- 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: Redding: SEC officiating isn't broke
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:01 pm to 62zip
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:01 pm to 62zip
quote:
Yes, there is a difference and that's why if you pay close attenton to the announcement after a review you will hear them both used ...
Interesting. Thanks.
What about the other questions - is there any practical difference in the outcome when they use one term over the other? And, do they still need "incontravertible proof" (or whatever term they use) if the on the field official would admit to the replay guy he didn't really see it?
This post was edited on 11/11/09 at 1:03 pm
1
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:14 pm to Methuselah
quote:
What about the other questions - is there any practical difference in the outcome when they use one term over the other? And, do they still need "incontravertible proof" (or whatever term they use) if the on the field official would admit to the replay guy he didn't really see it?
No real difference other than giving you a clue as to which way it went as far as the video.
As far as the last part - as far as I know all they have to work with is complete or incomplete or whatever the circumstance happens to be. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's how it works.
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:16 pm to 62zip
Zip,do you think the booth should have reversed the call on the interception ?
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:28 pm to I-59 Tiger
Well, I'm biased.
I thought it was an interception, BUT I would be interested in knowing precisely which replays were used in the process.
I saw a couple of good angles and a couple of not so good ones.
I thought it was an interception, BUT I would be interested in knowing precisely which replays were used in the process.
I saw a couple of good angles and a couple of not so good ones.
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:31 pm to 62zip
quote:
Well, I'm biased.
The refs on Saturday were biased.
Posted on 11/11/09 at 1:33 pm to los angeles tiger
Yep, that's it.
Everyone hates LSU.
Everyone hates LSU.
Posted on 11/11/09 at 3:52 pm to 62zip
I really hope BOTH Bama and Florida catch a loss before the seccg. Then, Texas and TCU in the Championship Game.
Now dats some funny frickin shite.........
Now dats some funny frickin shite.........
Posted on 11/11/09 at 7:49 pm to seawolf06
Redding has got to go. He's completely aware of media and fan disgust at the calls in the SEC, particularly this year, but he acts like it's just another day at the office. It's time for him to be fired and Slive can go along with him!
Posted on 11/11/09 at 7:55 pm to seawolf06
quote:
"The instant replay rule is if you don't have clear, 100 percent, absolute proof that the call on the field is incorrect, then you let it stand," Redding said.
The crooked bastards don't want it to work properly or as clearly as possible, that way they always have an out for their corrupt calls.
Posted on 11/11/09 at 7:58 pm to seawolf06
Posted on 11/11/09 at 8:01 pm to seawolf06
All the money and HD video etc ain't gonna cure the root problem! Corruption!
Posted on 11/11/09 at 9:53 pm to USMCTiger03
He lives in Birmingham because the freaking SEC office is in Birmingham.
The other 10 schools MUST get the damn SEC office out of Alabama.
Then, Bama and Auburn will be treated like the rest of the SEC instead of being worshipped.
The other 10 schools MUST get the damn SEC office out of Alabama.
Then, Bama and Auburn will be treated like the rest of the SEC instead of being worshipped.
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News