re: The catch not catch in 4th

Gotcha.

That view isn’t one I’m talking about. Stadium view looked straight toward him from Florida end zone between his arms.

I think it went forearm to forearm.

That picture doesn't show the ball hitting the ground that I can decipher

Shows the ball rotated clockwise on the turf between his hands.

Rogers is a jackal, I would just as well have Hunter Biden as an announcer than that douche nozzle.

I really don't understand the controversy. Seeing it real time and on several replays, as well as different photo angles, it's readily apparent that the ball hit the ground. Not even close.

quote:

---

I really don't understand the controversy. Seeing it real time and on several replays, as well as different photo angles, it's readily apparent that the ball hit the ground. Not even close.

---

You've answered your own question. It's a manufactured controversy promoted by the TV announcers to suggest that SEC officials are helping UGA win games, just like what happened in the Auburn game. Sean McDonough (Auburn game) and Jordan Rogers (Florida game) went on and on and on about calls helping Georgia, even where there was no video to back up their claims. Even when the replay booth upheld the calls. That's favoritism by the announcing crew and it's not uncommon. Not sure about McDonough but this is nothing new for Jordan Rogers.

When it comes to propaganda, the most frequent tactic is to use "experts" or "unbiased observers" to frame the argument. That makes it harder to question the objectivity and accuracy of their statements. Media personalities embrace that image of objectivity and expertise, but they're just run of the mill propagandists. And of course the fans don't care about evidence; they'll take that "objective expert opinion" and run with it as fact, as long as it suits their purposes. That's also why you have lots of posters on SEC rant posting with no team logo or being disingenuous about their team. They can troll their rivals without being accused of fan bias; they're "objective".

It was close enough that no matter which way it was called, there's not enough video evidence to overturn.

I thought the "rules expert" said there wasn't enough evidence to overturn the call?

quote:

---

You've answered your own question. It's a manufactured controversy promoted by the TV announcers to suggest that SEC officials are helping UGA win games,

---

I don’t think it’s that.

Throughout that whole game Roger’s was trying to stir up drama. I think it’s the booth trying to add excitement that the call could be reversed and there was a chance at last minute heroics.

But alas…it wasn’t meant to be. Sorry Jordan.

The real drama here was FL missing yet another wide open receiver behind our coverage.

We’re fortunate it wasn’t called a completion in the field. There’s nothing “conclusive” caught on camera. I think, especially from the end zone view, it sure appears to have touched the ground but I don’t think they would’ve changed it to incomplete based on that view.