Started By
Message
re: The Safety That Wasn't
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:40 pm to HighTide_ATL
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:40 pm to HighTide_ATL
quote:
Ball could’ve easily landed where in his vicinity
Can you draw the trajectory of the ball that would make sense so it would land in #2's vicinity?
This post was edited on 9/11/22 at 6:42 pm
2
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:44 pm to Diamondawg
It is not in the official NCAA rule book. It is in the special keep Bama from losing rule book as long as the REC keeps paying.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:45 pm to MackDaddyBrown
quote:
Can you draw the trajectory of the ball that would make sense so it would land in #2's vicinity?
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:49 pm to HighTide_ATL
quote:
The damn picture shows space between his leg and the ground.
And when presented, with some kind of purposeful, irrefutable, mathematical and chemical proof that Young's leg was - indeed - in contact with the ground ? You will just turtle up, intellectually, scream louder, and insist "He wasn't down.".
And the only thing someone like me can do is go down this rabbit hole with you, showing all you're dumb. Doesn't do anybody like me any good. But it has to be done. Because your dumb has to be refuted.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:53 pm to MackDaddyBrown
quote:
Can you draw the trajectory of the ball that would make sense so it would land in #2's vicinity?
That's academic as he's already down (see left forearm) in that photo. But, even this is late as he was ALREADY down a few frames before this image.
This post was edited on 9/11/22 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:53 pm to EarlyCuyler3
And then in reality his trajectory was straight at Overshown's helmet and nothing close to the one you drew out.
This post was edited on 9/11/22 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:54 pm to MackDaddyBrown
quote:
3. Can you post the part of the rulebook where it'd have been ruled roughing the passer?
The ruling on the field was roughing the passer with targeting. It means a review. Under reviewing the targeting they determined he wasn't down. Clearly, there was no targeting, and since he wasn't down, there can be no roughing either. But if they rule him down, they must enforce the non reviewable roughing call. Roughing the passer negates the play whether it is an int, safety, fumble etc... They literally ruled in the best possible outcome for Texas that was within their power to rule. Now if you wish to argue that roughing penalty was a bad call. I can't debate that. Nobody, not even the officials, are saying they didn't blow the call on the field.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:57 pm to MackDaddyBrown
Bank shot off his right calf to #2!
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:57 pm to MackDaddyBrown
quote:
And then in reality his trajectory was straight at Overshown's helmet and nothing close to the one you drew out.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 6:59 pm to viceman
quote:
But if they rule him down, they must enforce the non reviewable roughing call. Roughing the passer negates the play whether it is an int, safety, fumble etc... They literally ruled in the best possible outcome for Texas that was within their power to rule.
Huh? The refs said they "misspoke" on the roughing the passer call and just handwaved it away. (didn't they?) You're saying they wouldn't have been allowed to say they misspoke if they had tried to review for a safety?
This post was edited on 9/11/22 at 7:00 pm
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:01 pm to viceman
The ruling on the field was roughing the passer with targeting.
Jesus Christ, here we go again. Now a Rule-Splain about how the process works, and how it worked to its own definitions, and such, the Rules worked.
If the process follows itself, and figures out how to pat itself on the back for figuring out that Bryce Young wasn't tackled in the end zone - when he was obviously bouncing arse over head and slinging the ball while being down in the end zone - then whatever process you are trying to explain is flawed. Pure and simple.
I'm really getting tired of defending the damn shorthorns. Yet here I am.
Jesus Christ, here we go again. Now a Rule-Splain about how the process works, and how it worked to its own definitions, and such, the Rules worked.
If the process follows itself, and figures out how to pat itself on the back for figuring out that Bryce Young wasn't tackled in the end zone - when he was obviously bouncing arse over head and slinging the ball while being down in the end zone - then whatever process you are trying to explain is flawed. Pure and simple.
I'm really getting tired of defending the damn shorthorns. Yet here I am.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:07 pm to ScoggDog
quote:
The ruling on the field was roughing the passer with targeting.
Jesus Christ, here we go again. Now a Rule-Splain about how the process works, and how it worked to its own definitions, and such, the Rules worked.
If the process follows itself, and figures out how to pat itself on the back for figuring out that Bryce Young wasn't tackled in the end zone - when he was obviously bouncing arse over head and slinging the ball while being down in the end zone - then whatever process you are trying to explain is flawed. Pure and simple.
I'm really getting tired of defending the damn shorthorns. Yet here I am.
Something about not being able to see the forest for the trees. To put it another way, if not for instant replay, this would (correctly) be called a safety 100 out of 100 times.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:12 pm to Milf n Cookies
Its really irritating, and obviously getting under my skin. Which is on me. Nobody should let themselves get irritated on social media.
Yet, I am. Its just ... so ... fricking ... obvious. Its like arguing basic math with folks that don't know a single damn thing about math. I get it. Most of life is subjective. Yet, if you can't agree that Bryce Young is dancing on his helmet and that's at least two points ? Then why do we waste our time and money on this shite ?
Yet, I am. Its just ... so ... fricking ... obvious. Its like arguing basic math with folks that don't know a single damn thing about math. I get it. Most of life is subjective. Yet, if you can't agree that Bryce Young is dancing on his helmet and that's at least two points ? Then why do we waste our time and money on this shite ?
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:13 pm to ScoggDog
quote:
obviously getting under my skin.
We're aware.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:14 pm to ScoggDog
quote:
ScoggDog
Do you drink? If not.....start.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:16 pm to EarlyCuyler3
quote:
We're aware.
You got a break. A monumental break, really. You don't - as some have said - give it back. You take the gift.
But frick me, stop the chatter about how it was the right call. You got a gift. Bend those stiff, prideful necks and just admit it.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:16 pm to Milf n Cookies
I was certain it was a safety, but his arse, knee, nor elbow ever touched the ground.
GOOD CALL...
GOOD CALL...
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:18 pm to ScoggDog
quote:
Bend those stiff, prideful necks and just admit it.
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:19 pm to MackDaddyBrown
quote:
Huh? The refs said they "misspoke" on the roughing the passer call and just handwaved it away. (didn't they?) You're saying they wouldn't have been allowed to say they misspoke if they had tried to review for a safety?
Huh? Are you suggesting the refs just lie about the call to help out UTx? Because that is exactly what they did.
This post was edited on 9/11/22 at 7:20 pm
Posted on 9/11/22 at 7:19 pm to Milf n Cookies
quote:
Do you drink? If not.....start.
Man, I gotta' get down there for a game. You play checkers ? Listen to music ? Drink cold beer ?
I drag a travel trailer. They got any cool parks there ?
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News