Officials' Reviews

#1
V

VolsWinRLose

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
448
Likes
76
#1
I'm ready for the powers-that-be to change the play-review rules. Even the commentators denied any knowledge of GA's 1st challenge actually having been an officials' review. The whole thing sounded like something out of Animal Farm to me. "No, we didn't say 'coach's challenge;' it just sounded like it. What we really said was 'officials' review!'"

Conspiracy theorists who charge that the officials were trying to beat us make me crazy, but I do think that the number of reviews tonight, and the timeliness of a couple of them, highlight a flaw in the policy of play review. Namely, the officials can arbitrarily apply it whenever they like. I think they should review only when a coach calls for it (once!) or blow off the coach's challenge entirely and actually review every play.
 
#2
#2
there did seem to be way too many reviews.
 
#3
#3
Way way way too many, it was on my last nerve. It felt like every big play the Vols made was under review.
 
#4
#4
i thought bret smith's catch then fumble then recovering his own fumble should have stood. he did have control of the ball, even if it was only a split second.

the review of the tereshinski fumble was crap. it was obvious he fumbled from watching the play while it was going on. reviewing that was a waste of time.
 
#5
#5
The Dawgs got two reviews tonight even though they only entitled to one. Thats a fact.
 
#6
#6
I thought B. Smith's catch review was a catch. I thought he caught it got it knock lose, regained control and then got it knocked out of his hand all while taking like 3 or 4 steps before dropping it.

Too many challenges.
 
#8
#8
05_never_again said:
i thought bret smith's catch then fumble then recovering his own fumble should have stood. he did have control of the ball, even if it was only a split second.

the review of the tereshinski fumble was crap. it was obvious he fumbled from watching the play while it was going on. reviewing that was a waste of time.
Click to expand...

Didnt Georgia call a Timeout and callenge that play even though they had already used theirs earlier.
 
#9
#9
OWB said:
Way way way too many, it was on my last nerve. It felt like every big play the Vols made was under review.
Click to expand...

It did seem one sided but then again maybe that was because Georgia didn't have that many big plays. :birgits_giggle:
 
#12
#12
they called Richt's first challenge as already being under Ofiicial review, so it didn't count against them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top