Started By
Message
re: Shane Beamer is kind of a tool and completely in the wrong in his spat with Bert
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:13 am to Lonnie Utah
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:13 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
He just got his feelings hurt.
Did he? Bert seemed to calmly make the t-bar motion. It was Beamer, surprisingly, that had a fit.
IMO, and this is speculation, but Beamer and other coaches are not used to getting called out on their shite. That's why he went nuts, complete with the crazy eyes.
1
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:14 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Ahh. So, Beamer thought it was an ethical. Bert did not. So therefore, what do we have to fall back on. The rulebook. Just because Bert didn't like it, didn't mean it was wrong. He just got his feelings hurt.
Does the rule book say that everything that is legal is “sportsmanlike”? Probably not. That’s your own subjective (and incorrect) belief. Codified law, at least in America, is not intended to be an exclusive arbiter of right and wrong. Ethical codes of conduct are complex and vary from system to system. Within the college football “system”, the general consensus is that faking a signal commonly used to signal a fair catch is unsportsmanlike. You are free to disagree. However, your contention that the rulebook is the exclusive judge of “right” and “wrong” is inaccurate.
I’m a political philosophy major… so this debate is not new to me.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:16 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Here's the kickoff. Notice nobody got hurt
Noticed even the play-by-play guy gave up on the play.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:17 am to Bengalbio
quote:
Did he? Bert seemed to calmly make the t-bar motion.
Yes. On the kickoff play. That's why he came over and taunted the SC bench by making the T-bar motion.
It's clear on the radio broadcast of the incident.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:23 am to Buryl
quote:
Ethical codes of conduct are complex and vary from system to system.
Exactly, and from person to person.
My contention is that in an athletic contest where the idea is to get every advantage you can against the opponent, if there is nothing in in rule book against it, it's legal to use. In NASCAR they call it "the gray area". That's why Beamer cleared it with the refs before the game. The other side might not like it, but that doesn't make it WRONG. It's just the two side are operating with two moral codes. As a political philosophy major you should know that just because someone disagrees with your moral code doesn't make them wrong. By default, the rule books exists to unify everyone's moral code.
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 11:37 am
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:25 am to ummagumma
quote:
If Beamer is perfectly okay directing his players to fake an unofficial player safety signal for the sole purpose to deceive an opponent, he should man up and accept being called out on it. All he had to do was just smile and shrug his shoulders. Instead he blew a freaking fuse like a psycho. He’s an embarrassment to himself and his program.
This. There’s really no excuse for that reaction. You’d have thought Bert had body slammed an SC player.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:41 am to Prof
What's to even debate? Bert schooled Beamer and had him shrieking like a little schoolgirl.
SC choked and embarrased themselves along the way. And let another B1G school make the SEC look bad.
SC choked and embarrased themselves along the way. And let another B1G school make the SEC look bad.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 11:43 am to Adam Banks
Beamer needs anger management and a thorough arse beating.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:02 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
My contention is that in an athletic contest where the idea is to get every advantage you can against the opponent, if there is nothing in in rule book against it, it's legal to use. In NASCAR they call it "the gray area". That's why Beamer cleared it with the refs before the game. The other side might not like it, but that doesn't make it WRONG. It's just the two side are operating with two moral codes. As a political philosophy major you should know that just because someone disagrees with your moral code doesn't make them wrong. By default, the rule books exists to unify everyone's moral code.
You are arguing that anything not specifically banned by the rules is “moral” or “right” or “just.” Where in the rule book does it say that everything not specifically banned is “sportsmanlike?” It doesn’t, which makes your beliefs subjective as well.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:33 pm to Buryl
Y’all must hate the hidden ball trick in baseball
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:45 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
quote: unofficial player safety signal
Key word highlighted
It was included in the original statement for a reason and I don’t think a single person has ever claimed otherwise. Doesn’t change the fact that Beamer pulled a low class move, then doubled down on being low class with his unhinged reaction.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:46 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
It's clear on the radio broadcast of the incident.
So you’re saying we should trust a USC radio broadcast over our own eyes? That’s a strange argument.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:46 pm to BhamTigah
Is there really six pages on this? 
Who gives a frick
Who gives a frick
Posted on 1/2/25 at 12:50 pm to Woody4daTide9
quote:
Y’all must hate the hidden ball trick in baseball
This is such a stretch.
I love "trick" plays.
Breaking a gentleman's agreement that evolves around player safety is just jerk off stuff.
And Bert the Belly was no better.
Tricky by surprise is something most of love. Tricking by lying? That feels more like just taking a cheap shot.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 1:55 pm to Buryl
quote:
You are arguing that anything not specifically banned by the rules is “moral” or “right” or “just.”
No, I'm arguing that different people have different moral codes and that if it's not specifically in the rule book then it's a legal play and while you might not like it, there is nothing you can really complain about. Your complaint should be to the rule committee about updating the rule.
quote:
Where in the rule book does it say that everything not specifically banned is “sportsmanlike? It doesn’t, which makes your beliefs subjective as well.
In reality, these two statements defeat your argument. The rule book exists for two reasons. Fair play, and player safety. It's a logical assumption that something is not in the rule book then it's sportsman like and doesn't endanger player safety. And even more so when there is a whole section in the rule book called "Unsportsmanlike conduct."
The rules committee has this EXACT signal covered in the rule book. There is such a thing as an "Invalid fair catch signal". So long as the player does not wave their arms, it's not a fair catch. This is what Beamer clarified with the refs on Tuesday. Contrast what our player did on Tuesday with what happened in the Minn vs Iowa game last year. A TD was called back because of an "Invalid fair catch signal". Had our player done that, I would agree with you. But our coach found a grey area within the rule and exploited it.
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 1/2/25 at 2:03 pm to BhamTigah
quote:
So you’re saying we should trust a USC radio broadcast over our own eyes? That’s a strange argument.
Listen to it and tell me. They are actually fairly objective about the course of events.
Posted on 1/2/25 at 2:16 pm to Lonnie Utah
The refs just have it out for that suck arse program and want to be team. Sort of like sunny Utah
Posted on 1/2/25 at 2:24 pm to Buryl
quote:
Where in the rule book does it say that everything not specifically banned is “sportsmanlike?”
Section A R 9-2-1-I-X.
quote:
Unsportsmanlike Acts ARTICLE 1 There shall be no unsportsmanlike conduct or any act that interferes with orderly game administration on the part of players, substitutes, coaches, authorized attendants or any other persons subject to the rules, before the game, during the game or between periods Infractions for these acts by players are administered as either live-ball or dead-ball fouls depending on when they occur (A R 9-2-1-I-X)
Reading that, it states that any unsportsmanlike acts are a foul. While the rule book calls out specific instances that are definitely unsportsmanlike acts, it also gives the refs full discretion to determine what those acts are. For example, do you think there's a rule against throwing an opponents shoe a la Lsu vs Florida in 2020? No. Since the refs were specifically asked about this scenario and didn't flag it in the game, you have to make the assumption that per Section A R 9-2-1-I-X, it's not unsportsmanlike.
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 2:31 pm
Posted on 1/2/25 at 2:50 pm to Lonnie Utah
quote:
Lonnie Utah
It almost sounds to me like you don't believe anything can be bush league if there's not a rule that strictly prohibits it. Many times, rules will change when coaches pull bush league plays like that. For instance, Kenny Pickett did a fake slide move to gain an advantage under the rules. Players pulled up like you're supposed to, he kept running. It wasn't a foul under the football rules but still bush league in that situation. The NCAA agreed and changed the rule within a week. Their reasoning?
quote:
“The original rule was put in place to protect runners who wanted to end the play without contact and allowed them to slide feet first. Defenders have learned to hold up and back off.
“If we were to allow the fake slide, the defense may now not hold up, and we could see many unnecessary and dangerous hits. One point of note apart from this interpretation, the ruling has to be done by on-field officials and is not reviewable by Instant Replay under Rule 12-3-3 – Dead Ball and Loose Ball. We can have that part of the debate in the off season.”
The play in this game is similar in nature. Players think, based upon common practice, a fair catch has been called. They hold up. USC exploits a gray area in a player safety rule and run a trick play. Now you risk defenders blowing up return players not knowing whether a fair catch has been called or not. wouldn't be shocked if the rules committee addresses this exact signal in the offseason
This post was edited on 1/2/25 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 1/2/25 at 3:09 pm to lsufball19
quote:
It almost sounds to me like you don't believe anything can be bush league if there's not a rule that strictly prohibits it.
The only one that called it Bush leage was Fat Bert. Nobody else did until after the game. Not the announcers (radio or TV), the refs, nor the fans in the game thread. It wasn't until Bert cried about it in his post game presser did that narrative pick up Steam.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News