Started By
Message
re: If You're STILL Complaining about a Conspiracy...........
Posted on 11/13/09 at 2:30 am to Teague
Posted on 11/13/09 at 2:30 am to Teague
quote:
My bigger question is whether or not Julio Jones touching the ball (he did) makes it a dead ball because he was out of bounds (he was).
I stopped reading here. This guy is an idiot.
1
Posted on 11/13/09 at 2:44 am to bamaboy87
that isn't the only time yall have been on probation.
Posted on 11/13/09 at 3:04 am to heartbreakTiger
quote:
that isn't the only time yall have been on probation.
If All of Bama's wins get nullified Ole Miss will win the SEC west.
Bank on It Tigahs!
Posted on 11/13/09 at 3:08 am to inelishaitrust
naw no way yall beat us. the sec likes us more than you bc we bring bigger money.
expect calls to go our way
expect calls to go our way
Posted on 11/13/09 at 3:10 am to heartbreakTiger
quote:
naw no way yall beat us. the sec likes us more than you bc we bring bigger money.
expect calls to go our way
You guys are going to need alot more than officiating.
I'm just kidding, We might not even make a bowl this year.
Posted on 11/13/09 at 3:12 am to inelishaitrust
we needed les to get suspended 2 games but no he didn't have the back bone to test slive.
that would be pretty harsh top 4 ranking at one point to no bowl.
that would be pretty harsh top 4 ranking at one point to no bowl.
Posted on 11/13/09 at 3:18 am to heartbreakTiger
quote:
that would be pretty harsh top 4 ranking at one point to no bowl.
Yeah, we're alot better than that. It could happen though.
Posted on 11/13/09 at 3:32 am to mannybeingmanny
quote:
I stopped reading here. This guy is an nincompoop.
Edited to reflect the point at which I stopped reading.
Posted on 11/13/09 at 5:49 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
i'm not a gump brah. ETA and if he had touched it 1st, it WOULD have been down. it would also have been an illegal touch.
Thats pretty easy to confuse actually, the reason it isnt illegal touching is precisely because he was out bound at the time. making him by rule, the equivalent of the turf. This is to prevent people from people out of bounds getting involved in the play. Illegal touching is when a wr goes out of bound then comes back in bounds to make a play without establishing himself as an elligible teciever.
Now then the question becomes whether Julio touched it or not.
There is actually a video of the play the replay booth used on youtube: Here.
Im not homer enough to say the first angle proves shite.
The front angle is probably where they thought it was inconclusive.
Anyway the vid showed he clearly was in bounds, so you guys were right.
EDIT: Julio touching it first or second doesnt matter, if it was first it was as if the ball hit the ground, if it was second, then it was as if he trapped it. Lame technicality eh?
This post was edited on 11/13/09 at 6:03 am
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:01 am to alu
you gumps keep saying this, it is simply wrong. can turf jump up and contest you for a catch? I posted this in page2 of this thread:
ETA: an out-of-bounds player can do nothing legally to contest an imminent reception or interception.
stop talking out of your asses.
quote:
Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds during a
down shall touch a legal forward pass in the field of play or end zones or while
airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R. 7-3-4-I-III).
PENALTY—Loss of down at the previous spot [S16 and S9].
ETA: an out-of-bounds player can do nothing legally to contest an imminent reception or interception.
stop talking out of your asses.
This post was edited on 11/13/09 at 6:04 am
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:05 am to alu
quote:
EDIT: Julio touching it first or second doesnt matter, if it was first it was as if the ball hit the ground, if it was second, then it was as if he trapped it. Lame technicality eh?
absolutely NOT a lame technicality. if JJ touched it first, loss of down. if PP did, interception. neither was called.
and that's a big stretch, relating this to trapping.
ETA: wait a second, i think i initially missed the hilarity of what you just argued. Trapping? If JJ touched it while in PP's possession, it's like trapping????
This post was edited on 11/13/09 at 6:09 am
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:08 am to 90proofprofessional
And you could argue against that, but I am just going to go with you. I shouldve been a loss of downs. But that doesnt stop the ball from being dead.
Annnd thats by reading the definition of the rule.
EDIT: Yew it seems like a stretch, but it wouldnt be the first time a rule was made like that. I dunno, hey im not defending the call though, im just defending the officials at the game. Though, they did piss me off a few times.
I dont really care if it was or wasnt an int quite honestly.
Annnd thats by reading the definition of the rule.
EDIT: Yew it seems like a stretch, but it wouldnt be the first time a rule was made like that. I dunno, hey im not defending the call though, im just defending the officials at the game. Though, they did piss me off a few times.
I dont really care if it was or wasnt an int quite honestly.
This post was edited on 11/13/09 at 6:14 am
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:09 am to alu
quote:
I shouldve been a loss of downs. But that doesnt stop the ball from being dead.
correct. (ETA: my whole point- neither was called! see why we think we're entitled to a fricking official explanation of this?)
of course, it'd have also been 4th and 9. oh, and nothing in any replay, from any angle suggest jones touched it 1st. or at all, for that matter. never happened.
i'm open to evidence to the contrary, of course.
This post was edited on 11/13/09 at 6:12 am
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:18 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
correct. (ETA: my whole point- neither was called! see why we think we're entitled to a fricking official explanation of this?)
Stop making sense omg
You mean to say if they bothered to explain it JUST ONCE we wouldnt have this issue?
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:21 am to alu
hah, it won't undo the fricked up call, but nothing can do that anyway. an honest, "yeah, we fricked you" would be a start.
that'd be more satisfying than "incomplete."
that'd be more satisfying than "incomplete."
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:32 am to Teague
I have friends that say that say the 5 yard running into punter penalty should not have been called at all...and then you add the 5 yard and 30 inch spot, Kaboom!
this is a very Biased piece, I didn't finish reading it
this is a very Biased piece, I didn't finish reading it
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:48 am to ApexTiger
How much did Alabama/Florida pay that guy to write that article, or was it the refs??
Posted on 11/13/09 at 6:50 am to ApexTiger
Why do the Gumps keep posting about this? Why won't they all let it die?
Posted on 11/13/09 at 7:03 am to Teague
So actual sports writers for national news papers are all stupid, but a blogger in alabama is on the money?
Now it all makes sense.............
you're a fricking moron
Now it all makes sense.............
you're a fricking moron
Posted on 11/13/09 at 7:04 am to heartbreakTiger
quote:
that would be pretty harsh top 4 ranking at one point to no bowl.
Hell, we got that beat. 2000. #3 preseason....and that's how many games were won.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News