Started By
Message
re: Ryan Day still whining over "non-targeting" aka “Displaced Buckeye Sore Butthole thread”
Posted on 2/3/23 at 9:29 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Posted on 2/3/23 at 9:29 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
point is that I think they got it wrong.
In what manner exactly?
quote:
And the best y’all can come up with is Muh Officials and Muh Rules.
You are dunking on yourself:
We have unbiased Professional referees and official rules.
The best you have is “others”, which consists solely of buckeye homers, uga haters, pathetic excuse makers, and idiots who don’t understand the rules.
1
Posted on 2/3/23 at 9:35 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Why do you think the call would have stood?
A flawed rule that proved the existence of an imbalance between the safety rules and the physical nature of football.
The rule makers saw this flaw, so they got together and improved upon the rule, as you said they would.
They simply shifted the burden of proof to the replay ref. Brilliant move to fix the flawed imbalance.
Now, the chances of a big time mistake impacting a game have been decreased, importantly without sacrificing safety.
This post was edited on 2/3/23 at 9:50 pm
Posted on 2/3/23 at 9:42 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
DisplacedBuckeye
27 pages and still going.
This is one of the most impressive melts in the history of this site.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 9:59 pm to Chip82
quote:
The Big Ten told him that it did not measure up to targeting.
Did they?
"I spoke with the officials in the Big Ten and had a great conversation with Bill."
quote:
The Pac 12 told him that it did not measure up to targeting.
They stood behind their crew? You don't say.
quote:
The NCAA officiating office told him that it did not measure up to targeting.
Steve Shaw...
Sorry bud, but "the officials are right because they say they're right" means about as much anything I've posted.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 9:59 pm to djsdawg
quote:
We have unbiased Professional referees and official rules.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:01 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
quote:
SteelerBravesDawg
One of my favorite parts of all this is when you ducked out of the thread you started after you had your arse handed to you by a bunch of people who aren't Georgia fans.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:02 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
The funny part about the Buckeye is that they ignore that there was no forcible contact to the neck or head. It was mere a solid hit by the defender using his shoulder and striking the WR shoulder pad area. I showed him video evidence to support that. The defenseless player element is moot because he didn’t strike him high around head or neck. They obviously don’t know the rule.
This post was edited on 2/3/23 at 10:04 pm
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:03 pm to CasualFan12
What’s next? The ESPN/ Disney conspiracy theory
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:40 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
This is all from the Ryan Day recruiting day press conference.
Ryan Day explained who he talked with.
But the video evidence shows very clearly that it was shoulder to shoulder contact. So the targeting progression stopped right there.
The reality that it was a legal hit will not change.
Ryan Day explained who he talked with.
But the video evidence shows very clearly that it was shoulder to shoulder contact. So the targeting progression stopped right there.
The reality that it was a legal hit will not change.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:45 pm to Chip82
quote:
This is all from the Ryan Day recruiting day press conference.
Ryan Day explained who he talked with.
Right, and I explained why none of what he said means what you asserted.
quote:
The reality that it was a legal hit will not change.
The call won't change. That doesn't mean it isn't questionable.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:47 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Bitch I had my arse handed to me by nobody, you have me confused for yourself.
You've been OWNED up and down ITT and over on the MSB.
Take the L, let it go, and get ready for September.
You've been OWNED up and down ITT and over on the MSB.
Take the L, let it go, and get ready for September.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:49 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Sorry bud, but "the officials are right because they say they're right" means about as much anything I've posted.
What you have posted is about thr “others”, which consists solely of buckeye homers, uga haters, pathetic excuse makers, and idiots who don’t understand the rules.
They don’t have the knowledge and neutrality of the refs and rules.
Not even close.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:53 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
That doesn't mean it isn't questionable.
How questionable is it it, right?
That is determined by:
1. how good of a view the refs had.
2. the neutrality of the the refs
3. the rule book knowledge of the refs.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:54 pm to SteelerBravesDawg
quote:
Bitch I had my arse handed to me by nobody, you have me confused for yourself.
You did, and that's why you scurried back over here where you feel safe.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 10:55 pm to djsdawg
quote:
How questionable is it it, right?
Sure it could be a sliding scale.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 11:03 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
Get over yourself, dude.
You lost. It wasn't targeting. Get over it.
You lost. It wasn't targeting. Get over it.
Posted on 2/3/23 at 11:04 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
The call never made it past the first step.
Shoulder to shoulder ended the review protocol process.
The second review station in Pittsburgh came to the exact same conclusion on game day.
So the decision was based on clear video evidence and not on a subjective analysis of "intent."
Shoulder to shoulder ended the review protocol process.
The second review station in Pittsburgh came to the exact same conclusion on game day.
So the decision was based on clear video evidence and not on a subjective analysis of "intent."
Posted on 2/3/23 at 11:06 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Sure it could be a sliding scale.
Whose judgement is more questionable:
A - the ref who knows the rule book inside and out
B - the buckeye fan who doesn’t know shite about the rule book?
Submit answer _________
This post was edited on 2/3/23 at 11:19 pm
Posted on 2/3/23 at 11:10 pm to djsdawg
Or perhaps the opinion of a Buckeye fan who has watched decades of Big Ten powder puff football and only has to contend with one or two tough games per season?
This post was edited on 2/3/23 at 11:11 pm
Posted on 2/3/23 at 11:25 pm to Chip82
quote:
Or perhaps the opinion of a Buckeye fan who has watched decades of Big Ten powder puff football and only has to contend with one or two tough games per season?
You mean like UGA next year?
Page 27 of 38
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News