Josh Smith review?

[volnpowell]

Siap, anyone know why they were allowed to review that play after we ran a play?

 

[TNsnyper20]

Siap, anyone know why they were allowed to review that play after we ran a play?

I believe the call for the review came down right before we snapped the ball.

 

[ButchPlz]

I believe the call for the review came down right before we snapped the ball.

Ref didn't signal to stop play, so it shouldn't have mattered.

 

[ThreatLevelVol]

I believe the call for the review came down right before we snapped the ball.

Correct

 

[tumscalcium]

Ref didn't signal to stop play, so it shouldn't have mattered.

Indeed

 

[UneducatedGuess]

I believe the call for the review came down right "before" we snapped the ball.

FYP. I didn't hear a whistle

 

[Carl Pickens]

I'd like to hear an explanation on that one.... I think the momentum was changing at that point

 

[volnpowell]

I believe the call for the review came down right before we snapped the ball.

I never heard the whistle or saw the refs try to stop the play.

 

[TNsnyper20]

For what it's worth. I don't believe it should have been reviewed because I heard no whistles either. But, that's what the sec is going to go with.

 

[VolunteerAlumni]

Also would like to mention that it didn't look like enough evidence to overturn imo.

Preston Williams was definitely a drop.

This one? Ehh don't know how you can reverse it

 

[ButchPlz]

For what it's worth. I don't believe it should have been reviewed because I heard no whistles either. But, that's what the sec is going to go with.

And hopefully someone politely shows them the rulebook.

 

[VolFreakJosh]

Ref didn't signal to stop play, so it shouldn't have mattered.

Common sense

 

[volnpowell]

Also would like to mention that it didn't look like enough evidence to overturn imo.

Preston Williams was definitely a drop.

This one? Ehh don't know how you can reverse it

I actually disagree, I could more see ball hitting ground in Josh Smith catch.

In Preston Williams, I thought ground could not cause a fumble. He had control til he hit ground.

Edit: I can see if saying not enough to overturn the play since supposed to be decisive evidence.

 

[Fred_Jones]

Didn't that happen to us last year too?

 

[bnhunt]

I actually disagree, I could more see ball hitting ground in Josh Smith catch.

In Preston Williams, I thought ground could not cause a fumble. He had control til he hit ground.

Edit: I can see if saying not enough to overturn the play since supposed to be decisive evidence.

Not about ground causing fumble. Under the new rules you have to complete the process of the catch, which Williams did not do. Too bad that rule wasn't around during the phantom Janar Gafney catch a few years ago.

 

[Cdywolfe]

Not about ground causing fumble. Under the new rules you have to complete the process of the catch, which Williams did not do. Too bad that rule wasn't around during the phantom Janar Gafney catch a few years ago.

If tonight's game was any indication, maybe it's not too late to review that call.

 

[volnpowell]

Not about ground causing fumble. Under the new rules you have to complete the process of the catch, which Williams did not do. Too bad that rule wasn't around during the phantom Janar Gafney catch a few years ago.

I agree... but time sure flies, because that was more than a few years ago!

Never forgot that play though!!

 

[Voltopia]

I certainly found myself thinking that I'd like to know who "down in Birmingham" gets to make all those replay decisions.

 

[wtmvol]

I actually disagree, I could more see ball hitting ground in Josh Smith catch.

In Preston Williams, I thought ground could not cause a fumble. He had control til he hit ground.

Edit: I can see if saying not enough to overturn the play since supposed to be decisive evidence.

It wasn't a fumble. It was an incompletion.

Preston has to stay strong with it like his life depends on it. You can't let it out of your grip.

 

[Volle]

In Preston Williams, I thought ground could not cause a fumble. He had control til he hit ground.
.

I agree, I thought that was a catch... he controlled it until he hit the ground.... there is no continuation rule in college as there is in the NFL.

 

[BigOrange15]

Why the **** bother trying to get up quickly and run a play if they will just blow it dead to review 6 plays later? That was a bull**** call.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I certainly found myself thinking that I'd like to know who "down in Birmingham" gets to make all those replay decisions.

It was either Saban or Kiffin.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I agree this seems to open a bit of a Pandora's Box for college football review.

If the officials can review a play from two snaps ago, what about from three snaps ago? Or four? What if the ensuing plays involve a score, or a change of possession?

Will coaches be able to call timeout three plays later to use their challenge?

Don't get me wrong; I think the final call was correct. Josh did get a little bit too much help from the ground corralling that ball. But that's beside the point.

Real Pandora's Box opened tonight, it sure seems. Not sure the officials would want to do that, in retrospect.

 

[UGADawg4Life]

Also would like to mention that it didn't look like enough evidence to overturn imo.

Preston Williams was definitely a drop.

This one? Ehh don't know how you can reverse it

The ball clearly hit the ground first. I noticed it on the initial play in real time. The refs got it right and did what they should have done in reviewing it. UT tried to hurry up to prevent a review but the refs had already signaled for a review.

 

[VolLee]

The ball clearly hit the ground first. I noticed it on the initial play in real time. The refs got it right and did what they should have done in reviewing it. UT tried to hurry up to prevent a review but the refs had already signaled for a review.

How do you know the last half of your last sentence. The rest of us here didn't see anything to clue is in on that. What did you see? Specifically. Being serious.