Whistles don’t matter!

#76
#76
Powder and shot said:
Click to expand...


That's what bothered me more than anything. I didn't agree with the call, but as soon as I saw what was called I knew it couldn't be overturned because it's not reviewable.

And then they reviewed it...

And not only did they review it, they decided that it was confirmed, meaning they determined that the call on the field was obviously correct. That's just insanity from start to finish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen and BartW
#79
#79
bamawriter said:
That's what bothered me more than anything. I didn't agree with the call, but as soon as I saw what was called I knew it couldn't be overturned because it's not reviewable.

And then they reviewed it...

And not only did they review it, they decided that it was confirmed, meaning they determined that the call on the field was obviously correct. That's just insanity from start to finish.
Click to expand...
It is reviewable and should be overturned.
 

Attachments

  • C8BAF899-BB43-4128-BF9F-89FB1BE57D0B.png
    C8BAF899-BB43-4128-BF9F-89FB1BE57D0B.png
    2.6 MB · Views: 9
  • Like
Reactions: SobeVol and mpfvol
#82
#82
UGADawg4Life said:
Watch the replay in slo mo. Runner's left foot was the only one on the ground when the ball was 1 1/2 ft from the goal like, with a UT player pulling him. You can't drive with one foot. His forward progress had stopped with 1 1/2 ft to go. Refs got it right. Should have gone for 3 the series before, but certainly this series. Sends a bad message to your D.
Click to expand...

Whether one foot or two feet were on the ground at your point of reference is irrelevant. I bet you have a hard time walking with both of your feet on the ground.

I’ve watched the replay. It wasn’t reasonable to call forward progress stopped…because he was still progressing forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#87
#87
UGADawg4Life said:
Watch the replay in slo mo. Runner's left foot was the only one on the ground when the ball was 1 1/2 ft from the goal like, with a UT player pulling him. You can't drive with one foot. His forward progress had stopped with 1 1/2 ft to go. Refs got it right. Should have gone for 3 the series before, but certainly this series. Sends a bad message to your D.
Click to expand...
You can’t drive with one foot????? How do you shoot a lay up in basketball. Geeze what an idiot
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tnslim1
#89
#89
Dr H Lecter said:
For a writer, you’re not very clear in expressing you position.
Click to expand...

These were my first two sentences on the subject:

"That's what bothered me more than anything. I didn't agree with the call, but as soon as I saw what was called I knew it couldn't be overturned because it's not reviewable."

You quoted them in your first reply to me. How much clearer could I possibly be? Did I need to bold, cap, and italicize "I DIDN'T AGREE WITH THE CALL"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DuckInAPen
#91
#91
bamawriter said:
These were my first two sentences on the subject:

"That's what bothered me more than anything. I didn't agree with the call, but as soon as I saw what was called I knew it couldn't be overturned because it's not reviewable."

You quoted them in your first reply to me. How much clearer could I possibly be? Did I need to bold, cap, and italicize "I DIDN'T AGREE WITH THE CALL"?
Click to expand...
And you are dead wrong about it being “not reviewable”. See the other thread. Guy posted the clip from the NCAA rule book. It absolutely is reviewable and the refs and the announcing crew evidently didn’t know it.
 
#92
#92
Delmar said:
And you are dead wrong about it being “not reviewable”. See the other thread. Guy posted the clip from the NCAA rule book. It absolutely is reviewable and the refs and the announcing crew evidently didn’t know it.
Click to expand...
Under thread “Forward Progress is Reviewable”
 
#93
#93
bamawriter said:
Perhaps it's your comprehension rather than my attitude.
Click to expand...

Maybe, it’s difficult to tell over a message board. But I’ve seen similar remarks from you in the past. Let me ask you this: when you added to your response to Lecter the question bolded below, were you looking for a response?

“Well, they reviewed it and confirmed it. Does that make you feel any better?” - BamaWriter
 
#94
#94
Delmar said:
And you are dead wrong about it being “not reviewable”. See the other thread. Guy posted the clip from the NCAA rule book. It absolutely is reviewable and the refs and the announcing crew evidently didn’t know it.
Click to expand...

I'll respond with the same link that I did earlier:

Instant Replay Offseason Memo #6 8_24_18.pdf (arbitersports.com)

If the ruling was that forward progress stopped where they marked it, then it should not have been reviewable.

However, it was reviewed, and confirmed. Which is all the more absurd. So it really doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong, because the play got reviewed.
 
#95
#95
DC_Vol said:
Maybe, it’s difficult to tell over a message board. But I’ve seen similar remarks from you in the past. Let me ask you this: when you added to your response to Lecter the question bolded below, were you looking for a response?

“Well, they reviewed it and confirmed it. Does that make you feel any better?” - BamaWriter
Click to expand...

He responded, and the response wasn't argumentative. So I'm not sure what point you think you're making.
 
#96
#96
bamawriter said:
I'll respond with the same link that I did earlier:

Instant Replay Offseason Memo #6 8_24_18.pdf (arbitersports.com)

If the ruling was that forward progress stopped where they marked it, then it should not have been reviewable.

However, it was reviewed, and confirmed. Which is all the more absurd. So it really doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong, because the play got reviewed.
Click to expand...
Who reviewed it? The replay booth didn’t. Just a confab of the officials. That’s not a “review”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#98
#98
bamawriter said:
He responded, and the response wasn't argumentative. So I'm not sure what point you think you're making.
Click to expand...

I asked you a question…wasn’t necessarily making a point.

But, again, your response is consistent with someone who plays the condescending prick persona.
 
#100
#100
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top