- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:34 pm to clamdip
Im rewatching right now and there is NO angle that shows the ball hit the ground. That was shown on TV. I'll say it again. They did NOT show the ball hitting the ground on tv.
His foot touched out of bounds though.
His foot touched out of bounds though.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:35 pm to clamdip
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/8/19 at 6:39 pm
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:35 pm to gerard07
quote:
Should have been ruled an interception.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:35 pm to Azkiger
quote:
The replay shows the ball, however slightly, bouncing off the turf.
This.
These folks that keep posting the image in here are not proving a damn thing.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:36 pm to Azkiger
quote:
Unless Stingley has a significant beer belly, he's completely over the ball and unable to pin it against anything but the ground.
In the still, yes, but the ball was falling as they were moving. I'm saying the video replay makes it look like Stingley pins the ball as it falls while he rolls over the WR.
We can assume the ball probably hits the turf during that exchange, but the shadow and then Stingley's right leg block any definitive view.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:36 pm to CDawson
quote:
Clearly? You saw an angle I didn’t.
Watching it live they showed an angle were you can watch the ball, however slightly, bounce off the ground.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:36 pm to slackster
We can assume the ball hit the turf because we can watch it, in slow motion, bouncing off the turf.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:37 pm to bee Rye
quote:
travesty that it was ever called a reception on the field, cause the Texas guy never had the ball
SEC crew. Burnt Orange looks a lot like Crimson under the lights.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:40 pm to CDawson
Kind of wondering if some on here are blind. Watch the video, it clearly showed on replay the ball bounced off the turf, there wasn't any question from the 1 angle they showed. Nobody had possession when it hit the ground, was never controlled before that point.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:40 pm to Azkiger
quote:IIRC, the video that they went back and forth on makes you think it bounces, but I don't remember seeing it bounce.
The replay shows the ball, however slightly, bouncing off the turf.
I understand physics and whatnot, so I believe it his the ground, but you have to ignore assumptions when discussing instant replay.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:44 pm to slackster
quote:
I understand physics and whatnot, so I believe it his the ground, but you have to ignore assumptions when discussing instant replay.
No, they called a TD back from Texas after it showed their QB's knee touching the ground.
But, you have to assume it was his knee because there was another body in-between him and the camera cutting his body in half.
According to you it should have been a TD because we have to assume that's the QB's knee. There's no unbroken chain of sight from the QB's hip to his knee, and while we can safely assume that's his knee, as you've said, we can't make assumptions with instant replays.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:47 pm to Azkiger
quote:
No, they called a TD back from Texas after it showed their QB's knee touching the ground.
But, you have to assume it was his knee because there was another body in-between him and the camera cutting his body in half.
According to you it should have been a TD because we have to assume that's the QB's knee. There's no unbroken chain of sight from the QB's hip to his knee, and while we can safely assume that's his knee, as you've said, we can't make assumptions with instant replays.
Some of you are pretty pissy about this.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:47 pm to clamdip
quote:
Is there *any* angle showing Stingley's pick hit the ground?
I just watched it several times from several angles. The only question was when the ball was loose and between the players but the had the perfect angle to see where the ball was when it was loose between them. That ball DID NOT touch the ground!!! The only question is whether Sting was out of bounds before he got complete control.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:49 pm to slackster
I'm sorry you don't like how your own logic is being applied.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:49 pm to clamdip
Was sitting next to a bunch of Texas fans at the game. When he went up and took that ball away they looked at me and asked "who the hell is that guy?!" They were stunned when I told them he is a true freshman.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:50 pm to Bayou_Tiger_225
quote:
Was sitting next to a bunch of Texas fans at the game. When he went up and took that ball away they looked at me and asked "who the hell is that guy?!" They were stunned when I told them he is a true freshman.
DBU
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:50 pm to clamdip
It doesn't matter if it hit the ground or not. Watch the play again. Stingley's foot was out of bounds before "possession" was established (it wasn't, because the ball hit the ground).
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:51 pm to slackster
quote:
We can assume the ball probably hits the turf
Like i said, there was nothing on tv that showed the ball touch the ground. He was out of bounds though, i believe.
Posted on 9/8/19 at 6:53 pm to Azkiger
quote:
I'm sorry you don't like how your own logic is being applied.
If you've seen any football in your life, you know exactly what I mean. Replay officials typically don't make assumptions on things they can't see. Connecting someone's knee is much different than assuming a ball hits the ground when you cannot clearly see it on the ground.
Popular
Back to top


1



