- 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: Jeremy Hill had the best explanation about the fumble recovery that was not.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:07 pm to 62zip
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:07 pm to 62zip
quote:
I don't understand the rationale for penalizing the offense like that and I also don't get why you mention "loss of down." It's not lie anyone is replaying downs after recovering fumbles.
The logic is that it is illegal to touch a ball when no one has possession when you are out of bounds. It's analogous to an out of bounds receiver catching a ball before establishing himself back in bounds. I don't believe it should be a spot foul with yards; it should be returned to the line of scrimmage as though there were no gain.
The fundamental problem is that once you illegally touch the ball, you can effect who can recover it. Bring it back.
1
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:18 pm to DeafVallyBatnR
quote:
This call was not even close as bad as the Tennessee saftey that was not a safety.
Agree. It was either a safety or incomplete pass. I can't believe they let that call stand.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:19 pm to Indiana Tiger
quote:
The logic is that it is illegal to touch a ball when no one has possession when you are out of bounds. It's analogous to an out of bounds receiver catching a ball before establishing himself back in bounds. I don't believe it should be a spot foul with yards; it should be returned to the line of scrimmage as though there were no gain.
The fundamental problem is that once you illegally touch the ball, you can effect who can recover it. Bring it back.
The problem with that is that it is not illegal touching.
In addition, it's not correct that no one is in possession, every ball is in the possession of one team or another, even a ball rolling around loose on the turf. On a normal scrimmage play, the ball is in possession of the team that snapped it unless the other team, at some point takes possession of it. That's why the offense retains possession of a ball that is fumbled out of bounds.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:22 pm to DeafVallyBatnR
It’s all about brooks bobbling it when he pulled it into his chest. I guess they feel it’s like a pass once he starts to pull it to his body
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:25 pm to 62zip
There's a presumed possession in the event that a fumble goes unrecovered. That's what happened here. They ruled Brooks never had possession, then OOB Gump touched it, rendering it a dead ball. Bama retains possession.
The issue is it was ruled recovered by LSU (thereby a legal change of possession) on the field. Unless video review conclusively undoes that, it should have stayed LSU ball. The refs made a "was there enough possession" judgement on video review and they shouldn't have done that.
The issue is it was ruled recovered by LSU (thereby a legal change of possession) on the field. Unless video review conclusively undoes that, it should have stayed LSU ball. The refs made a "was there enough possession" judgement on video review and they shouldn't have done that.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:27 pm to Tigerpride18
quote:
It’s all about brooks bobbling it when he pulled it into his chest. I guess they feel it’s like a pass once he starts to pull it to his body
They are going back to the review and saying that he never had possession, even though he grabs the ball and attempts to tuck it into his belly. The OOB Gump immediately slaps it loose. There's no clear definition around these degrees of possession. Its extremely subjective as we saw in the TAM OT game. This is why this should NOT have been overturned. The call on the field is the default.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:31 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
There's a presumed possession in the event that a fumble goes unrecovered. That's what happened here. They ruled Brooks never had possession, then OOB Gump touched it, rendering it a dead ball. Bama retains possession.
The issue is it was ruled recovered by LSU (thereby a legal change of possession) on the field. Unless video review conclusively undoes that, it should have stayed LSU ball. The refs made a "was there enough possession" judgement on video review and they shouldn't have done that.
Yes, the rules make pretty clear how player possession and team possession work.
As far as replay, that's pretty much exactly what replay needs to determine - did LSU control or not control the ball which could lead to a recovery.
Please do me a favor when stating stuff like this and distinguish between "the refs" and "replay" since they were two different pieces in the puzzle here. It's a small point but it leads to clarification in the discussion. Peeve of mine.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:32 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:
They are going back to the review and saying that he never had possession, even though he grabs the ball and attempts to tuck it into his belly. The OOB Gump immediately slaps it loose. There's no clear definition around these degrees of possession. Its extremely subjective as we saw in the TAM OT game. This is why this should NOT have been overturned. The call on the field is the default.
The rules do give this guidance, however.
"When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed."
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:36 pm to DeafVallyBatnR
It was a flashback of the Patrick Peterson interception from Julio Jones, with a similar ruling on the sideline. Funny that this happens against Bama. At least we got the win this time!
Posted on 11/7/22 at 1:59 pm to 62zip
quote:
What illegal touching?
Ineligible player, out of bounds.
Posted on 11/7/22 at 2:00 pm to 62zip
Eh. The standard for overruling something on the field needs to be conclusive and irrefutable. The standards are not the same as the on field call.
I'll put it this way. NO ONE would be debating this call had the fumble recovery by LSU stood as called.
I'll put it this way. NO ONE would be debating this call had the fumble recovery by LSU stood as called.
This post was edited on 11/7/22 at 3:05 pm
Posted on 11/7/22 at 2:07 pm to PurpleExile
quote:Move the SEC office to Nashville. Let Vanderbilt have control
I would like to know who in B'ham was on the review crew. Where do they live? What was their affiliation? How many years have they been Alabama season ticket holders?
Posted on 11/7/22 at 2:49 pm to Havoc
quote:
Ineligible player, out of bounds.
There was no player illegally out of bounds and no illegal touching on the play.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 12:08 pm to 62zip
I see. So because the officiating of the game is fixed, it must therefore always successfully render the desired outcome. How logical.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 12:14 pm to DeafVallyBatnR
I’m just glad we’re not discussing this after losing
Posted on 11/8/22 at 3:34 pm to LSUStar
quote:
I see. So because the officiating of the game is fixed, it must therefore always successfully render the desired outcome. How logical.
Sure. If it's fixed for Alabama, then how did Alabama manage to lose?
Of course I'm guessing you're one of the assclowns who thinks that the fix is in every time L.S.U. plays and that L.S.U. has never legitimately lost a game.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 3:39 pm to 62zip
quote:
Sure. If it's fixed for Alabama, then how did Alabama manage to lose?
According to you, only one man is in the review booth. If that’s so, everything he did that night went Bama’s way and he definitely tried to rig it.
There’s no “conspiracy” of only one is involved.
Kelly knew it and implied it when going for 2
Also you’re a former ref who believes it’s impossible to rig a game which we already know from history is BS.
Give it a rest. You’re biased.
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 11/8/22 at 3:43 pm to Tigerpride18
quote:once he begins to pull it to his body he is controlling it. His knee is down. It’s our ball at that point.
It’s all about brooks bobbling it when he pulled it into his chest. I guess they feel it’s like a pass once he starts to pull it to his body
The word “possession” is NOT in that rule and “control” is not defined specifically.
Generally “control” can be defined as when a player controls movement as in soccer.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 4:07 pm to DJFord
quote:
According to you, only one man is in the review booth. If that’s so, everything he did that night went Bama’s way and he definitely tried to rig it.
Actually, it's three people, but one of them has the ultimate responsibility as the replay official.
So since "everything he did that night went Bama’s way and he definitely tried to rig it" would you mind explaining why on one replay he reversed a first down for Alabama which resulted in them having to punt and also why he reversed a ruling that a runner had gained 9 more yards than he actually had?
quote:
There’s no “conspiracy” of only one is involved.
No idea what this is supposed to mean.
quote:
Also you’re a former ref who believes it’s impossible to rig a game which we already know from history is BS.
I'll ask again since you ignored it previously, who said that I'm a "former ref"? I certainly didn't.
And I didn't say it's impossible, plenty of things are possible. I just asked how it is that Alabama wasn't able to win the game since it was so obviously rigged.
It's fun seeing a fanboy calling someone biased.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 4:09 pm to DJFord
quote:
The word “possession” is NOT in that rule and “control” is not defined specifically.
Did you ever look up those other sections in the rule yet?
quote:
Generally “control” can be defined as when a player controls movement as in soccer.
Would you mind pointing this out in the rule book?
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News