1
Started By
Message
re: “[insert fanbase] always bitching about the refs”
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:10 am to 3down10
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:10 am to 3down10
quote:
Do you dispute that Julio is out of bounds? Do you dispute that Julio touched the ball before Peterson's foot hit the ground?
Yes and yes.
I posted the video.
No one believes this & was never part of any explanation given.
If you can’t admit this is an INT, then yes you’re a blind homer.
Even in your pictures (less useful than video), Peterson has the ball & Jones’ feet aren’t on the ground.
Hugeeee reach by you. Impressive.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:15 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:15 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
Yes and yes.
I posted the video.
No one believes this & was never part of any explanation given.
I posted an image those shows Julio is both out of bound and touching the ball.
It's from the same video you posted.
You say you dispute Julio was out of bounds. But he clearly was.
And in the 2nd and 3rd images he is touching the ball and Peterson feet are not touching and it's actually before he has possession at all.
Nobody thinks about it because nobody thinks about the out of bounds rules. If you remove the out of bounds rules, then it's clearly Peterson stepping in bounds and an interception. That is what you see.
Factor in the out of bounds rules, and it's an incomplete pass as called.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:18 am to 3down10
Your pictures are terrible quality, and the only one I see Jones possibly touching the ball, his feet are in the air & Peterson has it in two hands.
A video is worth a thousand pictures. Idk why you keep posting them when the video with slow mo frames and replays from various angles is right there.
Get bent.
A video is worth a thousand pictures. Idk why you keep posting them when the video with slow mo frames and replays from various angles is right there.
Get bent.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:22 am to 3down10
Patrick Peterson was in bounds.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:22 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
Your pictures are terrible quality, and the only one I see Jones possibly touching the ball, his feet are in the air & Peterson has it in two hands.
A video is worth a thousand pictures. Idk why you keep posting them when the video with slow mo frames and replays from various angles is right there.
Get bent.
I can't help what the video has for quality.
At any rate, you've had it explained to you. But feel free to complain. It didn't even affect the game, you lost by 2 scores and when you got the ball back on your last possession your QB threw an interception.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:23 am to Mattamue
quote:
Patrick Peterson was in bounds.
Yes, but the ball was not.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:25 am to 3down10
quote:
At any rate, you've had it explained to you.
You’ve made up a cute story.
Unfortunately, most of us have eyes.
quote:
It didn't even affect the game
It absolutely did. You won by 9 having scored a TD on that possession & LSU would’ve instead got the ball in plus territory with much more time… rather than a Bama score.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:31 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:26 am to 3down10
Anyway, this concludes the demonstration that even if you lay out the rules for people, they will still believe whatever they want.
In their mind, there is no out of bounds rule, the only thing that matters is Peterson was in bounds and thus it's a bad call.
It's a rare call, but it's the correct one.
In their mind, there is no out of bounds rule, the only thing that matters is Peterson was in bounds and thus it's a bad call.
It's a rare call, but it's the correct one.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:27 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
You’ve made up a cute story.
Unfortunately, most of us have eyes.
Stay mad.
I think the reasons why it's an incomplete pass are pretty interesting, uncommon and not something people generally realize.
It's not like the outcome of anything is going to change.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:29 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:32 am to 3down10
quote:
I think the reasons why it's an incomplete pass are pretty interesting, uncommon and not something people generally realize.
You’re literally making it up. If Jones had touched the ball there it would’ve been a penalty on him.
This is an interesting way of coping with a loss.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:33 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:35 am to 3down10
quote:
In their mind, there is no out of bounds rule
Peterson catches the pass in front of jones. Jones’ feet are not on the ground in your screencaps.
If that were the explanation for the call, it would’ve been a penalty on jones called illegal touching.
So you’re just wrong and rambling. Again.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:41 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
You’re literally making it up. If Jones had touched the ball there it would’ve been a penalty on him.
This is an interesting way of coping with a loss.
Illegal touching is if he comes back in bounds and catches it.
Alabama won by 2 scores.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:42 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
Peterson catches the pass in front of jones. Jones’ feet are not on the ground in your screencaps.
If that were the explanation for the call, it would’ve been a penalty on jones called illegal touching.
So you’re just wrong and rambling. Again.
Illegal touching requires the player to come back in bounds.
You are the one who is wrong and just rambling and making up things.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:45 am to 3down10
On the record, the official on field explanation given was that Peterson caught the ball out of bounds.
The review was not overturned because it was ruled “inconclusive”.
Your crackpot theory is just that.
It’s not called illegal catching… and no it’s also a penalty if he touches the ball in play while out of bounds. Learn the rules.
9 points. 6 came on that drive. Instead LSU would’ve had the ball in plus territory.
The fact you try to argue this play was inconsequential to the game is itself evidence of your unseriousness.
Someone would have to had not watched the game to believe that. Didn’t realize you were so young.
The review was not overturned because it was ruled “inconclusive”.
Your crackpot theory is just that.
quote:
Illegal touching is if he comes back in bounds and catches it.
It’s not called illegal catching… and no it’s also a penalty if he touches the ball in play while out of bounds. Learn the rules.
quote:
Alabama won by two scores.
9 points. 6 came on that drive. Instead LSU would’ve had the ball in plus territory.
The fact you try to argue this play was inconsequential to the game is itself evidence of your unseriousness.
Someone would have to had not watched the game to believe that. Didn’t realize you were so young.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:48 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:47 am to 3down10
double post
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:48 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 2:49 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
It’s not called illegal catching… and no it’s also a penalty if he touches the ball in play while out of bounds. Learn the rules.
Are you drunk?
It's not a penalty if he touches the ball while out of bounds, the ball itself becomes out of bounds. Because the ball is out of bounds the moment/instant it touches something out of bounds.
You ever see where player stands out of bounds and then reaches in and touches the ball on a kickoff to make it out of bounds and a penalty? Same exact thing. The ball was in bounds as far as it's position, but out of bounds the moment the out of bounds player touched it.
quote:
9 points. 6 came on that drive. Instead LSU would’ve had the ball in plus territory.
The fact you try to argue this play was inconsequential to the game is itself evidence of your unseriousness.
Someone would have to had not watched the game to believe that. Didn’t realize you were so young.
3 points came on that drive, and you threw an interception on your next drive.
I've watched Alabama win 9 national championships. Hopefully I can grab another before my shift is up.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 2:53 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 3:00 am to 3down10
Jones jumps from in bounds, so he would not have even been considered out of bounds until his feet were on the ground out of bounds.
Again… on the record, the official on field explanation given was that Peterson caught the ball out of bounds.
The review of that was not overturned because it was ruled “inconclusive evidence”.
You are retroactively framing this as a call that was in fact never the call made by officials.
Yes, instead of getting the ball in plus territory.
You make yourself look stupid daily.
Again… on the record, the official on field explanation given was that Peterson caught the ball out of bounds.
The review of that was not overturned because it was ruled “inconclusive evidence”.
You are retroactively framing this as a call that was in fact never the call made by officials.
quote:
3 points came on that drive.
Yes, instead of getting the ball in plus territory.
You make yourself look stupid daily.
This post was edited on 10/11/26 at 3:03 am
Posted on 10/11/26 at 3:03 am to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
Jones jumps from in bounds, so he would not have even been considered out of bounds until his feet were on the ground.
Again… on the record, the official on field explanation given was that Peterson caught the ball out of bounds.
The review was not overturned because it was ruled “inconclusive”.
You are retroactively making up a reason for the call that was never the call.
He did catch the ball out of bounds. I just told you why the ball was out of bounds.
I'm done with this. You'll just have to stay mad about it. It doesn't really matter, I just enjoy the oddities of rules like this.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 3:06 am to 3down10
quote:
He did catch the ball out of bounds. I just told you why the ball was out of bounds.
Two different things homer.
“Caught the ball out of bounds” is not equivalent to “incomplete because an out of bounds player touched the ball first”.
Jones touches the ball after Peterson catches it anyway.
Glad to see you guys get fricked by refs today.
Posted on 10/11/26 at 3:07 am to 3down10
I'd love to think the Bama admin will go to the SEC and demand action about the refs, but they will sit on their hands and take it up the azz.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News