- 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: Brees to Jimmy TD overturned
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:54 am to Chad504boy
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:54 am to Chad504boy
I'll say it again. If the ref would of called it a touchdown like he SHOULD have then the play would have stood.
0
Posted on 12/13/11 at 10:55 am to Chad504boy
quote:
do you not see that white blade of grass clearly move ever so little bit when his cleat came down?
holy frick. Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:00 am to whodatfan
quote:
holy frick.
Take of your glasses, proof is there. This still shot is hard to conclusively determine but in the video, you clearly see it move after cleat comes up.
After his cleat releases from the ground, there is a white blade of grass that is released upward from the cleat on the ground. His cleat touched the white. Maybe the groundskeeper got careless with his paint job.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:01 am to Chad504boy
quote:
do you not see that white blade of grass clearly move ever so little bit when his cleat came down?
nope. his toe looks to be about an inch from the grass.
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 11:03 am
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:02 am to Mouth
quote:
nope. his toe looks to be about an inch from the grass.
His toe may be but not his cleat that's on the white.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:03 am to Chad504boy
looks like a shoe lace maybe. and from that angle there is no way the ref saw that. therefore he should of called it a TD.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:04 am to Mouth
This post was edited on 12/13/11 at 11:05 am
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:05 am to Mouth
quote:
looks like a shoe lace maybe. and from that angle there is no way the ref saw that. therefore he should of called it a TD.
whatever part of shoe it is doesn't matter. It was part of the shoe that caused the blade to move after his foot came up. Live telecast even noticed and zoomed in on it. And now your defense is "no way it could have been seen" ? I can't argue against what the ref should have called live... that's just an inarguable statement. But I can argue what the ref is seeing on the replay and with how it was called on the field, i don't have a problem with the ruling upheld.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:17 am to Chad504boy
do you think that blurry picture would have overturned it if they would have called it a TD?
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:19 am to Mouth
quote:
do you think that blurry picture would have overturned it if they would have called it a TD?
Probably not. We're talking about a blade of grass here, i have no problem with the ruling being upheld either way.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:20 am to Chad504boy
There is no way to tell if that "cleat" or spike is touching green or white. look how jagged that painted line is. also, you don't have to directly touch the white area for it to "move". the force of his foot could "move" ground not directly under it. My call stands. Touchdown.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:22 am to whodatfan
quote:
There is no way to tell if that "cleat" or spike is touching green or white.
Until the video shows the white moving after this "contact".
quote:
also, you don't have to directly touch the white area for it to "move".
Most likely you do but when it moves after the cleat is released from it is pretty damning evidence, or pretty damning evidence to at least not overturn the ruling.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:25 am to Chad504boy
quote:
Probably not. We're talking about a blade of grass here, i have no problem with the ruling being upheld either way.
exactly. my beef isn't with the ruling, its with the call on the field.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:27 am to Mouth
quote:
my beef isn't with the ruling, its with the call on the field.
So you agree with the replay ruling. Thanks.
I can't argue with the ruling on the field as it's so damn close for these refs. Why are they supposed to "err" on the side of a score? Even though this ref must have had an eye of an eagle cause he "seen't it".
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:27 am to Mouth
quote:
exactly. my beef isn't with the ruling, its with the call on the field.
this. however, i thought it should have been overturned. it was a "too close to call" deal and i think that is why they let it stand. again, if it was ruled a TD, it would have stayed a TD after review.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 11:31 am to Chad504boy
I need some Rogue. 
Posted on 12/13/11 at 12:02 pm to Chad504boy
Has anyone ever hit a golf ball and taken a divot?
There is grass that "flicks" or "moves" that never made contact with the club.
In this case you cannot definitivlely say that the shoe actually made contact with the blade or two of white grass. It could easily been moved by the surrounding grass.
There is grass that "flicks" or "moves" that never made contact with the club.
In this case you cannot definitivlely say that the shoe actually made contact with the blade or two of white grass. It could easily been moved by the surrounding grass.
Posted on 12/13/11 at 12:04 pm to tigercavor
quote:
In this case you cannot definitively say that the shoe DIDN'T actually made contact with the blade or two of white grass.
Wow, close call. I almost thought for a second my argument was in trouble but then i realized it wasn't.
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News