The SEC replay booth in Birmingham can find Xavier Lewis's hit

that was some sloppy, unprofessional officiating on those two plays. How you can go through a TV timeout with your head up your rear, then once play is resumed allow the ball to be snapped and then step in and say the "previous play is under review."

On the muffed punt, typically a receiver who does NOT touch the ball doesn't take off like his pants are on fire to retrieve the bouncing ball.

I don't think this is any "anti-LSU" thing just incompetent officiating.

quote:

---

How you can go through a TV timeout with your head up your rear, then once play is resumed allow the ball to be snapped and then step in and say the "previous play is under review."

---

This is SEC policy. Yes, you read that right.

Hanigriff was going off about this in the post game show.

The SEC Policy is to not review a play during a TV timeout. The commissioner was really adamant about NOT doing reviews during commercials.

quote:

---

The commissioner was really adamant about NOT doing reviews during commercials

---

This is insane. Are they saying it would be disrespectful to the sponsors if 3 retired referees watched a replay instead of a commercial?

This proves my point, I have seen nothing that shows me that you could tell either way. How many times do teams have to get screwed before Gumps admit the bias?

The "confirmed" call was the worst. As the ball is very near his hand you suddenly see yellow on his thumb flash quickly as it were bent back. Mizzou players wear gloves that are black on the backs and.... you guessed it, yellow on the palms. The ball bent his finger back which is why he ran after it like crazy trying to cover it.

The problem I have is that this year there is supposed to be a presumption of a fumble, then review. The officials on the field did not presume fumble (or muff), despite the reaction of the Missouri player. If the presumption of a fumble had been made was there sufficient evidence to overturn the call?

I have serious issues with the whole review process. When they review they take all the time to get as close to perfection for spotting the ball and getting the clock right. What makes those requirements so important on the few plays meriting review, but completely irrelevant on all other plays? Why doesn't getting the clock exactly right on all plays matter as much as just a few plays? Getting the clock right is one thing the review process can do accurately on just about every play.

Office is in Birmingham bro. Ritter has it in for LSU.

quote:

---

We couldn't tell what was going on from our seats. Please elaborate.

---

From what I could tell, the last play of the half (way to pad your stats Mizzou, calling a timeout with 3 seconds left to throw a quick screen and accomplish nothing) ended with two LSU players forcing a the Mizzou ball carrier out of bounds. Some words were exchanged and the Mizzou receiver shoved the game ball in the face of one of the LSU players. As the LSU players took exception to that, their teammates who had been heading to the locker room saw the commotion and ran over for backup. While both teams were facing each other with coaches/refs in the middle pushing kids back, someone from the Mizzou side tossed a football about from about 10 yards away into the crowd of LSU players.

quote:

---

The problem I have is that this year there is supposed to be a presumption of a fumble, then review.

---

It wasn't a fumble. That is indisputable.

quote:

---

The officials on the field did not presume . . . muff . . .

---

Nor should they.

quote:

---

If the presumption of a fumble had been made . . .

---

It wasn't a fumble. A fumble is not a muff. A muff is not a fumble. Keep repeating this to yourself until it sinks in.