Started By
Message
re: Can we talk about the 1H fumble situation in LSU-Bama?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:42 am to paperwasp
Posted on 11/8/22 at 11:42 am to paperwasp
Yeah, and that’s where biases come in. As an LSU fan, I say Brooks possessed the ball just prior to Latu(?) knocking it out of his hand. But I can certainly point to other instances where someone grabs the ball rolls over and it pops out again not being called “possession”. So, we will probably never agree on that. 
I’ve seen a lot of “firm possession” or “firm grasp” (can’t remember the exact wording) discussion. A lot of people point to Latu(?) knocking it out as evidence of Brooks not having firm grasp. My counter to that is if I stand in front of you (or kneel) with the ball in both hands outstretched in front of me then let you swing to knock it out of my hands, did I not possess the ball prior to that action because I dropped it?
Maybe that’s a flimsy reasoning? Again, we both have biases here so it’s hard to come to an agreement.
I’ve seen a lot of “firm possession” or “firm grasp” (can’t remember the exact wording) discussion. A lot of people point to Latu(?) knocking it out as evidence of Brooks not having firm grasp. My counter to that is if I stand in front of you (or kneel) with the ball in both hands outstretched in front of me then let you swing to knock it out of my hands, did I not possess the ball prior to that action because I dropped it?
Maybe that’s a flimsy reasoning? Again, we both have biases here so it’s hard to come to an agreement.
3
Posted on 11/8/22 at 12:11 pm to TFS4E
I think we all agree:
1. It was a weird play
2. It was an highly uncommon ruling
3. No one is likely going to look at it with unbiased eyes
1. It was a weird play
2. It was an highly uncommon ruling
3. No one is likely going to look at it with unbiased eyes
Posted on 11/8/22 at 1:28 pm to TFS4E
quote:
I say Brooks possessed the ball just prior to Latu knocking it out of his hand
Fair enough.
I think to the original point of the thread, we've reached the correct understanding of the rule, it just comes down to who was in possession of the ball when the out-of-bounds touch occurred.
The way I understand it, if the LSU player did in fact maintain possession long enough (as you state), it should have been LSU's ball — the touching of it by Latu simply ended the play.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 6:54 pm to TFS4E
Good analysis but the point is and has ALWAYS been...IF there is anyway a marginal call can favor the tide...then so be it ! At least 3-4 instances in this close game of 50/50 calls all going in favor of the gumps...this is simply uncanny OR, by design. History OVERWHELMINGLY shows gross favoritism to the tide...this is undisputable and we can only hope that the rest of the SEC will continue to LOUDLY complain to the SEC and the bias refs on the field !
Main reason Kelly went for two was of a real concern the refs would continue to favor the gumps !
Main reason Kelly went for two was of a real concern the refs would continue to favor the gumps !
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News