T1B

IndyFrisco wrote:The fix is in. Has been for awhile.

Leave USC out of this.

Diogenes wrote:

War Wagon wrote:

Diogenes wrote:No. He didn't have possession until he was out. That was what the refs were looking at, not where his feet were.

How the fuck do you know what the refs were looking at and what does it even matter?

He didn't bobble the ball, unless you call tucking the ball away...

...on the other side of the sideline, it's called incomplete.

Nope, it's called a blown call. He had clear and complete control of the ball, in bounds, with both feet down. By the time he was out of bounds he'd already tucked it away against his hip.

Van wrote:Bama doesn't have enough offensive balance to beat Florida. McElroy won't beat Florida, and Florida will load up to contain Ingram. Bama won't be able to put the ball in the endzone. They'll have to settle for FGs.

And when it turns out your completely wrong, you'll know where you heard it first.

Diogenes wrote:

Van wrote:Bama doesn't have enough offensive balance to beat Florida. McElroy won't beat Florida, and Florida will load up to contain Ingram. Bama won't be able to put the ball in the endzone. They'll have to settle for FGs.

And when it turns out your completely wrong, you'll know where you heard it first.

Yeah, I will: from Sam.

Van wrote:

Diogenes wrote:

Van wrote:Bama doesn't have enough offensive balance to beat Florida. McElroy won't beat Florida, and Florida will load up to contain Ingram. Bama won't be able to put the ball in the endzone. They'll have to settle for FGs.

And when it turns out your completely wrong, you'll know where you heard it first.

Yeah, I will: from Sam.

I missed that prediction.

And unlike him, I'm not from Alabama. I just call them like I see them.

SEC refs strike again, blatantly obvious the higher ranked teams are protected.

What is the point of replay if they just look for any excuse to back the call on the field? That was definitely a pick.

Danimal, hey, sometimes they overturn calls too, provided it also favors the protected team.

Jsc810 wrote:Well, the better team won today, props to Bama.

Sam, y'all enjoy the championships. Don't see anyone beating the Tide this season.

And Ingram should win the Heisman.

You may be right, but quit lying. LSU got fucked. And I'm the last person to take up for LSU.

True, but that one blown call did fuck the spread, and that's all that matters!

Believe the Heupel wrote:I'm not sure what they consider pass interference in the SEC. Both LSU and 'Bama got hosed on a couple of non-calls, and the call late in the 3rd didn't even look like the LSU defender even laid a hand on the receiver.

No way that could ever happen.

Sin,

Pac 1 tards.

Will SEC official ever get a critical call right?

Sure they will. One of these times the right call will favor the favorite, and they will certainly call it that way.

Sam, you and 'Spray are conveniently overlooking the point. Nobody is saying no other refs but the SEC's miss calls. No, the point is that the SEC refs always miss the blatant calls, and they always miss them in such a way as to help the SEC's favorite teams. It's the predictability of their missed calls always going against the underdog that is so damning.

Swear to god, who among us here didn't just know that that call was going to end up going Bama's way, just like those horrific calls went LSU's way when they were playing multiple loss Georgia. They even overturn calls, if need be. They don't merely uphold the shitty call on the field, using the excuse that there wasn't indisputable evidence to overturn the call. Nope, even when the call on the field was correct, and the replays clearly show indisputable evidence that the call was correct, they still overturn it.

Florida with Tebow will likely never see a blatantly bad, game changing call go against them late in a close one, not in an SEC game.

It's the predictability of it which stinks to high heaven. It's the same thing the Lakers benefitted from during the Shaq-Kobe run. It was blatant, it was ugly, and you knew it was coming.

Btw, "forthund" was very cool. :D

Sudden Sam wrote:
Fact is the rest of the country is pissed as hell that Florida and Bama are awaiting the opportunity to maul some team from another conference in the BCS title game.

Neither Florida or Alabama will "maul" Texas. Far from it. Get that fact thru your myopic ballsucking SEC homer head.

BTW,what did LSU have- 9 total yards in the second half? The 'interception' would have been meaningless. And they would have had the ball a couple plays before if they hadn't tried to bodyslam the punter.

It shouldn't have been that close. Ingrahm only had about 7-10 runs in the first half, it they had been running the ball all game, you losers wouldn't have needed to worry about the spread.

War Wagon wrote:

Sudden Sam wrote:
Fact is the rest of the country is pissed as hell that Florida and Bama are awaiting the opportunity to maul some team from another conference in the BCS title game.

Neither Florida or Alabama will "maul" Texas. Far from it. Get that fact thru your myopic ballsucking SEC homer head.

If Tejas manages to make it through the season undefeated, they will get annihilated.

Diogenes wrote: If Tejas manages to make it through the season undefeated, they will get annihilated.

Coming from the fool who still thinks that wasn't an INT, your opinion regarding anything related to football is worthless.

War Wagon wrote:

Diogenes wrote: If Tejas manages to make it through the season undefeated, they will get annihilated.

Coming from the fool who still thought LSU would cover, my opinion regarding anything related to football is worthless.

Agreed.

Texas would definitely give Bama a game. The offenses in the SEC are so brutal, that Texas would hit them like a ton of bricks.

Diogenes wrote:BTW,what did LSU have- 9 total yards in the second half? The 'interception' would have been meaningless. And they would have had the ball a couple plays before if they hadn't tried to bodyslam the punter.

It shouldn't have been that close. Ingrahm only had about 7-10 runs in the first half, it they had been running the ball all game, you losers wouldn't have needed to worry about the spread.

Off topic for a moment, but wtf with the running into the punter penalty, generally speaking that is? Has cfb always been this way? It's not like LSU's guy creamed the kicker. Seems to me that back in the day (yes, back in the day) kickers would get hit and it'd be a judgment call for the ref to make whether the kicker was roughed. Nowadays, if the kicker acts well enough or the defender just nudges the kicker, the ref is letting the flag loose. WTF?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Texas would definitely give Bama a game. The offenses in the SEC are so brutal, that Texas would hit them like a ton of bricks.

Very definitely a possibility that Texas could 'Utah' Bama, only with equal talent too. Bama hasn't faced an offense even remotely as fastpaced and explosive as the Longhorns would throw at them, and we all saw what happened the last time Bama faced a fastpaced, explosive offense.

Kinda like what so often happens when the Big 10 faces the Pac 10. Over the years, the Big 10's plodding style of play hasn't prepared them to play fastpaced, explosive offenses.

I just don't see Bama having enough offensive balance to get this thing done, either against Florida or Texas. I don't think they could match points with Texas. Florida doesn't have a great offense either, but they're harder to gameplan, and they're so experienced. Florida just has more guys who can make plays, starting with the guy under center, and their D is every bit as good as Bama's, if not better.

Wow. Could you be more wrong on all accounts? First, the ref on the field stated that, upon review, Peterson was out of bounds. No one ever said he had possession and Jones touched the ball. You made that up. That wasn't the ruling on the field. Second, as far as Jones touching the ball:



His hands are about 4 feet away from the ball. Quit making things up.

That was about as clear of a pick on a reviewed play as we're ever going to see. There was no way it wasn't a pick. He had full control of the ball, with both feet down. He never even hinted at bobbling it. He tucked it cleanly away to his hip.

I want my point back in Pick 'Em!!

LSU definitely got hosed on that play, but I still don't think it would've mattered. They could've spotted them 1st and goal at the 1 and I'm not sure it would've mattered.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: They could've spotted them 1st and goal at the 1 and I'm not sure it would've mattered.

I hope you're being sarcastic. Or ironic. Or some word I don't understand completely.

It woulda mattered in Pick 'Em! That play prevented the thing from staying under 8.5!

Python wrote:I hope you're being sarcastic.

Of course. That's just my way of saying their offense blows chupacabra testicles.

If you posted a video, it's blocked at work. I assume it's the same angles that have been shown over and over. Look at the picture again. Jones is nowhere near the ball. Not even close. And again, the ruling on the field was that Peterson was out of bounds. Jones touching the ball was never mentioned. That scenario started popping up a few days ago from Bama fans. It wasn't ruled that way on the field or in the booth. You can argue all you want, but that wasn't the call. Even if it was, the ruling would have been illegal touching, which it wasn't. Just ignore everything an it'll go away.

"Don't worry. The player touched the ball. The correct call was made. Please don't worry about anything."

Believe the Heupel wrote:
And if you think no 'Bama player was near the play, you're on crack. The replay shows him right there, regardless of whether you think he touched the ball or not.

Please show me in that picture where an Alabama player is within 4 feet of touching the ball like you say. Please. For the love of God. Show me in that picture. And this discussion is about whether that play should have been ruled an interception or not. It's not about your percieved incompetency of the LSU team. If you want to discuss that, we can do that too. Stick to the topic at hand. The ruling on the field, as you claim, was not that Jones touched the ball. Not at all. You still want to make that claim?

And you can post the rules all you want. None of that has anything to do with what was called on the field. For the last time, do you want to stick to your claim about what the ruling on the field was?

Believe the Heupel wrote:Your picture is completely out of context and meaningless.

So I really am dealing with Baghdad Bob. Unreal.

So do you want to stick to your claim about what was ruled on the field? Simple question.

Yep. No Alabama player was within four feet of touching the ball when the play in question turned into an interception. Julio Jones did not touch the ball. Again, the ruling on the field was that Peterson was out of bounds. No official on the field on in the booth mentioned anything about touching the ball, which is what you claimed originally. That was your claim and your claim is incorrect.

So you're saying that audio will back up your claim that the official ruled, as you stated, "before the LSU defender established possession, Julio Jones touched the ball."? Is that what you're saying?

B-t-H, I get what you're saying. Obviously, Jones was right there too. Py's wrong, there. Regardless, your replays show that Jones did not touch the ball. Merely getting his hand close to it isn't good enough. The only player who touches it there is the LSU defender, who clearly has full control of the ball, with both feet in bounds.

That play does not full under the rule you cited. The refs did not rule that Jones touched it while out of bounds, which would've also been incorrect anyway, since he never touched it.

From the very first article I came across:

"Officials ruled Peterson caught the ball out of bounds and replay officials did not overturn the call, though video showed the LSU defensive back might have had a foot down in bounds."

No mention of touching by Jones being the call.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4639342

SS wrote:Well I'll be damned!

Yep.

-poptart

Sudden Sam wrote:At 1:15 (slo-mo) it's clear that JJ's foot is OOB and his hand is on the ball. Incomplete.

No, it clearly does not show that. All it shows is that his hand is near the ball. There is no angle which shows his hand actually touching the ball. Also, the guy who touches the ball first, who has control of the ball, is in bounds. The Bama player doesn't touch it at all, but even if he did it wouldn't matter, since the guy who touched it first and caught it was never out of bounds.

I watched those replays over and over, and I don't see where JJ's hand touches the ball. Neither shows evidence that he did touch the ball, only that it's possible that he could've touched the ball based on where his hand was in relation to the ball. But a mere possibility isn't good enough, nor should it pass as conclusive evidence. It almost seems like he was about to get to it, and then the LSU defender cut him off with his hands and got in front of him.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I watched those replays over and over, and I don't see where JJ's hand touches the ball. Neither shows evidence that he did touch the ball, only that it's possible that he could've touched the ball based on where his hand was in relation to the ball. But a mere possibility isn't good enough, nor should it pass as conclusive evidence. It almost seems like he was about to get to it, and then the LSU defender cut him off with his hands and got in front of him.

Precisely.

Oh good grief. It doesn't matter if he touched it, didn't touch it, fondled it or tongued it. The point I made is that the ruling on the field didn't address that issue. They ruled him out of bounds. No one mentioned Jones touching the ball. Dude just made that garbage up about it being part of the ruling.