- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Did out of bounds Bama player have to reestablish himself to become a legal participant
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:29 am to Hotboudin718
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:29 am to Hotboudin718
How was it enforced correctly? LSU had possession. It seems to me that the definition of "possession" took on a Clintonesque character during that review.
1
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:33 am to Tbone2
Just so completely misguided here. LSU had possession by any definition of the word AND according to NCAA rules. It was LSU ball.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:33 am to hayden7cub
quote:
It should be that if you’re out of bounds, you’re out of the play and if you touch the ball, it doesn’t matter.
Perhaps, but without any doubt, it should be that if an out of bounds player touches a live ball it certainly shouldn’t result in his team getting or keeping the ball. It should be a foul and against the very fiber of the game to allow an out of bounds player to affect the possession of the ball.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:35 am to jrodLSUke
quote:
Call on the field was LSU ball. The moment that the out of bounds Bama player touches the ball it is dead and goes back to the team in possession. Replay booth said Bama was in possession at this moment.
No they never ruled bama was in possession of it after the fumble. They just deemed we did NOT have possession of it while being down therefore if the bama player touches it while out of bounds the ball is dead and goes back to the last possession which the guy who fumbled the ball - the bama player.
The issue really is they didnt think our guy with 2 hands on the ball and knee down was enough time to call it possession for us and down. You can really call it either way, we've been burned of stuff like this differently in the past (Kellen Mond knee down picking fumbled ball up with 1 hand, ruled him down AFTER replay). So apparently the split second Mond had his hand on the ball with knee on ground was enough to rule him down but our guy with 2 hands on the ball and knee down before being touched by OOB player was NOT enough to be ruled possession.
IT is what it is, we won, we know we have to fight the refs and Birmingham seemingly every fricking game against Bama so just have to play through it. If there's a close call/judgement play, we know its not going our way. This one, the tipped pass PI play, the no call on Perkins being held on Bama's 41 yard TD go ahead strike late in game, etc etc etc
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 10:38 am
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:36 am to White Tiger
quote:
LSU had possession by any definition of the word AND according to NCAA rules. It was LSU ball.
Evidence to support your quote.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:37 am to Tbone2
quote:
Rule was correctly applied but the possession should have been reviewed. LSU had possession before the touch. If knee was down, play is over, LSU ball. If knee was not down, play was over when Alabama touched the ball, LSU ball. That call and the tipped pass is why CBK went for 2. In less than one game he saw the cheating and knew his only option at a win was to take it out of the refs hands.
The rule book does a shitty job of differentiating possession and control. I agree with the premise of your argument, the control that LSU had of the ball in that situation should have at least triggered a change in team possession. The Bama player simultaneously interrupted what would have led to LSU possession and killed The play dead from out of bounds. If he doesn’t knock it out, it’s not out of bounds. There is basically no way to rule on that play live, you would have to use replay to rule on it.
What sucks is they used the fact that it was batted down to say he didn’t have possession, but did not use the fact that he gathered and recovered afterwards to say he ultimately did have posesssion, because at one point the oob bama player touched it. At what point was the ball dead? When he touched it? When the ball touched the ground?
Too many moving parts to actually reverse it on the field in my opinion, and that is ultimately why LSU fans are still upset.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:37 am to tke_swamprat
quote:
The bigger questions is what constitutes possession.
Apparently this is
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-dmn.s3.amazonaws.com/public/BP6ZMINDDFKUP2D6OHDNFT4EUA.jpg)
But this isn’t
because reasons?
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 10:39 am
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:39 am to Poboytom
Lsu had possession. Didn't matter if he touched it.
Can you without a doubt confirm he touched it?
Without a doubt lsu didn't have possession?
Can you without a doubt confirm he touched it?
Without a doubt lsu didn't have possession?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:44 am to zoom
quote:
Without a doubt lsu didn't have possession?
No, but I can tell you one thing LSU has “possession” of right now. That’s 1st place in the SEC west!!!!
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:58 am to WillyLoman
Yep.. What a stupid arse rule it is.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 10:59 am to Tbone2
I've watched it numerous times in slow motion, and it was sooo close, but I think Brooks had possession with the knee down. It appears that the knee was down a split second before the ball was hit by the out of bounds bama player. It appears that Brooks grabbed the ball with both hands before his knee was down, and a split second later his knee hit, and then a split second later the ball was dislodged by the bama player. I think if the knee had been down before he grabbed the ball, it might not have been overturned.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:07 am to LSUnKaty
quote:
you're standing on the sideline - whether you're a player in the game or not in the game, or a coach, or a GA, or a trainer, or just a fan - and see your team fumble the ball and an opposing player about to recover it, just reach out and touch the ball before anyone else does and it's your ball right there. Well, if you're not in the game maybe after a penalty - but it's YOUR BALL! Is this not the implication of that rule?
I’d love more clarification on this scenario
The rule as is is terrible. It’s actually an advantage for the fumbling team to get their players out of bounds and just reach/push/kick to try to get a fingertip on the ball to keep possession. Staying in bounds and trying to recover it you have to actually recover it….
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 11:08 am
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:08 am to Poboytom
The point you're missing is tha the Bama player touched WHILE HE WAS OUT OF BOUNDS. Dead ball. That's always been the rule, and it's a fine rule.
'Re-establishing" has to do with making a reception or establishing possession. That happens AFTER a player went out and then came back in.
Get over it. It was an unfortunate call, but the right one.
'Re-establishing" has to do with making a reception or establishing possession. That happens AFTER a player went out and then came back in.
Get over it. It was an unfortunate call, but the right one.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:11 am to Buda
quote:
The point you're missing is tha the Bama player touched WHILE HE WAS OUT OF BOUNDS. Dead ball. That's always been the rule, and it's a fine rule.
But if the same player “touches” the ball in bounds, nothing happens right? In bounds he has to actually possess, out of bounds he just gets to swipe and flail
And this is on top of replay deciding their was indisputable video evidence LSU didn’t possess the ball prior (which is my biggest complaint)
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 11:12 am
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:11 am to WillyLoman
quote:
The rule is stupid and was applied correctly.
You and a lot of other smart football people have said that. But I'd like to look at the rule.
Do you have it?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:15 am to jrodLSUke
If that is not possession then there is no such thing as possession. Maybe people will now see that the games ARE in fact rigged to favor certain schools. This happens repeatedly. So to all you people who deny "conspiracies", good luck to you and be sure to get your booster.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:16 am to Poboytom
No boundaries for bama
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:19 am to Srbtiger06
Agree looks like his hand could have waved over the ball without touching it. I felt that was also inconclusive
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:21 am to White Tiger
quote:
So to all you people who deny "conspiracies", good luck to you and be sure to get your booster.
What the hell does that even mean?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:22 am to Buda
quote:
The point you're missing is tha the Bama player touched WHILE HE WAS OUT OF BOUNDS. Dead ball. That's always been the rule, and it's a fine rule...Get over it. It was an unfortunate call, but the right one.
Except that the dead ball goes back to the team who had possession last. The call of the field was LSU ball, so replay has to have indisputable video evidence that LSU was not in possession. So your saying that this is indisputable evidence that LSU was not in possession? "Indisputable" is the standard by rule.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News