What actually happened with Young's fumble at the goal line?

[Aerie Vol]

Because it's critical to the review. In fact, it's all that matters. The ruling on the field was TD. To overturn that there has to be indisputable video evidence that he didn't recover. There is no such evidence.

I thought you were better than this. You're either lying or you're ignorant of the rules. You continue to ignore the fact they overturned the original call that he broke the plane. There was indisputable video evidence of such. You don't get to cry, "ah, but there's no video evidence bama DIDN'T go on to thereafter score a TD, so it's a bama TD."

Bottom line: Refs blew the TD call, as evidenced by video showing a fumble before the score. (tough call, easy to miss, but yes I do believe if Hooker had extended that ball it would have been ruled a fumble on the field.)

Replay blew the next call by claiming "fumble recovered by Young" when absolutely no clear evidence shows him with his hands securing it.

 

[bamawriter]

I thought you were better than this. You're either lying or you're ignorant of the rules. You continue to ignore the fact they overturned the original call that he broke the plane. There was indisputable video evidence of such. You don't get to cry, "ah, but there's no video evidence bama DIDN'T go on to thereafter score a TD, so it's a bama TD."

Bottom line: Refs blew the TD call, as evidenced by video showing a fumble before the score. (tough call, easy to miss, but yes I do believe if Hooker had extended that ball it would have been ruled a fumble on the field.)

Replay blew the next call by claiming "fumble recovered by Young" when absolutely no clear evidence shows him with his hands securing it.

I completely disagree that there is no evidence that Young recovered. He absolutely did. But, I can admit my bias. So I'm saying, arguendo, that if one wants to say that there is no evidence, it still doesn't matter.

Here's what it really boils down to: what do you think the correct result should have been? If you think the refs should have said "we can't tell, so it's Bama's ball at the 2 inch line," then okay. You feel good about UT's defense getting a stop? If you think they should have given the ball to Tennessee despite absolutely no video evidence suggesting that a UT player came close to having possession, then you're the last person who needs to be calling someone out for dishonesty or ignorance.

 

[Volwonder1]

Yes, there is a rule about it. If a ball carrier fumbles forward it can recovered by any offensive player UNLESS it is 4th down. On 4th down only the ball carrier is allowed to recover his own fumble. A recovery by any other offensive player brings the ball back to the spot of the fumble.

Thanks for the clarification

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Has there ever been a rule in football about fumbling the ball forward and said fumbler being the one to recover in the endzone for a TD...I would think if you fumbled the ball forward and regained possession it should be a touchback. Just my 2 cents

That doesn’t make sense. If you are a RB and a LB knocked the ball out right when you got to the end zone and you fall on it, how can that be anything else than a TD?

 

[Aerie Vol]

I completely disagree that there is no evidence that Young recovered. He absolutely did. But, I can admit my bias. So I'm saying, arguendo, that if one wants to say that there is no evidence, it still doesn't matter.

Here's what it really boils down to: what do you think the correct result should have been? If you think the refs should have said "we can't tell, so it's Bama's ball at the 2 inch line," then okay. You feel good about UT's defense getting a stop? If you think they should have given the ball to Tennessee despite absolutely no video evidence suggesting that a UT player came close to having possession, then you're the last person who needs to be calling someone out for dishonesty or ignorance.

I'm saying, "I want you and everyone else to admit the refs screwed up, again, in the favor of bama and against the favor of UT."

There's one chance in a hundred that we stop bama 1st and goal from the inch line in that situation. But they still missed it. I would be significantly less mad had they made that the call. However, I also disagree that a scrum isn't immediate possession, but I'm open to clarification from some knowledgable referee.

As for the evidence Young recovered, you're wearing your crimson glasses. Mine are big orange. We are gonna disagree on that one for eternity, unless someone shows me a different look. Shoulda and musta don't equal did.

And with that, I bid you all goodnight. Thanks for the banter, bamawriter. You better fear the Hype. Anyone with any football knowledge can see what's coming down the line from Rockytop.

 

[Volwonder1]

That doesn’t make sense. If you are a RB and a LB knocked the ball out right when you got to the end zone and you fall on it, how can that be anything else than a TD?

I was more or less thinking that a player could literally “fumble” the ball forward all the way to the endzone or for a first down ect..Sounds a lot more practical then the end of the game miracle backward lateral passes that never seem to work. But seeing as it has to be the player who fumbled to be the one to regain possession it makes more sense.

 

[Volwonder1]

I was more or less thinking that a player could literally “fumble” the ball forward all the way to the endzone or for a first down ect..Sounds a lot more practical then the end of the game miracle backward lateral passes that never seem to work. But seeing as it has to be the player who fumbled to be the one to regain possession it makes more sense.

I noticed it in the Ole Miss game also when the OM player was stopped short of a first down but fumbled the ball forward and was recovered by OM for a first down.

 

[volinthenorth]

They ruled it a fumble, there are pictures that then show Young holding the ball in both hands in the endzone, then players start diving in and the ball changes hands in the scrum. But none of that matters, he had the ball, and was down in the endzone. The play is over, does not matter what happens after that. Therefore the touchdown was confirmed, because there was video evidence showing Young with the ball, in the endzone

I never saw those pictures/video evidence. Can you give me a timestamp from Freak's game footage?

 

[dobre_shunka]

Because it's critical to the review. In fact, it's all that matters. The ruling on the field was TD. To overturn that there has to be indisputable video evidence that he didn't recover. There is no such evidence.



They came out with the ball half a minute later. The change of possession has to be immediate for it to be overturned. There are several seconds in which you can see the ball disappear under Young's body and there is nothing that suggests a UT player recovered.

The ruling in the field was overturned as the replay booth stated the ball was fumbled. Again, show me a video, a photo, an water color, an etching, anything of any Bama player possessing the football in the endzone after the fumble. Where is the proof beyond your "well, no one else could have had possession therefore Bama had possession therefore TD" reasoning.

By your previous post, there is nothing to suggest that Young recovered it either at any time.

So if the defense doesn't immediately recover a fumble and the ball rolls around some your " The change of possession has to be immediate for it to be overturned" comes into play and the offense retains possession even though a defender ultimately recovers the ball? You're arguing that's a rule now ?

Is it that hard to admit Bama may have been the beneficiary of a bad call?

 

[fishheadspin]

We didn’t get screwed. He fumbled and he fell on it. The vol that came out with the ball dove in and ripped it away after Young had been on the ground for 2 or 3 seconds with possession. It was the right call no matter how they explained it.

There was a PI not called where Payton smoked the corner and the safety where he was grabbed and held back that is not even being mentioned. Pretty sure would have pulled us back to down by 7.

 

[bamawriter]

The ruling in the field was overturned as the replay booth stated the ball was fumbled. Again, show me a video, a photo, an water color, an etching, anything of any Bama player possessing the football in the endzone after the fumble. Where is the proof beyond your "well, no one else could have had possession therefore Bama had possession therefore TD" reasoning.

By your prevoius post, there is nothing to suggest that Young recovered it either at any time.

Is it that hard to admit Bama may have been the beneficiary of a bad call?

How do you know that they overturned the call? Upon what are you basing that?

I'm not going to admit that Bama was the beneficiary of a bad call in this instance because the correct call was made.

But again, what do you think the result should have been?

 

[DukeDaisySam]

We didn’t get screwed. He fumbled and he fell on it. The vol that came out with the ball dove in and ripped it away after Young had been on the ground for 2 or 3 seconds with possession. It was the right call no matter how they explained it.

There was a PI not called where Payton smoked the corner and the safety where he was grabbed and held back that is not even being mentioned. Pretty sure would have pulled us back to down by 7.

This is correct. IF UT came up with the ball, it was well after the play was over, whistle had blown and Young had fallen on the football.

 

[dobre_shunka]

How do you know that they overturned the call? Upon what are you basing that?

I'm not going to admit that Bama was the beneficiary of a bad call in this instance because the correct call was made.

But again, what do you think the result should have been?

The initial call of a TD was overturned when the replay booth said a fumble occurred. There was no bean bag thrown on the field to indicate a fumble was called by the field crew.

 

[bamawriter]

The initial call of a TD was overturned when the replay booth said a fumble occurred.

Upon what are you basing the bold?

There was no bean bag thrown on the field to indicate a fumble was called by the field crew.

They don't have to throw the bag if there's an immediate recovery. For instance, if there's a bad snap and the QB falls on it immediately, the bag usually won't come out.

 

[NighthawkVol]

Pretty much, didn't see a clear fumble recovery by Young, it looked like he "may of" fell back on it, but that's not how replay works. So shoulda been called a fumble and awarded to whoever had the ball after the pile was pulled apart, aka us.

It was clearly recovered by Young.

 

[BigALWiLson]

I completely disagree that there is no evidence that Young recovered. He absolutely did. But, I can admit my bias. So I'm saying, arguendo, that if one wants to say that there is no evidence, it still doesn't matter.

Here's what it really boils down to: what do you think the correct result should have been? If you think the refs should have said "we can't tell, so it's Bama's ball at the 2 inch line," then okay. You feel good about UT's defense getting a stop? If you think they should have given the ball to Tennessee despite absolutely no video evidence suggesting that a UT player came close to having possession, then you're the last person who needs to be calling someone out for dishonesty or ignorance.

This is false because Tennessee had the ball in the endzone. He clearly fumbled. Possession means you don't lose the ball again especially at the back of the pile. SEC officiating is complete trash. Not saying it woukd have changed the outcome of the game. I don't believe that at all. The better team won hands down. Only thing I am asking of the SEC is to find ***** Officials who actually fo their job. The ones for Ole Miss game should be fired immediately. The Officials Saturday missed a lot of holding calls and the obvious fumble. Should be reprimanded and sent to officiating school. I realize you can call holding on every play. But you have got to throw the flag when it absolutely effects the play directly. Bama is a good team, we all know that. They don't need the officials helping. Throw the damn flags

 

[bamawriter]

This is false because Tennessee had the ball in the endzone.

Only after the scrum was being cleared.

The Officials Saturday missed a lot of holding calls and the obvious fumble. Should be reprimanded and sent to officiating school. I realize you can call holding on every play. But you have got to throw the flag when it absolutely effects the play directly. Bama is a good team, we all know that. They don't need the officials helping. Throw the damn flags

They didn't call holding on either team, so this gripe is pretty hollow.

 

[dobre_shunka]

Upon what are you basing the bold?



They don't have to throw the bag if there's an immediate recovery. For instance, if there's a bad snap and the QB falls on it immediately, the bag usually won't come out.

Bean bags aren't required to be dropped for fumbles behind the line of scrimmage such as a bad snap. It has nothing to do with immediate recovery or not.

 

[bamawriter]

Bean bags aren't required to be dropped for fumbles behind the line of scrimmage such as a bad snap. It has nothing to do with immediate recovery or not.

If you say so.

I'll ask yet again: what do you think the result should have been?