- 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: Besides the cheating, what really bugs me about the PP call
Posted on 11/14/09 at 1:39 pm to Rex
Posted on 11/14/09 at 1:39 pm to Rex
quote:Would not have mattered, they had a crystal clear view of the spear and never flagged it.
In a situation where the on-field refs ADMITTEDLY didn't have a clear view of the play
1
Posted on 11/14/09 at 1:45 pm to Rex
I bet if it was USC arrests... 
Posted on 11/14/09 at 1:56 pm to genuineLSUtiger
quote:
What bothers me is that Patrick doesn't get credit for a phenomenal play. That goes against everything that competition stands for. An outside source is imparting their will on the play and the result which has been shown to be egregiously wrong. That's what bothers me the most.
Many feel this way genuine. Kid deserved to be remembered for gutting it out AND making a huge play when the chips were down. Not this way.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:03 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:It was called incomplete on the field. There wasn't conclusive evidence supporting his right foot landed in bounds; hence, the ruling on the field was not overturned. I don't see how this is so hard for you folks to comprehend.
I haven't been able to figure out what basis the on field refs had for calling PP out of bounds.
This is the best view the replay booth had. Can you honestly say his right foot was in? I don't think so.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:23 pm to jlc05
quote:
Yes there was...incomplete.
OK.....they may have ruled it incomplete...BUT neither saw the play.
Sooooo.......replay official should have been making the call NOT confirming one from the field.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:26 pm to LSUBlake8
If the refs don't know what the proper call was, incomplete is the default call.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:31 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:
It was called incomplete on the field. There wasn't conclusive evidence supporting his right foot landed in bounds; hence, the ruling on the field was not overturned. I don't see how this is so hard for you folks to comprehend.
A. I know it was called incomplete.
B. There wasn't any conclusive evidence supporting his right foot landing out of bounds either...the ref didn't see it, so why did the ref ASSUME the answer was out of bounds?
C. Why did you respond with this silly nonsequitor? Is reading conprehension beyond you?
D. If the ref didn't see it, imo, he should have ruled in bounds and let replay decide if he was or not.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:34 pm to Charles Bronson
nm
This post was edited on 11/14/09 at 2:36 pm
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:37 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:
If the refs don't know what the proper call was, incomplete is the default call.
That may be the case (I do not know), but imo it is the wrong decision. Failure to make a play should not be assumed.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:39 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:
It was called incomplete on the field. There wasn't conclusive evidence supporting his right foot landed in bounds; hence, the ruling on the field was not overturned. I don't see how this is so hard for you folks to comprehend.
You have got to be kidding me. Go root for Bama tard.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:50 pm to Charles Bronson
No, it's not the best view they had. That's nonsense. The view from behind BAMA's quarterback clearly showed an interception. When the view from behind BAMA's quarterback was shown, Danielson said it was an interception, and everyone knew it was one outside the state of AL. Don't try to pretend there was not a better view available, because we all saw the better view on instant replay DURING THE GAME IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE PLAY. Take that BS somewhere else.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:05 pm to Indiana Tiger
You sandwich this:
in between these two gems...
You can't be that stupid.
quote:
C. Why did you respond with this silly nonsequitor? Is reading conprehension beyond you?
in between these two gems...
quote:
B. There wasn't any conclusive evidence supporting his right foot landing out of bounds either...the ref didn't see it, so why did the ref ASSUME the answer was out of bounds?
D. If the ref didn't see it, imo, he should have ruled in bounds and let replay decide if he was or not.
You can't be that stupid.
This post was edited on 11/14/09 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:11 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:You are talking out of your arse. They showed much better views on the replays during the game and the TV guys both were convienced it was an interception and they were cautious to wait until they saw several replays from different angles before making a call.
This is the best view the replay booth had. Can you honestly say his right foot was in? I don't think so.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:13 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:
Charles Bronson
The entire freaking country knows it was a pick. Give it up, you're looking massively retarded.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:18 pm to jlc05
quote:I'm trying to shed truth on thee.
The entire freaking country knows it was a pick. Give it up, you're looking massively retarded.
Nothing I have said is false. I even provided firm evidence. What have you provided besides your idiocy?
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:36 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:Your agenda is transparent. Give it up. That still pic you posted is PP's third step after catching the ball. He caught the ball out in front of his body with his hands while draging his left foot to create the divot. This pic is two steps later.
Nothing I have said is false. I even provided firm evidence. What have you provided besides your idiocy?
This post was edited on 11/14/09 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:38 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:
I even provided firm evidence.
I think the vids and pics that were available on numerous sites over the last week speak for themselves. He had not just one but two feet in when he had control of the ball with his hands.
Lets see...you, Arrakis, Hodges and Burleson all believe it wasn't a pic...to include most but not all the gumps on the SEC Rant. Congrats.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:39 pm to XbengalTiger
It's obvious the officials (and I) believe he didn't have possession at the time of the divot, which is why rational folks like I have been laughing at folks that believe the divot is some sort of indisputable proof.
The right foot, like I have said before, is the pivotal part of the play. He landed his left foot, but before he gained possession the left foot left the ground.
The right foot, like I have said before, is the pivotal part of the play. He landed his left foot, but before he gained possession the left foot left the ground.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:41 pm to jlc05
quote:No. In the popular picture people like to show, he doesn't have his right foot down.
He had not just one but two feet in when he had control of the ball with his hands.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:44 pm to Charles Bronson
quote:Well, it's obvious you don't know what possession is... In a "hands" catch, possession is instant because control is instant.
It's obvious the officials (and I) believe he didn't have possession at the time of the divot
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News