No Sparky
- Thread starter Catch50
- Start date
- Status
No, you just started another thread on the subject when you didn't get what you wanted somewhere else.
I researched it for the last half hour. Plenty of others around the country feel it was a bad call. Some feel the review rules should be changed.
I researched it for the last half hour. Plenty of others around the country feel it was a bad call. Some feel the review rules should be changed.
The only thing I "wanted" was for more people to see what I said. I'm certainly getting nothing else from this.
Everyone saw what you said, "numerous times", in more then 1 thread. BUT when something like this has been hashed out for 4 days & the MASSES(including national and conference representatives) have stated the ruling was correct give it a rest.
What??? Do you think Nebraska is the majority? Let's be honest here. For whatever reason, a lot of people around this country don't like Nebraska football. For people who are somewhat serious about college football, I often detect it in their tone. I live in on the east coast. I'll only feel confident in the Huskers again when they start winning again without the controversy.
The fact is I don't read this page much anymore. I read some posts about this topic but did not see one state what I did. If somebody did state it, good. From the reaction I received, it seemed like a fair chance nobody had said it the way I said it.
Not to get too involved in this peeing match but Sparky help me out. Did the B1G actually say it was the right call or that the "mechanics" was handled correctly. There was no right or wrong "call" since it was purely a judgement call but the replay mechanics was handled properly is what I read. IF what I read is correct then to say it was correct or incorrect for that matter is a matter of judgment and not exactly what the big boys said. so if it isn't called it is correct and if it is called it is correct because it is essentially in the hands of one guy at once instance in time who happened to be looking at the exact right place and the exact right time while running down the field. Think how hard that all is. They (officials) get hammered on but really, how many of us could even come close to doing what they do?
Last edited:
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
The minority is us, I've gotten nothing but crap for this, lol, I'm sorry but most fans think we got one handed to us. I disagree but that is the perception.
I responded to the quote above in quotes about changing the rule. If you would rather completely switch gears let me know. Lets figure this out. First you stated that Plenty of others around the country feel it was a bad call(not even close to a majority including officials).I refuted that statement according to reports from B10 officials & analysts across the country. Then you switch gears & want to talk about Nebraska football not being liked by most people around the country.
For whatever reason, a lot of people around this country don't like Nebraska football.
Lets talk about this statement. From what I've gathered MOST everyone( no scientific analysis ) want the HUSKERS to be in the mix. We're a Blue Blood. They like us & want us to get back where we belong. A lot just feel that it will be difficult with the changing face of college football but only a small minority don't like us. As a matter of fact they respect us.
I'm not special but people like you are boring.
I'd rather be liked for a being a good program. We are far, far from that in my opinion. HCMR is a good and decent man but I don't think we will ever win a Big 10 Championship with him. Or the Western Division.
From the NCAA rule book.
6. Receiver A88 is running near the sideline. He steps out of bounds on his own, returns
and establishes inbounds, leaps to receive a forward pass, grasps the ball while
airborne, and lands inbounds with the ball in his possession.
RULING: Foul for illegally touching a forward pass in the field of play. A88 did not regain
his eligibility before touching the ball. Loss of down at the previous spot.
7. Receiver A88 is running near the sideline. He is blocked out of bounds by a defender.
From out of bounds he returns and establishes inbounds, leaps to receive a forward
pass, grasps the ball while airborne, and lands inbounds with the ball in his possession.
RULING: Complete pass. A88 did not lose his eligibility when he was blocked out of
bounds, and he had established in bounds before touching the ball.
You have blamed BR for the route he ran, and discounted the fact that he turned to look for the ball while still in bounds, contact was made, causing him to go out of bounds, at what appears to be the time he is trying to move back around behind the defender, who appears to know exactly what he was doing, trying to run him out of bounds.
You are right video doesn't lie, but video is only as good as the angle and distance. The field judge had a better view than any ESPN camera or cell phone video. This play happened in the worst place possible for good camera angles, the sideline near the endzone.
The field judge made the call. His view was better than anyone elses. His judgement, and the video from the end zone shows much better than the overhead shots, was that the defender's actions caused Reilly to go out of bounds and he did not voluntary run out of bounds. Correct call.
It does not matter WHERE or HOW BR ran prior to the contact. Had BR ran our of bounds and NEVER bent touched, the yes, illegal touching, but that is not what happened.
The defender's actions of falling down out of bounds lead credibility to the field judge's opinion that Reilly did not go out of bound on his own. Why? Because he wasn't going for or even looking for the ball, he was looking back to try to avoid a flag!
You are adamant about something that the video angles available could not and can not prove, and absolutely do not prove the field judge was wrong! But you appear hell bent and you just can't accept the fact that the field judge was correct.
Let it go. You are not correct. Based on the totality of the circumstances the field judge made a call that according to the rules is correct.
You may not like the rule, just like a lot of people thought Dallas got screwed in the playoffs last season, but not liking the rule does not make the field judge's ruling wrong.
I've heard "spirt of the rule" arguments. Spirit of the rule is that a receiver can not knowingly and intentionally run out of bounds in an attempt to get away from a defender and get past him. That is not what happened here.
This was a VERTICAL route. Had the LOS been the Nebraska 30 instead of the MSU 30, BR wouldn't have been slowing up when he did, and might have been further past the defender thus wouldn't have had contact, but that isn't what happened. There was less than a minute left. Had BR ran straight, do you not think the defender wouldn't have still tried to pinch him to the sideline????? Hell yes he would have.
So drop your "This was a tainted victory, Nebraska is unworthy, I'd have coached the receivers better soap box."
I'm just happy I'm not redundant. That would be the worst.
No amount of explanation is going to work. It doesn't matter. He's pissed because it's a good win for Riley, and he doesn't want Riley to be the coach. Period.
Hell bent? No.
If Reilly had not started as close to sideline as he did, he would have had more room to stay in bounds. He clearly did not run straight down the field .. he ran at an angle. If you think Nebraska (or any other team) is going get away with that all the time, you're delusional.
I never said Nebraska is unworthy. I know how hard these kids and coaches work.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
How do you know how hard they work living on the East coast? I know you think football plays have to be ran in right angles and straight lines.... there really is no point in explaining it to you anymore. Too many layers of derp to get through.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
The defender was the major factor in where BR ended up. You think that he wouldn't have effected his route no matter where he went? Hell yes he would have.
This was less than a minute left. The defender had to have known, anything not obviously blatant was not going to be called.
Dude...I've been a football official for over 30 years. I think I'm a tad more qualified to respond to this question than some bitter immature idiot like yourself. But keep posting. It's great entertainment.
Keep posting catch50. With each new post you seem just that much smarter and more respectable.
- Status
