Started By
Message
re: Most infamous games in SEC since 1992
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:20 am to DoreonthePlains
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:20 am to DoreonthePlains
0
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:21 am to DoreonthePlains
quote:
NYCAuburn, look, the point is that even if you bring in some nonsensical interpretation of "uncatchable" to include the defender which played the ball, surely you can admit that the, ironically, Article 9 Section K part of the rule still means Auburn should have a 15 yard penalty and automatic first down awarded against them. Correct?
Please go back and read the two qualifiers for pi, then check the definitions of those qualifiers.
Then go read 9c as well
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 1:26 am
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:21 am to NYCAuburn
Go throw up all over ITAT, dude. You're an imbecile.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:22 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
So when you change what happened it fits your definition. The tip, locations and trajectories render the ball uncatchable and therefore loses the second qualifier for pi.
The tip is irrelevant because he was contacted prior to it.
The only way you would be correct is if there was no contact, and if the ball wasnt tipped, he still couldnt have caught it. Only then would it be uncatchable.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:23 am to JuiceTerry
Damn.
Well, I'm interested now. This starts around page 14 ?
Well, I'm interested now. This starts around page 14 ?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:23 am to JuiceTerry
Wow first tornado insults then continued insults, utter class from you. All because you can't read and retain.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:25 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:. No it isn't.
The tip is irrelevant because he was contacted prior to it.
quote:
The only way you would be correct is if there was no contact, and if the ball wasnt tipped, he still couldnt have caught it. Only then would it be uncatchable.
Nope. The tip absolutely comes into play. Seriously if this is your hangup. Go read the rulebook it's free.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:27 am to NYCAuburn
Let me try to sum. PI was called before tip, and you're saying that because ball was tipped, rendering it uncatchable, the penalty should have been waved off. Is this about right?
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 1:28 am
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:27 am to NYCAuburn
You really are a joke.
I mean, the rules have been posted. You told us to read them. We did. We all agree that according to the rules, it was PI. And even if it wasn't, then it should have still been a 15 yard penalty against Auburn.
What rules are you referring to? Could you post them? Because they ain't the ones the Dore posted.
I mean, the rules have been posted. You told us to read them. We did. We all agree that according to the rules, it was PI. And even if it wasn't, then it should have still been a 15 yard penalty against Auburn.
What rules are you referring to? Could you post them? Because they ain't the ones the Dore posted.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:28 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Nope. The tip absolutely comes into play. Seriously if this is your hangup. Go read the rulebook it's free.
Wow, you're an idiot
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:28 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
Nope. The tip absolutely comes into play. Seriously if this is your hangup. Go read the rulebook it's free.
Please copy and paste the part that states tipping a pass matters AFTER the illegal contact has been made. Your cart is leading the horse, and your logic train is out of control. To bring in a rant trope, you have lost control more than Mark Richt ever has.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:29 am to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
There are two qualifiers for pi. Contact and legal forward pass/catchable ball.
The tip along with doucets original trajectory and location render half of the qualifiers null. Had ther not been a tip or different location and trajectory it would have been pi.
The tip along with doucets original trajectory and location render half of the qualifiers null. Had ther not been a tip or different location and trajectory it would have been pi.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:29 am to dbt_Geaux_Tigers_196
quote:
Let me try to sum. PI was called before tip, and you're saying that because ball was tipped, rendering it uncatchable, the penalty should have been waved off. Is this about right?
Yes, because he incorrectly believes the defense's actions have any bearing on a catchable pass.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:31 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
NYCAuburn
Quick question: Did Chad Ramsey chop-block Glenn Dorsey?
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:31 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
he tip along with doucets original trajectory and location render half of the qualifiers null. Had ther not been a tip or different location and trajectory it would have been pi.
The tip does not matter. The rule is that if the interference occurs after a tip, it is legal.
This post was edited on 4/30/14 at 1:32 am
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:32 am to magildachunks
quote:
We did. We all agree that according to the rules, it was PI.
I thought you said you read them. Please explain how it was a catchable ball.
quote:
And even if it wasn't, then it should have still been a 15 yard penalty against Auburn
quote:
What rules are you referring to? Could you post them? Because they ain't the ones the Dore posted.
I though you said you read the rules
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:33 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
The tip does not matter. The rule is that if the interference occurs after a tip, it is legal.
Who is making things up again. This is downright false in this instance.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:33 am to NYCAuburn
quote:
The tip along with doucets original trajectory and location render half of the qualifiers null. Had ther not been a tip or different location and trajectory it would have been pi.
Again, here is 9J since I think you missed it last time.
quote:
j. Tackling or grasping a receiver or any other intentional contact before he
touches the pass is evidence that the tackler is disregarding the ball and is
therefore illegal.
This says nothing about another player proceeding to touch the pass after PI occurs.
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:34 am to NYCAuburn
Well, I can't be objective because I'm still mad about Chaz, Tubbs cigar, 2 chances at the PAT, AU going to the Sugar Bowl while the Co-champ and H2H winner LSU didn't, ....
Posted on 4/30/14 at 1:36 am to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Yes, because he incorrectly believes the defense's actions have any bearing on a catchable pass.
You are incorrectly believing that a tip that renders a ball uncatchable as having no merit for the qualifiers for pi
Page 17 of 23
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News