't see the particular incident, but just a question out of curiosity; when the player established himself out of bounds, wouldn't that mean if he touched the ball while out of bounds without having come back in bounds, it's the other teams ball? And for what it's worth, wasn't his foot on the floor when he threw the ball back in? Looked like it could have been.
I have felt, for years, a lot of the officials in the SEC are either betting the games (through a proxy) or employed by someone who is betting.
I am not saying they care about the outcome, but sure will make calls either way to cover the spread. Not just talking UT games here.