You need to go to bed, man. You're seeing every close play as a conspiracy against us. It was close, but it snuck inside the post.DungeonRealm wrote: ↑Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:18 pmThis is one of the most rigged games in the history of sports, GA ST gets zero credit and zero respect
we got away w stuff too - our DB held the WR for GSU (BAD) on a throw to the endzone late in the game. BAD - and they just let it go. they were letting all DBs play.DungeonRealm wrote: ↑Sat Sep 07, 2019 10:35 pmAnd pass interference on 4th down play of course does not get called
0 respect goes out to these Sun Belt refs and GA ST, game was gift wrapped to them all day
I know it's not worth going over something that can't be changed. I wish I understood more why a play like the interception wasn't reviewed over the fumble call that was reversed.
It think that is what happened. FU took a time out and I assume the FU people upstairs said it wasn't worth challenging. It sure looked like it was. On the interception it is on a long list why DB's are not WR's. Looked like he started to run before he caught it. In real time I thought it was going to be a pick 6. He had room to run. In reference to CLempson last year the one I remember was when we had them backed up with 4 minutes left in the half and it was still only 13-0. Lawrence threw a pass to the sidelines on 3rd and long and it was ruled a catch. One camera looked like the receiver was inbounds but another camera showed his foot was clearly on the line but they kept showing the one that was in CU's favor and of course that one play opened the flood gates. Instead of us having the ball at midfield late in the half they go down and score and then added another score at the end of the half and the game was over.paladinduece wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:19 amNot saying that it was, but a lot of times they will look at it and in their opinion it wasn't close enough for a review that requires stoppage of play. Similar to all scoring plays are reviewed, but if there is no question they don't hold up the game. If that were the case I am surprised because it took me watching the replay to see if it was or wasn't a catch.
I was frustrated by the review of the fumble and non-review of the INT but Furman did have a challenge as I understand it and I think that was the purpose of the Timeout and WE decided not to challenge.. a little odd in my opinion as the ESPN announcers thought it might be a pick but if we decided not to challenge that's not as much a conspiracy....AstroDin wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 7:55 amI know it's not worth going over something that can't be changed. I wish I understood more why a play like the interception wasn't reviewed over the fumble call that was reversed.
I'm sure it's just coincidence but last year against Clemson all reviewed plays went for the Tigers.
The only thing I can think of concerning the interception is as Blackshear controlled the ball against his shoulder pads his foot did land in play (you can tell by the turf beads) but his foot was on the line.
Football is a game of inches - we lost literally by a few inches Saturday. The Dins will learn from it. Put the hammer down men!
That's my interpretation of the situation as well. It was difficult looking up over my shoulder at the jumbotron and getting a good look at the interception. We were on the 50 yard line, back row, and the TV camera scaffold was directly behind us. Plus, the review they kept showing was from behind the defender, so it was very difficult to see whether or not he had possession of the ball prior to stepping out of bounds. I'm assuming those watching at home saw more camera angles than those of us who were there in person.FUpaladin08 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:09 amI’m a few days removed from watching the game live at The Ted so my memory could be fuzzy, plus they didn’t give the best replays on the Jumbotron. The fumble was ruled a turnover and the interception was ruled out of bounds right? Isn’t the NCAA rule that all turnovers are reviewed and do not require a challenge? So that is why the review would have “come from upstairs” on the fumble and not the interception. It would require a challenge from Furman to have that reviewed. We took a time out and clearly decided there wouldn’t be enough to overturn. I guess if we had challenged we risked losing a time out. Not 100% sure that’s the NCAA rule, but I know that’s the rule in NFL.
Again, a little fuzzy but I think the difference came down the the call on the field being incomplete.
Had a chance to look in slow motion and it was not an interception the call was correct.MNORM wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:24 amThat's my interpretation of the situation as well. It was difficult looking up over my shoulder at the jumbotron and getting a good look at the interception. We were on the 50 yard line, back row, and the TV camera scaffold was directly behind us. Plus, the review they kept showing was from behind the defender, so it was very difficult to see whether or not he had possession of the ball prior to stepping out of bounds. I'm assuming those watching at home saw more camera angles than those of us who were there in person.FUpaladin08 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 09, 2019 11:09 amI’m a few days removed from watching the game live at The Ted so my memory could be fuzzy, plus they didn’t give the best replays on the Jumbotron. The fumble was ruled a turnover and the interception was ruled out of bounds right? Isn’t the NCAA rule that all turnovers are reviewed and do not require a challenge? So that is why the review would have “come from upstairs” on the fumble and not the interception. It would require a challenge from Furman to have that reviewed. We took a time out and clearly decided there wouldn’t be enough to overturn. I guess if we had challenged we risked losing a time out. Not 100% sure that’s the NCAA rule, but I know that’s the rule in NFL.
Again, a little fuzzy but I think the difference came down the the call on the field being incomplete.
