Started By
Message
re: Auburn Football Deserves the Death Penalty
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:42 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:42 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:
I have NEVER seen an AU fan anywhere near your level of embarrassment to the school and fan base
Auburn and its fans are not capable of being embarrassed. What could possibly be more embarrassing than the garbage you people exhibit with pride on a regular basis? If that doesn't embarrass you, nothing could.
Auburn, the only school that does not have a single living former head coach who is not still on the payroll and contractually obligated not to speak of recruiting tactics that were employed during his reign.
Think about that. Not one.
0
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:44 pm to wahoocs
quote:I think that xiv is arguing that the ball was uncatchable. I cannot imagine why he thinks this but if it were uncatchable I could understand the no call.
The receiver (Doucet) was contacted (tackled) after the ball was thrown. By definition, this would be pass interference, as opposed to defensive holding. Defensive holding would occur prior to release of the ball.
However - it was catchable.
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:44 pm to wahoocs
quote:Nope. Defensive holding (or illegal contact) can happen while the ball is in the air. A ball can be deemed uncatchable, as it was in this play, and there can still be illegal contact. Since the ball is uncatchable (or if the receiver/victim is nowhere near the pass), pass interference cannot be called. What you say is incorrect.
The receiver (Doucet) was contacted (tackled) after the ball was thrown. By definition, this would be pass interference, as opposed to defensive holding.
quote:This also is not consistent with the differences between "pass interference" and "illegal contact" or "defensive holding."
All of this is regardless of the batted ball, unless the ball was deflected prior to contact, which also is not the case.
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:45 pm to xiv
See
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:47 pm to xiv
Why are we still talking about a game from two years ago that will never be changed????? It won't matter THIS year cause LSU crushes AU!!!!!!
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:48 pm to TigerInBamaLand
quote:If that's Early Doucet wearing a blue #33 jersey, then you're absolutely right.
it was catchable.
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:48 pm to xiv
Look at the video link at at the 1:00 mark.
I stand by the fact that had the ball not been deflected it would have hit Early as he was being tackled.
ETA: 1:08 to be exact
I stand by the fact that had the ball not been deflected it would have hit Early as he was being tackled.
ETA: 1:08 to be exact
This post was edited on 9/12/08 at 4:50 pm
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:51 pm to TigerInBamaLand
BTW I bought Miles a CIGAR and he said I WON'T STOOP to that level. Which means he KNOWS LSU will win and will not be a DICKHEAD on the opponents field!!!! 
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:54 pm to TigerInBamaLand
quote:What you say here is 100% correct.
I stand by the fact that had the ball not been deflected it would have hit Early as he was being tackled.
It doesn't matter what would have happened if the ball wasn't deflected because the ball was deflected. The ball never hit Early, and it had nothing to do with any contact. It had everything to do with #33's position between Early and the ball. That means the ball was not Early's to catch; therefore, no pass interference. Illegal contact is at least arguable. Pass interference was not, is not, and will never be, no matter how many Tiger fans passionately disagree with me.
Posted on 9/12/08 at 4:58 pm to xiv
quote:This is where you are wrong. Interference can happen before a tipped ball - not after. And this is why:
It doesn't matter what would have happened if the ball wasn't deflected because the ball was deflected.
Had Early not beeen interfered with he would have had an opportunity to make a play on the ball and prevent the deflection. But he was interfered with preventing him that opportunity. It was a missed call no matter how vigorously you claim it to be otherwise.
It seems that you do not have as good an understanding of this rule as you think you do.
Tell me, if what you said is true why is the CB not allowed to interfere with the WR on every play as long as he (or a team mate) can deflect it later?
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:02 pm to TigerInBamaLand
quote:Rule 7, Sec 3, Article 9-H
Pass interference rules do not apply after the pass has been touched anywhere inbounds by an inbounds player or has touched an official.
ETA: LINK
This post was edited on 9/12/08 at 5:06 pm
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:07 pm to TigerInBamaLand
quote:
Had Early not beeen interfered with he would have had an opportunity to make a play on the ball and prevent the deflection.
Wrong and you will lose this arguement whether you choose to admit it or not. Had Doucet NOT been touched, he was not in the process of leaping 3 yards upfield to get to the ball BEFORE Brock did. Doucet was jumping primarily in a vertical plane to catch the ball in against his jersey. There was no way he was in the process of jumping 3 yards upfield to arrive at the ball before Brock. Period.
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:07 pm to xiv
The penalty occurs at the time of contact, period.
Everything else is mental masturbation.
You are making an attempt to defend a call never before seen in college football or since.
The funny thing is, this exact same situation arose the last time in Auburn, and the SEC office issued a formal aplogy for misinterpretation of the rule.
An Auburn ex-QB that now announces their games could not believe or understand the reversal, but yet you, an obvious part time and subpar official, has a complete understanding of a play we will never see called again.
All I ask for in return for my investment in following college football (time and money) is a fair shake. I know the officials are human and subjective, and I understand how this can affect their judgement, hence home field advantage.
The only home field advantage greater than Auburn's over LSU that I have seen change the outcome of a game was Oklahoma and Oregon on the same day as the one we are discussing.
Everything else is mental masturbation.
You are making an attempt to defend a call never before seen in college football or since.
The funny thing is, this exact same situation arose the last time in Auburn, and the SEC office issued a formal aplogy for misinterpretation of the rule.
An Auburn ex-QB that now announces their games could not believe or understand the reversal, but yet you, an obvious part time and subpar official, has a complete understanding of a play we will never see called again.
All I ask for in return for my investment in following college football (time and money) is a fair shake. I know the officials are human and subjective, and I understand how this can affect their judgement, hence home field advantage.
The only home field advantage greater than Auburn's over LSU that I have seen change the outcome of a game was Oklahoma and Oregon on the same day as the one we are discussing.
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:09 pm to wahoocs
It was a bod no call.............
Thanks to Shula
Thanks to Shula
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:09 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
There was not technically pass interference on the call. LSU fans have been so voiciferous about something they are likely wrong about. It got old a long time ago and is really embarrassing to you're fans (the reasonable ones).
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:09 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:That is inconsequential.
Had Doucet NOT been touched, he was not in the process of leaping 3 yards upfield to get to the ball BEFORE Brock did. Doucet was jumping primarily in a vertical plane to catch the ball in against his jersey. There was no way he was in the process of jumping 3 yards upfield to arrive at the ball before Brock. Period.
Tell me, on every holding penalty could the defender being held have made the tackle?
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:14 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:I agree that it doesn't matter at this point. But what I don't understand is why some AU fans (not all mind you) cannot admit that it was a bad call. It clearly was. Would LSU have won had we gotten the call? Maybe, maybe not, we still had a long way to go against a great defense.
It got old a long time ago and is really embarrassing to you're fans (the reasonable ones).
I can admit that LSU has benefited from bad calls by the officials in the past - why is that so hard for some people?
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:17 pm to wahoocs
quote:
The penalty occurs at the time of contact, period
You guys really just do not understand. PI was not the correct call on the play. The ball was uncatchable. If the contact had NOT occured, the ball would still have been deflected and uncatchable due to the deflection in a bang bang play. The only thing you guys SHOULD be arguing (but you never seem to figure this out) is illegal contact. We need some smarter LSU posters here. I guess the smart ones decided long ago continuing to whine and whine is simply embarrassing. I really think some LSU fans think they are going to impact the refs and get some calls by
so much. Hell, maybe they did. Last year LSU got the calls. Of course AU fans are a little better than all the whining since we realize it is generally counterproductive to dwell on the past, whine, and make an arse of yourself. We learned that from Bama fans which I may not even be as bad as many LSU fans if the ones here are representative (I personally think they are not).Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:19 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
quote:It's funny that you decided to take this to the level of personal attack. I wonder why you would feel you had to resort to that?
Tiger n Miami AU83
Anyway, I was just having fun debating this topic. I'll stop now that we have resorted to name calling.
Good luck this season.
This post was edited on 9/12/08 at 5:20 pm
Posted on 9/12/08 at 5:20 pm to Tiger n Miami AU83
The call on the field was pass interference.
I don't think it really matters what they call the penalty.
The defender has Doucets arm pinned against Doucet's body with the defenders feet off the ground prior to the deflection of the ball by the other defender.
I can't think of anything that makes this a legal play and could care less what penalty they actually would have called, although I think pass interference makes the most sense.
Surely, the ball was underthrown, but the defender was beat and knew it. He instinctually reacted.
My immediate reaction was of disappointment, because for such a hard fought physical game to have its outcome so influenced by a dumb penalty just didn't seem fair.
But, I got a whole new perspective on fairness thirty seconds later.
I don't think it really matters what they call the penalty.
The defender has Doucets arm pinned against Doucet's body with the defenders feet off the ground prior to the deflection of the ball by the other defender.
I can't think of anything that makes this a legal play and could care less what penalty they actually would have called, although I think pass interference makes the most sense.
Surely, the ball was underthrown, but the defender was beat and knew it. He instinctually reacted.
My immediate reaction was of disappointment, because for such a hard fought physical game to have its outcome so influenced by a dumb penalty just didn't seem fair.
But, I got a whole new perspective on fairness thirty seconds later.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News