What God-Awful Refereeing Today

NO WE GET THE WORST REFS FOR LAST ACC will be in the natty mark that now
 
you can bet good money on the dwags to win it all. ESPN worships this team for some reason and the refs will do everything in their power to hand 'em a trophy in a week.
Lather, rinse, repeat for next year. I won't be surprised if 45 yr old dipshit Bennett magically finds another year of eligibility too.

Every single mutt fan, player, and coach can rot in hell.
 
RamblinWreck92 said:
you can bet good money on the dwags to win it all. ESPN worships this team for some reason and the refs will do everything in their power to hand 'em a trophy in a week.
Lather, rinse, repeat for next year. I won't be surprised if 45 yr old dipshit Bennett magically finds another year of eligibility too.

Every single mutt fan, player, and coach can rot in hell.
Click to expand...

And I thought I hated UGAY the most. I applaud you jolly good fellow. Carry on.
 
Both games were last minute thrillers. That is what the network that runs college football wants. Referees know that. It is very likely Ohio State scores aTD if the targeting call stands. That puts them up 3 scores in early fourth. Georgia likely done. TV sets can turn at 11:20 to New Years shows. Both games were influenced by bad replay decisions.

The Bowers call gives Georgia three points. It should have been a turnover on downs. I have never heard such “official” idiocy being spoken by the TV experts justifying the reversal. Yes, your body can break the plane of the sideline, but if the ball stays in bounds inside the pylon you get a TD. But, on this play the ball breaks the plane of the sideline with Bowers in the air. The ref gets the call right. The reversal crazily claims he gets credit for where the ball was as he landed, in spite of the fact the ball was out of bounds. None of us have ever seen that interpretation before. If so, every coach would teach a player headed out of bounds to do a downfield running broad jump with ball extended. By tonight’s ruling, the ball would be marked where you land out of bounds, not where the ball broke the sideline plane. We all know that is an incorrect interpretation. But, it kept Georgia in the game. Refereeing led to a seven point swing in Georgia’s favor. It kept TV sets on and made the game close and exciting to the end.

The way college replay works is awful. It does not make sure we always get the call right. It does make sure the folks analyzing the replay can have great impact on a game’s outcome.

One last part of my rant. Why can an offense hurry up and snap the ball to avoid replay? That should never happen. There is a replay ref up in the booth whose initial job is to notify the head ref if review is warranted. When he sees the other team hurrying up to snap the ball, that is reason enough to hit the button. The offense is telling you that they even doubt the call that has gone their way.
 
2246efcf98012e5443e21a39d4fe2cb67f8ca9dc_hq.gif
 
The Champ said:
Both reviews looked like the right call.
Click to expand...

I mean, we have been told that inadvertent helmet to helmet can still be targeting. And we have been told it can still be targeting if it's shoulder to helmet with force. I can't understand what led to the overturn there other than "it's the playoffs"? Agree the Bowers in-bounds was the right call. Was clear
 
The Champ said:
Both reviews looked like the right call.
Click to expand...
The stupid ref called the wrong penalty on the mugging at the back of the EZ. It was not targeting and never was targeting. He didn't lead with his helmet, he led with his shoulder to the defenseless guy's head at top speed. The call was unnecessary roughness, not targeting. The review on Bowers' catch was, amazingly, correct. The guy levitated 3" off the ground for about 3 yards.
 
stinger78 said:
The stupid ref called the wrong penalty on the mugging at the back of the EZ. It was not targeting and never was targeting. He didn't lead with his helmet, he led with his shoulder to the defenseless guy's head at top speed. The call was unnecessary roughness, not targeting. The review on Bowers' catch was, amazingly, correct. The guy levitated 3" off the ground for about 3 yards.
Click to expand...
OTOH, here is a definition and discussion of targeting. According to this rule, I amend the above post. It was indeed targeting, the call on the field was the correct one, and that review was crap. Those had to be ACC refs.

______________
ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. ...

Note 1: "Targeting" means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indications of targeting (emphasis NCAA's) include but are not limited to:
  • Launch-a player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
  • A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
  • Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
  • Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet
Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:
  • A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass
  • A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier
  • A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return
  • A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect himself or has not clearly become a ball carrier
  • A player on the ground
  • A player obviously out of the play
  • A player who receives a blind-side block
  • A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped
  • A quarterback any time after a change of possession a ball carrier who has obviously given himself up and is sliding feet first"
Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:
  • A player leaving his feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area
  • A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
  • A player leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area
  • A player lowering his head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.
 
Other teams (us included) need to adopt the uga model of injuring star players when playing uga. The cheap shot on Harrison altered the game. More uga players need to find their way to the trainer’s tent since it’s such an effective strategy.
 
ElCidBUZZingFAN said:
It wasn’t even live action calls that were bad. They were reviews, which means people actually had time to contemplate and discuss the ööööty calls they made.

College football is in such a trash position to the casual viewer.
Click to expand...
Just imagine being a B1G fan, midwesterner, or better yet an OSU fan. They probably feel it much worse than we do because we’ve known about the fix for quite some time now, but experiencing the Cucks for uGag may be an entirely new experience for them. All I can say is welcome to our world.
 
77GTFan said:
The Bowers call gives Georgia three points. It should have been a turnover on downs. I have never heard such “official” idiocy being spoken by the TV experts justifying the reversal. Yes, your body can break the plane of the sideline, but if the ball stays in bounds inside the pylon you get a TD. But, on this play the ball breaks the plane of the sideline with Bowers in the air. The ref gets the call right. The reversal crazily claims he gets credit for where the ball was as he landed, in spite of the fact the ball was out of bounds. None of us have ever seen that interpretation before. If so, every coach would teach a player headed out of bounds to do a downfield running broad jump with ball extended. By tonight’s ruling, the ball would be marked where you land out of bounds, not where the ball broke the sideline plane. We all know that is an incorrect interpretation. But, it kept Georgia in the game. Refereeing led to a seven point swing in Georgia’s favor. It kept TV sets on and made the game close and exciting to the end.
Click to expand...

The replay officials' interpretation of this play was correct. And while you have no reason to trust me, I actually did look up this rule earlier in the season so I already knew about it.

The rule is the ball gets spotted either where it went out of bounds only if the player is airborne. Otherwise it is spotted with forward progress regardless of where it crossed the sideline.

Normally, when a player is going out of bounds in a situation like this, they dive with their whole body off the ground and the ball is spotted where it went out. However, in this case, Bowers had a hand down in the field of play so the ball is spotted at its forwardmost point, even though the ball had already crossed the sideline.

Here is the relevant rule from the rulebook:

NCAA Football Rulebook said:
The most forward point of the ball when declared out of bounds between the goal lines is the point of forward progress (A.R. 8-2-1-I and A.R. 8-5- 1-VII) (Exception: When a ball carrier is airborne as they cross the sideline (including a striding runner), forward progress is determined by the position of the ball as it crosses the sideline (A.R. 8-2-1-II-III and V-IX).
Click to expand...

Note that it specifies the ball is spotted where it crosses the sideline only if the runner is airborne. That is stated as an exception in contrast to how it is spotted if the player is not airborne.

Now here is Bowers on that play. Note that his hand is down in the field of play, so he is not airbone and thus the ball is not spotted where it was when it crosses the sideline.

1672586483303.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top