If I'm Les, I get suspended after the game for that call
- Thread starter dawgatUSM
- Start date
...because that is clearly a catch. They're focused on the right foot, but he had possession of the ball with his left foot inbounds.
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
already made out. Show it to the reporteers and state, "Here's my fine, now I'm gonna get my $30K worth!"
It was the correct call not to overturn. The call on the field was incomplete. The replay guys made the right call in not overturning because it is not clear that his left foot did not come down first out of bounds. It looks like his left foot is OB and the way the rule is written it would have to be abundantly clear that it was not OB. Too close to overturn. Correct call.Coach34 said:
I think the rule is a good rule in that the on field refs make the call to the best of their ability in accordance with the speed and play of the game. You don't override them unless it is 100% clear that the call was incorrect. This you could not DEFINITIVELY say that his left foot, which came down first, was in bounds.
because you sure as hell weren't watching the same one as the rest of the country. Or perhaps you just have the same replay feed as the replay officials, which is to say the one that doesn't exist. Hell I didn't really care one way or the other who won that game, but number 7 caught the ball and clearly had one foot in bounds (you know, huge divot and all, but don't let facts get in your way), which kicked up all sorts of dirt and it looked like he had a second foot in bounds as well. The second foot you can argue, but that first one was a whole half foot or more in bounds.LR1400 said:
The rule is a good rule. The problem is that the replay officials in the SEC have no idea what the rule is or that they are supposed to actually follow it.
Seriously, look at the replay again. He had possession of the ball and at least one foot in- and it looked to me like he had two. That was an INT.
Let me put it this way- if I was the replay official, I would have overturned it, and would have been able to look myself in the mirror the next day.
Let me put it this way- if I was the replay official, I would have overturned it, and would have been able to look myself in the mirror the next day.
it looked like he got 2 feet in, not just one. Not sure what you were looking at.
I liked what Flabloser said- it seems the SEC has told replay officials 100 out of 100 idiots or retards have to agree for a call to be overturned. There is no excuse for what has gone on this season. And with the millions of dollars that are at stake, one has to wonder if some type of ******** is going on.
I liked what Flabloser said- it seems the SEC has told replay officials 100 out of 100 idiots or retards have to agree for a call to be overturned. There is no excuse for what has gone on this season. And with the millions of dollars that are at stake, one has to wonder if some type of ******** is going on.
