|
Replies: 29
| visibility 225
|
Dynasty Maker [3265]
TigerPulse: 94%
34
|
Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 29, 2019, 11:51 PM
|
|
Calling all fair minds!!
Watch the portion between 1:59 and 2:02. Come on, I DARE you! It's in real time with a clear view. Now then . . . TRUTH: Dozens of time each fall Saturday, the rule concerning completing a catch is interpreted and applied consistently with the outcome here, and typically no one complains. The complaints here emanate from three main things
(1) Ohio State picked it up and ostensibly scored a TD, so folks were working with that baseline in their mind. It was no longer simply a question of was it caught (i.e. evaluating it with the same mental sobriety and objectivity as if it were a mundane situation), but with the hyper-exicted hypothetical of "what if OSU loses the TD?"
and (2) The slow-motion got run over and over creating the impression that Ross had the ball and was trotting along in compete control for some time, when in reality, it was bang-drop. I've timed this several times and from the moment the ball hit his hands to the time it was broken loose, it was somewhere between .72 and .92 seconds. It was bang bang. Now one can disagree with the gray area and discretion of the rule if one wants (and ironically I do), but these types of plays across the college football world have been **consistently** called *JUST THIS WAY* for some years now. When it's a mundane 2nd and 4 in the first quarter of a less high-profile game, no one complains b/c they know you must "finish a catch," but now for some reason Clemson has to be held to a higher standard that what everyone is always held to in every other case. But I'm calling bullcrap and anyone with a fair mind can't argue what I've said here -namely, that if you watch college ball, you've seen this exact play called in just this manner many dozens if not hundreds of times over the last 8-10 years.
|
|
|
|
 |
Dynasty Maker [3265]
TigerPulse: 94%
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3262]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
he’s being hurled around by the bucknut.
Dec 30, 2019, 12:00 AM
|
|
I say - never had possession, so they should shut up already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10825]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
I’d love to put this to bed
Dec 29, 2019, 11:53 PM
|
|
But I think this is one of those games/plays we will be hearing about from bitter buck nuts for the rest of our lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3265]
TigerPulse: 94%
34
|
I think your'e absolutely right . . . BUT
Dec 29, 2019, 11:58 PM
|
|
I don't define "settling" the matter as causing complaints to cease (which one can't control), but as laying the truth out in such a way so that they can keep lying with their mouths but they know in their heart that we're right!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68088]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90176
Joined: 2001
|
Yup, but...
Dec 30, 2019, 12:03 AM
[ in reply to I’d love to put this to bed ] |
|
at the end of the day, losers make excuses and blame the officials for a loss while winners find a way to win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [100]
TigerPulse: 93%
11
|
Man is that true!!
Dec 30, 2019, 9:05 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4751]
TigerPulse: 82%
37
|
Re: I’d love to put this to bed
Dec 30, 2019, 8:27 AM
[ in reply to I’d love to put this to bed ] |
|
Oh Yeah, it is already in the Hall Of Fame of unfair treatment of the bucknuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68088]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90176
Joined: 2001
|
The refs allowed the play to continue...
Dec 30, 2019, 12:00 AM
|
|
which is exactly what they should have done.
The ESPN booth official stated almost immediately that it was not a catch.
The officials on the field in conjunction with the instant replay officials then reviewed the play and determined the pass was actually an incompletion rather than a fumble.
OSU fans can b!tch and moan all they want but the officials did everything within their power to make the correct call.
The BuckNuts are pi$$ed-off about losing and they're looking for someone or something to blame other than the performance of their own team. On that basis, they're not going to stop whining and complaining or have their minds changed no matter what the video evidence proves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3265]
TigerPulse: 94%
34
|
Yes that's a good point . . .
Dec 30, 2019, 12:04 AM
|
|
and I don't have any beef the officials letting the play pan out. That was wise. But all the commentators after the fact need to keep in mind that there is no "baseline reality" that one should be psychologically tempted to establish as the default position so that there's an artificially high burden of proof for the other position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3675]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [626]
TigerPulse: 100%
21
|
Re: The refs allowed the play to continue...
Dec 30, 2019, 1:42 AM
|
|
As a side note to that, I saw a few tweets exclaiming how much of a Clemson slant Fowler and Herbstreit had, lol. One even called it "sickening." I thought it was fairly called by them, and definitely no Clemson slant, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2715]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
If anything, I think Herbstreet was trying his best not to
Dec 30, 2019, 8:34 AM
|
|
favor Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6784]
TigerPulse: 96%
41
Posts: 13483
Joined: 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [419]
TigerPulse: 96%
17
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 12:02 AM
|
|
Had the opportunity to meet and talk with an ACC official today. He said he thought it was the correct call: incomplete pass.... 4th down!
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7474]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Fella, you have bucknuts and media nuts still saying
Dec 30, 2019, 12:14 AM
|
|
the Targetting call was not Targetting. You ain't winning either case no matter the undisputed video evidence. Why? Because it went Clemson's way and not the blue blood brotherhoods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3265]
TigerPulse: 94%
34
|
Ah. I'm not trying to get them to admit the truth . . .
Dec 30, 2019, 12:16 AM
|
|
I'm just trying to rub the truth in their face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64648]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 41678
Joined: 2004
|
Re: Ah. I'm not trying to get them to admit the truth . . .
Dec 30, 2019, 12:42 AM
|
|
Like “The Push-Off” with the coots. Bringing this up with bucknut fans will bring a smile to my face for years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6760]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 12:42 AM
|
|
Excellent post! TU! Real time view says it all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [152]
TigerPulse: 70%
12
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 2:17 AM
|
|
I say if it is called complete it shouldn't change.
If it was called incomplete it shouldn't change by the video.
That was to close. overturns are supposed to be 100 %.
Not the reason for the loss. It was a great game by both teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3717]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 9:45 AM
|
|
Would it have been ruled a touchdown if caught in the end zone? No! That settles it!
The on field ref called it incorrectly a completion and fumble, but they err on continuing the play and decide later by replay. If called incomplete and oberturned, 0-4er St would have had the ball but there would not have been a TD to overturn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [281]
TigerPulse: 95%
14
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 2:17 AM
|
|
Consider it payback for the phantom PI vs Miami in 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4751]
TigerPulse: 82%
37
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 8:26 AM
|
|
Excellent analysis. I would add one more thing. Refs are moving more towards letting the play run rather than blowing it dead because they don't want to impact the game. They know they can review and overturn a fumble, but they cannot overturn an early whistle so they let the it play out.
This does two things. It increases the pressure on the review because, as you point out, there is now much more at stake. Secondly, the review booth is trying to get the call right as is rather than merely reviewing the call. In other words, they are reviewing the film as is rather than holding themselves to the irrefutable evidence standard.
That is what happened Sat. night. It may not have been irrefutable evidence to overturn, but a review of the play itself led to the right call (at game speed). Get used to this going forward because of what I said above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [973]
TigerPulse: 97%
24
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 8:58 AM
|
|
I was wondering the same thing--and how does that affect the standard of review on replay? Because I thought I had heard the same thing that the refs are now taught to let the play go on.
If the ref who declines to call it incomplete did so only on the basis of allowing the play to continue for replay, does that mean that replay no longer is bound by the "indisputable" standard? Can the replay booth then just make the call as they see it without deference to the call on the field?
Any experts know this answer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5797]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
I’m not sure the answer, but
Dec 30, 2019, 9:13 AM
|
|
I was thinking something similar. I bet that the referee(s) on the field THOUGHT it was an incomplete pass but didn’t want to blow the play dead since review could confirm their initial position. The review did just that for them, so they reversed the call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [40]
TigerPulse: 100%
5
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 10:24 AM
[ in reply to Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all ] |
|
This, very much.
I think there’s an understanding between the field refs and the review refs that a “let it play out” scenario like this will not require as high a standard to overturn as a call that isn’t impacted because play is stopped anyway. I’m glad for that because I think letting it play out is the right thing to do. Keep in mind that in the moment the field refs had no idea it would turn into a TD and the stakes would be so much higher for the review. They kind of unintentionally threw the review guys under the bus. That said, I think there is a strong case that there was indisputable evidence anyway that it was an incompletion.
The thing I find interesting is that even Urban Meyer was not really buying the “we got robbed” line in the post game show on the BTN. He said to him “it was 50/50” as being an incompletion. I even got the feeling he was saying that mostly to not totally contradict Ryan Day and the other analysts that were on the show. He gained a lot of respect from me for taking that position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [3060]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 8:40 AM
|
|
It was settled once and for all....on the field, at the game, by the officials.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6821]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
TL;DR - Too Long; Didn't Read
Dec 30, 2019, 9:01 AM
|
|
Also, the referees have already settled this...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6677]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: Let's settle this incompletion/fumble thing once and for all
Dec 30, 2019, 9:21 AM
|
|
This was the only review I thought the Buckeyes had a case about. Watching this and using your time of less than 1 second I now do believe replay got it right. The whole purpose of the DB sticking his arm through Ross’ hands is to knock the ball out and keep it from being a catch and that’s exactly what he did. I watched the feet Saturday night and counted 4 steps but he was never able to bring that ball in and get it near his body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10775]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
Posts: 12153
Joined: 1999
|
The replay analyst said something I didn't know-the replay
Dec 30, 2019, 10:31 AM
|
|
officials don't watch those replays in slow motion. He was convinced it was NOT a catch. (Because of the definition you pointed out.)
Even Herb thought "3 steps, so it's a catch" - and the analyst said on-air that's not how it works...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 29
| visibility 225
|
|
|
50
