Former head of pac-12 refs comments on Kevin Smith's catch.
Comments
-
If that picture shows nothing it is high time I pour gasoline over my head and light a match. It is amazing what people choose to see and not see. Part of the human condition.
The game didn't come to that play plenty of other factors. -
A lot of people, who are impartial, said there wasn't enough evidence to overturn the call.
Fuck ASJ for not catching it on 3rd down. Never should have gotten to 4th down. -
you know what everyone should forget about the call and moveon.org it. Doesn't matter.
-
Passion's dooging it up for reals today.Passion said:
Bullshit. Your photo shows nothing, and frankly is awful. His left arm does not end at the elbow (as it seems to in your photo). And look at the right side of the football on the ground. That appears to be a glove underneath the ball. Third, the ball isn't even on the ground yet in your photo.TierbsHsotBoobs said:Reduce, reuse, recycle:
The referees on the ground had a much better vantage point than the idiots up in the booth who, at best, had this grainy photo to look at that proves nothing.
Lastly, I'll take the word of the former head of pac-12 referees over a guy that wants to say anything that "pleases" oregon fans. Just go to autzen and start sucking dicks for free. -
Mental masturbation - games over and we lost
-
Passion, frankly not your best effort. You have brought a much higher level of discussion then this. We all have our days!
-
Exactly. Why would an impartial observor - who also had access to the video and still shots - say that the evidence was inconclusive?HeretoBeatmyChest said:A lot of people, who are impartial, said there wasn't enough evidence to overturn the call.
-
TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Reduce, reuse, recycle:
Too gummyTierbsHsotBoobs said:Reduce, reuse, recycle:
-
In that photo it looks like the foot of an ASU player could be underneath the ball.
-
For the 781st time, you fail to acknowledge the standard of review. The ruling was a catch, so unless you can indisputably prove 1. where his right hand was, and 2. that he did not have control of the ball as the ball touched the ground -- you have no ground to stand on. None. I know your schtick on here is to be the raging sexually frustrated negative nancy, but you come across stupid here dude. Sorry.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
For the 781st time, there is conclusive evidence of the football on the ground. That's conclusive evidence to overturn in this case.He_Needs_More_Time said:The catch call the rule on reviews is it has to be conclusive.
Had they called it incomplete you guys would be correct. However, the call on the field was a completion. It wasn't conclusive evidence to over turn it.
Now did that cost UW the game? No it didn't. Would UW had won had they made that coach? Who really knows? It's not like the Huskies have Folk as their kicker so you still had a good 25 yards to go if not more to feel comfortable with the kick.
It is okay to say the call was wrong to overturn it AND point out that UW fucked themselves way before that call so it shouldn't have came down to that.
