SEC refs

#177
#177
Lawrence Wright said:
My point is just because someone is an alum of Florida, Auburn or Alabama doesn’t mean they automatically don’t like Tennessee as you suggested.
Click to expand...

Based on our recent history we aren’t even on their radar enough to dislike. They probably love us because we’re such an easy win.
 
#178
#178
jps2194 said:
I never said it doesn't or hasn't happened, but the OP suggested that every SEC ref is corrupt and biased and simply isn't true.
Click to expand...

Every ref is likely not corrupt and biased but I’m starting to believe every ref is incompetent.
 
#179
#179
BearBryant said:
Having an incompetent organization like the NCAA to hire refs, would be an absolute disaster. Parallel it to the way we are being governed. The Federal Gov't is an absolute total failure. We are allowing them to destroy our country. Our country was founded on the freedoms and liberties that our God(the true God that created everything) gave to all of us. Our gov't was set-up to allow the states to be the power not some centralized evil bureaucracy.

Each conference is equivalent to our states and the NCAA is the federal gov't. Each conference should be responsible for their refs. They need to make them more accountable for atrocious calls they make. The two calls that are most egregious 1)The strip, scoop, and score and 2)the 4th and 24 spot. There should be a public announcement by the SEC to explain both. And if either was incorrect they should admit the refs made a mistake.

The strip, fumble, score is baffling how they called that back. The referees ran all the way to the endzone and then somehow came up with this ridiculous forward progress crap. This should be explained in detail how this happened, and how they the refs made that call.

The 4th and 24 call--the sideline refs were in no position to make an accurate spot of the ball. They appear to mark it close to where Warren's knee went down instead of where the ball was at that point. The yellow line was not the line to make for the First Down. The 40 yard line strip was where the sticks were. And it appears it was about the middle of that stripe. Unfortunately there was no great camera angle to show exactly where the ball was when Warren's knee went down. So I don't think the replay crew was wrong in not reversing the call. But the SEC should explain why the refs were NOT in position to make the correct spot. Because there is no doubt the spot was incorrect!

Before any of you think I'm a Bama fan,--Don't. I've been a Tennessee Vol fan all my life. I'm from McConnell, TN which is near Martin, TN. My Great Grandfather's cousin was Graham Vowell the first All-American at Tennessee. So I would love to see Tennessee destroy Bama's season. The last time Tennessee beat Alabama I was at the game. My daughter was a student and she graduated from UT.
Click to expand...

I agree with this completely. But I’d add that I e been frustrated with the way replay is administered from the very beginning. The problem is…why does the call on the field stand unless there is irrefutable/unquestionable/dna evidence sufficient to overturn it? The official in charge of the call on the field (spotting the ball) was over 20 yards behind the play and all the way out be the sidelines while running full speed with other players obstructing his view. He also seemed to run to the 40 amd begin towards the place he’d ultimately spot the ball on that line before stepping back to the 39.

It was never going to be that accurate. The reply official on the other hand has the benefits of multiple angles and slow motion. Why wouldn’t the reply official always go into the review thinking I’ll place it where it belongs? That’s the way the process should work. Instead he goes in there intending to stick with the call on the field unless there’s overwhelming evidence it’s wrong. It makes no sense. They air on the side of not changing the call. Why is that? Nobody is on trial for murder. The offical should always go into that situation thinking replay it’s a tool to ensure the call is question is correct. If he goes into the review (regarding the spot) I think conventional wisdom would lead to the ball being spotted at the 40.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BearBryant and Bigorangedan23
#180
#180
chattavol420 said:
I agree with this completely. But I’d add that I e been frustrated with the way replay is administered from the very beginning. The problem is…why does the call on the field stand unless there is irrefutable/unquestionable/dna evidence sufficient to overturn it? The official in charge of the call on the field (spotting the ball) was over 20 yards behind the play and all the way out be the sidelines while running full speed with other players obstructing his view. He also seemed to run to the 40 amd begin towards the place he’d ultimately spot the ball on that line before stepping back to the 39.

It was never going to be that accurate. The reply official on the other hand has the benefits of multiple angles and slow motion. Why wouldn’t the reply official always go into the review thinking I’ll place it where it belongs? That’s the way the process should work. Instead he goes in there intending to stick with the call on the field unless there’s overwhelming evidence it’s wrong. It makes no sense. They air on the side of not changing the call. Why is that? Nobody is on trial for murder. The offical should always go into that situation thinking replay it’s a tool to ensure the call is question is correct. If he goes into the review (regarding the spot) I think conventional wisdom would lead to the ball being spotted at the 40.
Click to expand...

The numerous replays showed he didn't get the line to gain which is the only thing that can be reviewed. The pinpoint accuracy of the spot isn't reviewable. Once it was determined that Warren failed to get the first down there would be no discussion as to whether or not Ole Miss would start with the ball a foot or two closer to the 40.
 
#181
#181
bamawriter said:
The numerous replays showed he didn't get the line to gain
Click to expand...

The replay did no such thing. if it had been spotted as a first down by 6 inches the replay would have allowed the spot to stand. The problem is a ref 20 yards out of position making a bad spot. There’s no argument that the spot was accurate because it clearly wasn’t.
 
#182
#182
bamawriter said:
The numerous replays showed he didn't get the line to gain which is the only thing that can be reviewed. The pinpoint accuracy of the spot isn't reviewable. Once it was determined that Warren failed to get the first down there would be no discussion as to whether or not Ole Miss would start with the ball a foot or two closer to the 40.
Click to expand...

I disagree that multiple angles showed he didn’t make the line to gain. The yellow long was between the 40 amd 39 but in actuality touching the 40 would’ve been a first down. While you could tell exactly where the ball was when his thigh touched down mist would place it at the 40. But because the way the rule is administered the call stood. If the offical goes into the review thinking he is responsible for placing this ball as accurately as possible (regardless of rhe call on the field) I think he spots it at the 40. And I think that’s what should happen in that situation.
 
#183
#183
WoodsmanVol said:
It might be wiser to use refs from other conferences. PAC12 refs working SEC games, ACC refs working B1G or Big 10 games, Big Sky refs working Big 12 games, for example. No ties, or association, but still oversight to be sure none of them are involved in sports betting.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t their ref essentially become sec refs.
 
#184
#184
Orangeslice13 said:
The replay did no such thing. if it had been spotted as a first down by 6 inches the replay would have allowed the spot to stand. The problem is a ref 20 yards out of position making a bad spot. There’s no argument that the spot was accurate because it clearly wasn’t.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you're wanting to see something that isn't there. The positioning of the official is irrelevant because the replay showed Warren was short. The spot was only relevant to where Ole Miss would take over.
 
#185
#185
bamawriter said:
Sorry, but you're wanting to see something that isn't there. The positioning of the official is irrelevant because the replay showed Warren was short. The spot was only relevant to where Ole Miss would take over.
Click to expand...
The replay showed nothing… which was the problem. I think he was probably about 6” short but I still don’t know whether it was a 1st down. I also know the Head Linesman running in from 18 yards behind the play had no earthly idea either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rjd970 and feathersax
#186
#186
GAVol said:
The replay showed nothing… which was the problem. I think he was probably about 6” short but I still don’t know whether it was a 1st down. I also know the Head Linesman running in from 18 yards behind the play had no earthly idea either.
Click to expand...

Fine. I thought the replays were quite conclusive. But I'm sure that's my Bama bias leaking thru despite the fact that it was in Bama's best interest for UT to win.
 
#187
#187
bamawriter said:
Fine. I thought the replays were quite conclusive. But I'm sure that's my Bama bias leaking thru despite the fact that it was in Bama's best interest for UT to win.
Click to expand...
No… I think you’re probably just wrong lol.

I really don’t get the ref mechanics on that play. How are the Side Judge and Back Judge both bailed on the play to the point that they weren’t closer to the spot 25 yards downfield than an official that starts at the LOS?
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax
#188
#188
GAVol said:
No… I think you’re probably just wrong lol.

I really don’t get the ref mechanics on that play. How are the Side Judge and Back Judge both bailed on the play to the point that they weren’t closer to the spot 25 yards downfield than an official that starts at the LOS?
Click to expand...
Reasonable questions and we never get reasonable answers
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax
#189
#189
GAVol said:
No… I think you’re probably just wrong lol.

I really don’t get how the Side Judge and Back Judge both bailed on the play to the point that they weren’t closer to the spot 25 yards downfield than an official that starts at the LOS.
Click to expand...

I assume they were looking for penalties, which is their responsibility. The line judge is supposed to mark forward progress.
 
#190
#190
bamawriter said:
I assume they were looking for penalties, which is their responsibility. The line judge is supposed to mark forward progress.
Click to expand...
They all look for penalties… and the Line Judge is on the opposite side of the field from where that play happened.
 
#191
#191
GAVol said:
They all look for penalties… and the Line Judge is on the opposite side of the field from where that play happened.
Click to expand...

You're right. It's the linesman on the other side. And while they all look for penalties, they do not all spot the ball.
 
#192
#192
bamawriter said:
Sorry, but you're wanting to see something that isn't there. The positioning of the official is irrelevant because the replay showed Warren was short. The spot was only relevant to where Ole Miss would take over.
Click to expand...
I wish that I could see the replay that you are seeing. I haven't seen one yet that could be conclusive either way.
 
#193
#193
It was the same crew that called the Miss St - Memphis game and they blew that game too and cost Miss St the game. I have had a lot of people here in ACC country say there was a lot of bad calls in the game.
 
#195
#195
He was short. It was weird that the official 20 yards away spotted the ball, but I don’t think Warren made the first down.

Fans were just fed up with the flopping all night and having a legitimate TD taken off the board. It was a powder keg of frustration and the spot lit the fuse.

Nobody should have been throwing crap but I 100% guarantee the stoppage wouldn’t have happened had their been competent officiating all night and UT wasn’t on the butt end of it, yet again in another big game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13
#196
#196
Vols420 said:
Nothing will change until the Conference moves the conference from Birmingham to a major city. Bama likes things just like they are. It's all sports in the SEC not just football. To many homers calling games across sports and 0 accountability from the SEC Office. Get the HQ out of Gump land and move it to a major city there are plenty across the SouthEast. Orlando makes the most sense to me. Until that happens nothing changes and the integrity of the league is at risk.
Click to expand...
Knoxville makes more sense.
 
#198
#198
Redleg68 said:
I wish that I could see the replay that you are seeing. I haven't seen one yet that could be conclusive either way.
Click to expand...

That’s because you’re seeing what actually happened. There’s no way you can say one way or the other from the replay.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top