|
Replies: 17
| visibility 4135
|
Orange Blooded [2142]
TigerPulse: 99%
32
|
Reversed Call
6
6
Dec 1, 2024, 9:18 PM
|
|
The call on the disaster reverse that Mafah never had possession and therefore when he hit the ground he was not down?
a. He was definitely down, he made a purposeful attempt to flip the ball from the ground not a fumble. The ball was placed where Mafah went down at the 38 and half. Ruled down on the field. I am biased, but not blind.
b. The next play was complete before the refs blew the whistle to give the ball to Carolina ... pass complete on the SC 27 yard line to set up 3 and 5...
Did I miss some massive rule change where the SEC can go back and retroactively stop play and look back at a play and reverse the call from the replay booth? The rules say when the ref's acknowledge a call (blow the whistle) not when replay decides they want to review something...
"The replay official and his crew shall review every play of a game. He
may stop a game at any time before the ball is next legally put in play (Exception: Rule 12-3-6-d) whenever he believes that:
1. There is reasonable evidence to believe an error was made in the initial
on-field ruling.
2. The play is reviewable.
3. The outcome of a review would have a direct, competitive impact on
the game."
Couple of very questionable calls, not on the field but from the booth...
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [8138]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2142]
TigerPulse: 99%
32
|
Re: Reversed Call
1
Dec 1, 2024, 10:45 PM
|
|
just saw that... going to post the rule...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [62809]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 12292
Joined: 2019
|
Re: Reversed Call
2
Dec 1, 2024, 10:08 PM
|
|
As far as I’m concerned, this call by the replay booth changed the outcome of the game. That was inexcusable officiating. I’m still upset about those 2 plays tonight.
I would love to hear their explanation for this latest disaster call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6938]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Re: Reversed Call
1
Dec 1, 2024, 10:23 PM
|
|
Don't hold your breath for the explanation because it will never come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [159]
TigerPulse: 68%
12
|
Re: Reversed Call
1
Dec 1, 2024, 10:31 PM
[ in reply to Re: Reversed Call ] |
|
FIeld officials were SEC. Replay officials were from the ACC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tiger Spirit [10081]
TigerPulse: 98%
44
Posts: 10001
Joined: 2015
|
The other part is the officials blew the whistle
2
Dec 1, 2024, 10:20 PM
|
|
So Wesco didn't really go after the ball he had his hand on the ball and let go.
Then these a holes wait 3 sec after we snap the ball to blow it dead and call for a review and over turn it. Screwed us 2 times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1974]
TigerPulse: 93%
31
|
Re: Reversed Call
3
Dec 1, 2024, 10:28 PM
|
|
Absolutely horrible.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen refs stop a game long after the snap of the next play.
If it’s OK to stop the second play three seconds after the snap, when does the prior play become non-reviewable? After the second play is complete? That would be crazy. After the third play is complete? That would be crazy.
There is absolutely no justification to stop the second play once the ball has been snapped. Period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [668]
TigerPulse: 86%
21
|
Re: Reversed Call
2
Dec 1, 2024, 10:38 PM
|
|
I still can't believe our coaches let that go without an ejection. I said same thing. How did he pitch it back without possession. And if they blew the whistle and Wesco didn't secure it bc whistle, then the play is over. Not reviwable for change of possession. Then you have the late replay and Dabo should have been all over the field on that. Total reversal of momentum as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3382]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: Reversed Call
2
Dec 1, 2024, 10:42 PM
|
|
Yep it's like Dabo just let it ride without a fight. That reversed call most likely took 3 points off the board at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [49]
TigerPulse: 17%
5
|
Re: Reversed Call
Dec 1, 2024, 10:48 PM
|
|
Did the gamecocks score on that series
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1785]
TigerPulse: 57%
31
|
Re: Reversed Call
Dec 1, 2024, 11:16 PM
|
|
I think they got the FG on that next series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [28267]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 34192
Joined: 2009
|
no they didn't
1
Dec 1, 2024, 11:22 PM
[ in reply to Re: Reversed Call ] |
|
but it was the first time our offense was stopped when it had been rolling along. It started the slide toward being too conservative
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solid Orange [1377]
TigerPulse: 96%
28
|
Re: Reversed Call
1
Dec 2, 2024, 12:28 AM
[ in reply to Re: Reversed Call ] |
|
We would’ve created a two score lead that, with how our defense had mostly done until the 4th, would have felt massive
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7827]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 10648
Joined: 2007
|
The surprise was them overturning the ruling on the field
1
Dec 1, 2024, 10:50 PM
|
|
I didn’t think it was indisputable/clear but someone thought it was I guess. And that was huge. It probably is what changed the outcome bc we were on our way and moving the ball that drive. Killed our momentum we were building.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [83009]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 38199
Joined: 2003
|
They should never have been allowed to review it that late, but then to BLOW
1
Dec 1, 2024, 10:52 PM
|
|
the review and issue that bogus turnover to the Coots is even more inexcusable. SEC, SEC, SEC!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5197]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
Re: Reversed Call
1
Dec 1, 2024, 11:07 PM
|
|
I was saying earlier I bet if Wesco had caught the reverse and ran it for 10 plus yards, I wonder if they would have reviewed that and said oh Mafah was down...play was dead. Of course he would've been then....it was a no win situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [79096]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 29315
Joined: 2018
|
This argument on FB is pretty sporty.
1
Dec 2, 2024, 12:41 AM
|
|
They are extremely defensive 😆
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 17
| visibility 4135
|
|
|
50
