If that ball is in the end zone, that's a TD though right?? I would have to think so.
Printable View
If that ball is in the end zone, that's a TD though right?? I would have to think so.
Should have phrased it differently. Seeing something bad happen means nothing to me either way. Bad shit happens all the time. Blitzer should have went low though and he would have finished the game on the field.Quote:
Originally Posted by ByeSonBusiness
Now go back to your HYB.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This wasnt an issue of phrasing. You specifically said you wanted to see him get hurt due to your feelings about the school he goes to.Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthernBison
Nice attempt at walking it back.
I’m with Business on this one Northern - you made a very offensive and aggressive statement that was a bad look for this fan base. Not cool. You should seek help. Further - you should consider what you post on a social media platform that persists FOREVER. Not smart and extremely not cool. You are no friend of mine and will not be until you seek help.Quote:
Originally Posted by ByeSonBusiness
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
If they called it a catch and fumble as it happened, and then use real-time replay, how the hell can they reverse what they saw live? Makes no sense. They are basically seeing the same exact thing. Now, if they used slow-motion, I could maybe see it, but on this play, all 3 scenarios yield a catch and fumble for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyBison
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It should be ruled the same whether in the end zone or field of play other than obviously no catch/fumble option. That would be catch/TD. But catch or no catch should be the same in either case. If you are ruling incomplete here you would rule incomplete in the end zone too.Quote:
Originally Posted by stevdock
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
And your judgement isn't wrong either. This was that tight. What we don't know is if the HL ruled catch/fumble because he felt it was a catch or because it was a when in doubt situation and he was deferring the call to replay. Replay will take a different approach based on that decision. The rule actually says when in doubt this is incomplete (unless you have replay then let it play out).Quote:
Originally Posted by CAS4127
For those counting steps as an absolute be careful. That isn't part of the NCAA rule. It can be a factor in the decision but time is really a more key element. Slow motion helps determine if a foot was in bounds or out of bounds but on plays like this you need to focus on the real speed views.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Do on-field officials communicate there position on a play to replay official, or is it a “blind” review?Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyBison
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There was an official on the sideline that was in perfect position and immediately threw his beanbag signifying a catch and fumble. I really don't like that the play was reversed when there wasn't anything on the replay that says otherwise.
Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk
They are all connected via O2O radios. Something like this though could go from the covering official to the referee who then communicates with the replay official on the sideline.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAS4127
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
As I've said before, we don't know if he felt it was a catch or if it was so close he was letting the play continue because he wasn't 100% certain. Either way he throw his bean bag. Replay takes a different view depending on that decision. They may still have ended up with the same result.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldmantutters
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Right, understand that, but do on-field officials tell replay that they, in this instance, let pay go but thought it wasn’t a catch? If that’s the case, then I lose a bit of confidence in replay decision. IMO, on-field officials shouldn’t communicate their thought patterns to replay official. To do so taints the replay official’s review. Hope you understand what I’m getting at.Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyBison
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They very much tell the replay official what was ruled. It determines what they can and can't rule on. For example, if a receiver steps out of bounds and then is first to touch it but the official said there was contact then replay can only confirm if there was contact. They NEED to know that information. Some things are required to be announced on PA to be considered (i.e. there is no pass interference because the ball was tipped). Replay can only get involved if that ruling is announced and then they can only review of the pass was touched. That's what happened in the Bison playoff several years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAS4127
Without replay this is likely a when in doubt situation and supposed to be ruled incomplete. I assume replay applies the same logic of they are told when in doubt on the field. They could still determine it was definitely a catch in their judgement and this it would have stood regardless of what the on field official ruled.
When I saw it live in real time my first reaction was incompleta. He didn't have it long enough. Not sure if my grader would agree or if the replay grader on this play agreed.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
I’m not talking about “announced” ruling, I’m asking whether on-field officials tell replay guy, basically, “ignore on-field announcement, I just let this play out so you could review.”. Can you get where that might skew what replay guys decides?Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyBison
If on-field guy doesn’t say anything about his/her thought process and just says “review announced call please”, that makes a difference to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And I said that would be communicated because it has an impact on how the replay official needs to look at it. The rule very specifically states the when in doubt situation on that play is incomplete unless you have replay then let it play out ruled as catch/fumble. In that case he wasn't sure it was a catch so then replay would look at it and make the decision of catch/no catch on his own. If the covering official felt it was a catch then replay uses indisputable video evidence needed to overturn it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAS4127
This is not black and white so one answer isn't necessarily right and one is wrong. You want to defer to the on field official as the starting point so you need to know what his actual ruling is.
If you don't like this approach then you don't like replay. If you think there is an absolute right and wrong on every play you will never be happy with the game. If you think replay is the perfect cure all then you will be continually disappointed. Nothing about football is perfect. That is the beauty of the sport. Everyone is striving for perfection but nobody ever involved in any game ever achieves it.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
BTW...thank you to everyone for a very civil conversation and asking legitimate questions.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
It would be pretty entertaining if these conversations were public and available to fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyBison
Well... in some cases they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by NDSUSR
[White hat forgets that mic is hot] "We're gonna hafta review that for PR purposes..." :rofl:
And thanks for your expert input/feedback, Brian.Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyBison
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Some can be quite interesting. If we ever meet in person I'll share some over a drink. Most are downright boring and just fact sharing discussions and confirming enforcement/result. You would get bored listening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor Chaos
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
I’m really starting to hate the college replay system. A lot of instances where officials are letting the play continue and not making a call because they know they have instant replay. I thought the point of replay was to only overturn a call if it’s definitive to overturn the call on the field. So many cases of that not happening. Kinda wish it was more like the NFL. Way too many play stoppages. The biggest argument I can think of against that is that the college officials are no where close to the level of the NFL. Especially in certain conferences.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You could question any replay system that way. They almost always start out just correcting obvious errors on a limited basis. Then it expands every year because people have this misconception it can "fix" anything. They don't realize not all calls are black and white but replay forces it to become more black and white. Two football examples are the definition of a catch and illegal substitution. The first will always a point of debate. Before replay many catch/no catch decisions were based on the feel and some philosophy. But if it looked like a catch it was ruled a catch. But to get replay involved you have to try to remove the gray. Terms like "football move" and "survive the ground" came into the game. Some of that is good because it has made the call a little easier and more consistent. But it has also turned plays that many people would probably consider a catch be correctly ruled as incomplete (the infamous Calvin Johnson and Dez Bryant plays). They keep tweaking it at all levels and because a catch/fumble and forward/backward decisions are hard to reverse if they rule incomplete on the field the philosophy with replay is to let it play out. Now you have situations where the replay official isn't confirming/overturning the ruling on the field but actually making the ruling. The same people screaming that's not right are screaming for the replay official to rule on OPI/DPI which is even more subjective. The other example is illegal substitution. The defense is trying to run off a player just before the snap. He's a yard from the sideline when the ball is snapped. By philosophy that was not considered a foul because he had no impact on the play. But it became reviewable and it now called by the letter of the law. The NFL rule is similar and Bill Belichek (for all his faults he knows the rules as well as any coach) threw a challenge flag at a key point in a key game and got a first down because of it. Do we really need to be that technical with the substitution rule? That's debatable. But that's what you get when you implement replay.Quote:
Originally Posted by marenlee
I think ultimately replay is both good and bad. It helps with the big calls in critical points of the game and helps with the obvious black and white type of calls. The more subjectivity and judgement you put into it the more debate plays into it. Not to mention the flow of the game impact. I think basketball is even worse at the end of a game. Someone once said replay in football has improved accuracy from 96% to 98%. Is that 2% really worth it?
I think a lot of frustration with replay is the almost refusal to admit officiating mistakes. And I know this is more of an NFL gripe than an NCAA gripe because there are more eyes on the (at most) 16 games/week. I know us casual fans have a misconstrued understanding of the rule book(s), but I also have watched a lot of football and know when something doesn't smell right; don't spit in my face and tell me it's raining. If an official makes a mistake, because hey, shit happens fast out there, admit it.
Officiating mistakes are admitted to all the time. TV rules experts disagree with calls on the field every game. Conferences and the NFL issue statements to teams about calls and those sometimes make it to the media. One reason it may look different to you is there aren't nearly as many mistakes as you think there are. I see a lot of situations where people get up in arms about an incorrect call and they actually got it right. Sometimes that is due to fan bias. You see it how you want to see it. Bison fans by and large saw the pass against ISU as forward and ISU fans and everyone else who are sick of the Bison saw it as backward. Another reason is there are some calls that aren't necessarily right or wrong. They are close and could go either way or are very complex situations that are addressed as best they can in real time and with what replay allows. You would view that as a mistake, but the conference or league views it as a judgement call and there is no need to comment on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by oldmantutters
If replay sees a mistake they will overturn the call because they are graded too. Their post season assignments (the wholly grail for any official) and renewal for the following season are based entirely on those grades. They wouldn't risk not overturning something because it would make the on field official look bad and risk getting a downgrade themselves. But mistakes still happen. No different than the OSU QB and WR reading the play differently and the INT happens at the end of the game. Or the Seahawks last night completely forgetting the play clock was running and getting the very costly DOG penalty.
After watching fb for decades now, I would actually prefer it would go back to the way it was before replay. Officials sometimes make mistakes just like players or coaches, so the human element was part of it. If anything, it seems like there is more controversy now than there was before the use of replay. I know some of that is due to more media (social and traditional) but I don't get the sense that the outcomes are really much better than they used to be. It seems like there is just as much angst, if not more, than before. Plus things have gotten much more technical (not just due to replay, but rule changes in general) and common sense seems to have gone out the door.
Just my opinion.
I thought it was a catch, fumble and recovery but to be fair, I have not watched it in real speed. I'll go look for that clip.
Just watched it at full speed and in slow motion. I understand what people are saying about it looking very different...the real time view to me looked incomplete and all of the slow motion looked complete. But then, how long do you need to hold it to possess it? A football move? How many players and coaches can even define what that is? So I'm not arguing the call as much as suggesting they need to simplify the rules to reflect the understanding of those involved in the game because I don't think there is alignment.
I don't mind replay so much. I think people (all fans in general) just need to accept and move on never has a mistake been overturned after the replay official makes a confirmation or overturn. the only time I got perturbed by it was that EWU game where they went to review must of been every other play it seemed like and the game took 4 1/2 -5 hours or something.
That said many of here still carry the Jenson fumble memory to this day, luckily for us it has been somewhat negated by a large number of championships. Makes forgetting about it a lot easier at least for me. We've beat EWU multiple times since then so that helps as well.
Sent from my Pixel 3a XL on a bullet train from Hillsboro.
I'd disagree, I think replay is a good thing. If you have the technology you should use it. It messes with game flow sometimes and even the replay official screws up sometimes but replay corrects a lot more mistakes than it makes in the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gully
Agree. Replay has not improved the game and the more they inject it the worse it gets. The NFL learned that lesson once before, but forgot it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gully
With the proliferation of bowl games they do not seem to mean as much as they used to. With 39 of them that means 60% of the FBS teams go to one.
I think that guy just gave Skylar two shots of coffee!
LSU CLEMSON for the title. 2 possessions 2 punts. exciting atmosphere
cheer for NDSU kid jimmy burrow so Clemson isnt a dynasty?
or cheer for Dabo cuz he likes NDSU hmmm
Defenses flying out there
4 possessions 4 punts. lame
It's called defense.Quote:
Originally Posted by El_Chapo
Oh great indybison is going to take me to the wood shed now!
clemson 7-0. savvy on suicide watch after that hot knife thru butter TD drive
I have no bias in this game. But looks like two obvious DPI's and one OPI sorely missed by the officials on LSU.
Lmao as soon as I saw that hit I thought, "indy gonna be feeling validated."Quote:
Originally Posted by scottietohottie