- 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
re: Definitive picture for the 4th down play
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:38 pm to gdzgft28
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:38 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
One ref clearly had a better view of what occurred than the other. The ref with the better view should make the call.
The only thing that matters is the ball. Neither ref saw it. I understand that, it's a flawed system.
But neither ref should supercede in the call because me there saw anything relevant. Only the ball matters, not how far Allen's body progressed.
It's also even possible that the ref of the far side that was potentially blocked by Jones, did see it. The down the line camera was slightly offset and the ref could have moved his line of sight to get a view.
It's just a shame that refs make a call that they didn't see. They guessed and then replay was hamstrung with piecing together multiple angles that are somewhat sketchy and have a high burden of proof to overcome.
Sad.
1
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:39 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
And that’s a terrible idea.
Why should officials make a call they didn't see and hamstring the replay team?
That makes no sense.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:39 pm to gdzgft28
quote:So you think it makes since to put more weight on an admitted call on the field where the refs actually can’t see, then using multiple slow mo cameras?
And that’s a terrible idea.
Dude you are out of control
This post was edited on 1/27/25 at 6:40 pm
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:40 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:He is dug in a trench and he is defensive
Why should officials make a call they didn't see and hamstring the replay team?
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:44 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
The only thing that matters is the ball. Neither ref saw it. I understand that, it's a flawed system. But neither ref should supercede in the call because me there saw anything relevant. Only the ball matters, not how far Allen's body progressed.
Well, you’re wrong and that doesn’t make any sense. If no one saw the ball a call still must be made. They don’t redo the down.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:45 pm to gdzgft28
So you think more weight should go with the call on the field when the refs absolutely have to guess and not more weight on slow mo multiple camera angles
That makes sense
That makes sense
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:46 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
Well, you’re wrong and that doesn’t make any sense. If no one saw the ball a call still must be made. They don’t redo the down.
I'm not proposing they redo the down.
I'm proposing replay figure out what most likely happened from all relevant angles rather than two refs that didn't see it.
The refs come together, tell the white hate neither saw the ball, and the head ref go to the monitor with the replay booth and figure out the most likely outcome.
That can be done.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:47 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Why should officials make a call they didn't see and hamstring the replay team? That makes no sense.
They still may not see it on replay. Just like the play in question. “Preponderance of evidence” simply makes replays take longer and doesn’t remove subjectivity from the equation.
Replays should remain “clear and obvious”, but actually be clear and obvious. If you have to replay it 4-5 times from multiple camera angles it’s not clear and obvious. The Saints/Rams missed PI was clear and obvious. The 4th down wasn’t. Whatever was called should stand.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:47 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:Anyone that argues against this being the way it should be done is literally not fully functioning
The refs come together, tell the white hate neither saw the ball, and the head ref go to the monitor with the replay booth and figure out the most likely outcome. That can be done.
It has nothing to do with this specific play either. Your principle is 100% logical and people have been saying it since replay was started
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:48 pm to lsupride87
quote:
So you think more weight should go with the call on the field when the refs absolutely have to guess and not more weight on slow mo multiple camera angles
There was nothing in the camera angles that showed where the ball was. lol…
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:48 pm to gdzgft28
quote:If you don’t know what happened going with the call on the field “just because” makes no sense
They still may not see it on replay. Just like the play in question. “Preponderance of evidence” simply makes replays take longer and doesn’t remove subjectivity from the equation. Replays should remain “clear and obvious”, but actually be clear and obvious. If you have to replay it 4-5 times from multiple camera angles it’s not clear and obvious. The Saints/Rams missed PI was clear and obvious. The 4th down wasn’t. Whatever was called should stand
You should go with what most likely happened
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:49 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
There was nothing in the camera angles that showed where the ball was. lol…
Was there more to go by then what the refs saw on the field? That’s a very simple answer, yes
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:51 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
They still may not see it on replay.
If they don't see it on replay, they mark it short. If there is nothing evidence of any kind that he go the line to gain, that's the path forward.
In this case, piecing together the two publically available shots, he more likely than not got the line to gain. Should be first down Bills.
Have a blessed evening.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:51 pm to lsupride87
quote:
If you don’t know what happened going with the call on the field “just because” makes no sense You should go with what most likely happened
They reviewed the play and it was no more conclusive. The call on the field should stand. The call should be made by the ref who actually saw the play not the ref who saw Chris Jones back.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:52 pm to lsupride87
quote:
Was there more to go by then what the refs saw on the field? That’s a very simple answer, yes
No. And no one wants 5 minute reviews. Y’all would be whining about that.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:52 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
They reviewed the play and it was no more conclusive.
That's not true. The burden of proof is "indisputable video evidence" not "conclusive"
ETA: burden for border
This post was edited on 1/27/25 at 6:54 pm
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:52 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
If they don't see it on replay, they mark it short. If there is nothing evidence of any kind that he go the line to gain, that's the path forward.
Or you let the ref who had the best view make the call. Like that do in actual sports.
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:53 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
That's not true. The border of proof is "indisputable video evidence" not "conclusive"
Lol
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:54 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
Or you let the ref who had the best view make the call. Like that do in actual sports.
There is no best view if we assume neither one of them saw the actual ball. It's just two bad views that didn't see anything of consequence (the ball).
Posted on 1/27/25 at 6:55 pm to gdzgft28
quote:
Lol
What's funny?
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News