Jump to content

SEC Refs Suck


Nueces River Rat

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, El Squared said:

Until the refs have at least superficial accountability, they will continue to pervert calls and sometimes game outcomes. If the league doesn’t police it, unplanned chaos will find its way in.

The Refs have had this issue for over 100 years. Surely any chaos has already inflicted us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

The Refs have had this issue for over 100 years. Surely any chaos has already inflicted us.

while true, the first 90 years didnt have single games with literally millions of dollars at stake, thinking in terms of college football playoff implications, NLI money, Coaches bonuses, and yes, maybe even sports gambling  (although obviously gambling probably had millions on the line 10 years ago)

 

I really dont understand why Beemer didnt pop off about the refs, because they got absolutely jobbed out of a for-sure pick 6 (the "roughing the passer" after the INT bullshit), and that god awful OPI.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Constant said:

IMG_7648.thumb.jpeg.130315d0724a60f3ce6327703357986c.jpeg

This one pisses me off the most right now. Spotted 2 and half yards short of where the ball is. 

His hip was literally lying past the 28 yard line. A lot of things can be explained by incompetence. It doesn’t feel like that spot, let alone the review, is one of those things. 

Edited by Doc Daneeka
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JBJ said:

Both of the USCe called back interception returns were correct calls.

the 2nd one absolutely was NOT correct.

once the pic is thrown the QB is legal fucking tender.... now you cant BLOW HIM UP anymore, but you sure as fuck can redirect his motion out of the way to make sure hes not involved in stopping the play.   and that was what was done on that play.  it wasnt a dirty hit, it wasnt an illegal hit.  what it was was the refs defaulting to protecting the QB even after he fucks up and throws a pic.    once the change of poession happens, hes considered a defender capable of making a tackle.

 

and he was barely fucking pushed in the grand scheme of football hits.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

once the pic is thrown the QB is legal fucking tender.... now you cant BLOW HIM UP anymore, but you sure as fuck can redirect his motion out of the way to make sure hes not involved in stopping the play.   and that was what was done on that play.  it wasnt a dirty hit, it wasnt an illegal hit.  what it was was the refs defaulting to protecting the QB even after he fucks up and throws a pic.    once the change of poession happens, hes considered a defender capable of making a tackle.

People on Twitter are highlighting the wrong player.  The QB absolutely was gratutiously blown up.

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx-Ai_6hwGcpC2rCLhD0bbYj8fU-fhtaVe?si=355RZTpSJWbgk0jn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, T’Boo Ted Marshall said:

Shouldn't the hit on the LSU QB have been a personal foul since the INT had already taken place?  It happened after change of possession so I don't see why it nullified the INT.  

I'm absolutely confused by that as well. If the QB threw a pick, and then during the return someone had an illegal hit/block, I don't see how on earth the interception gets wiped out. The return for TD, sure. But to negate the entire play? Why isn't this being talked about more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, T’Boo Ted Marshall said:

Shouldn't the hit on the LSU QB have been a personal foul since the INT had already taken place?  It happened after change of possession so I don't see why it nullified the INT.  

That’s because it didn’t nullify the INT. SC got the ball at the 10.

28 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Why isn't this being talked about more?

Because that’s not what happened. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Helobious said:

That’s because it didn’t nullify the INT. SC got the ball at the 10.

Because that’s not what happened. 

I haven't watched the full sequence. I heard they called "roughing the passer", which is a confusing penalty to call given that he was not a passer, nor did his team possess the ball. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, JBJ said:

People on Twitter are highlighting the wrong player.  The QB absolutely was gratutiously blown up.

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx-Ai_6hwGcpC2rCLhD0bbYj8fU-fhtaVe?si=355RZTpSJWbgk0jn

He wasn’t remotely blown up. He was pushed on the shoulder. 

If they want to call it a crack back block, sigh, fine, maybe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pam Cummings said:

I haven't watched the full sequence. I heard they called "roughing the passer", which is a confusing penalty to call given that he was not a passer, nor did his team possess the ball. 

You heard wrong. Like, completely wrong. The refs called unsportsmanlike conduct for an illegal block. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the 2nd one absolutely was NOT correct.
once the pic is thrown the QB is legal fucking tender.... now you cant BLOW HIM UP anymore, but you sure as fuck can redirect his motion out of the way to make sure hes not involved in stopping the play.   and that was what was done on that play.  it wasnt a dirty hit, it wasnt an illegal hit.  what it was was the refs defaulting to protecting the QB even after he fucks up and throws a pic.    once the change of poession happens, hes considered a defender capable of making a tackle.
 
and he was barely fucking pushed in the grand scheme of football hits.

I think they just saw him either flopping or laying on the ground and assumed he got hit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2024 at 9:10 AM, Underdog said:

Didn't see that one, there was a play in the UK/UGa game where you UK was called for facemask,correct call, but on that same play a UK ballcarrier had his facemask grabbed and helmet eventually came off... No flag on that.  So what should've been offsetting penalties was the penalty on UK alone.  It wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game most likely but bullshit is bullshit. 

Well there was the unsportsmanlike on Kentucky where he drove the guy down and tackled him blocking.  It could have been both ways, but probably should have been just on UK.  But after that was over a different Georgia player comes over and shoves the UK player down right by the refs.  That should definitely been unsportsmanlike, but they didn't call it.

6 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

More annoying is really starting to see a concerted effort by broadcasters/commentators to back the refs and paint whatever picture is needed to support the ref calls even in cases where it seems obvious they got it wrong.

Yeah.  I've seen a lot of that this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

More annoying is really starting to see a concerted effort by broadcasters/commentators to back the refs and paint whatever picture is needed to support the ref calls even in cases where it seems obvious they got it wrong.

That's a product of every network deciding they need a member of the officiating fraternity on payroll to defend every remotely controversial call.  An uphauling development.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JBJ said:

People on Twitter are highlighting the wrong player.  The QB absolutely was gratutiously blown up.

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx-Ai_6hwGcpC2rCLhD0bbYj8fU-fhtaVe?si=355RZTpSJWbgk0jn

 

JBJ, you need to watch this video, Pate flat out points out how that was a normal hit.  QB was GOING AFTER THE RUNNER, and the DT shoved him on his  right shoulder pad with 2 hands, he didnt hit him with his body, he was clearly facing the QBs front, so its not a block in back, its not a hit to head or neck area, its a fucking block that applied enough impact to take the QB out of the play. 

 

55 minutes ago, satyanash said:

 

and I completely missed the Georgia facemask call last night, i must have been away from the TV, but the mans helmet is ripped off and a facemask isnt called on that player??  I mean holy fuck thats a 30 yard mistake by the refs there.... applying 15 yards to the offense, instead of 15 to the defense with the fresh set of downs.

thats inexcusable 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, gofuckyourself said:

Yep, worst call I've seen. Ejection for targeting. Aggy was something like 2nd and 35 and it gave them a first down, then scored a TD afterwards.

 

It is absolutely targeting since 2022.  official needs 3 things to call targeting.

1. Is the player defenseless?

2. Is there an indicator?

3. Was the crown of the helmet used to make forcible contact on the opponent, or, if the player was defenseless, do we have forcible contact above the shoulders?

Indicators per the NCAA rulebook

  • Launch: A player leaving his feet to attack by upward thrust of the body in the head or neck area.
  • Crouch: A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to the head or neck area, even though both feet are still on the ground.
  • Leading with the helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack the head or neck area forcibly.
  • Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.

Bottom line - good call, correct call for aggy

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For sure the flag was thrown on the South Carolina defender because of the Latin American Futbol style embellishment by Nuss. That being said, you cannot go head hunt the QB after a turnover and players know that and any good team gets that coached into them. You could tell the defender knew he was right on the line when he threw his hands up to say “I didn’t do anything!” which actually means I did something but please don’t throw a flag on me. 

Just stay away from hitting the QB. Nuss was not about to tackle anyone. You put yourself in that position needlessly if you do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was less confusing when they had a separate call for spearing that was not a part of the targeting call.

But yeah, spearing is still against the rules and the rule exists to discourage defensive players from lowering their heads and causing injury to themselves.

I

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, AUS-97HORN said:

while true, the first 90 years didnt have single games with literally millions of dollars at stake, thinking in terms of college football playoff implications, NLI money, Coaches bonuses, and yes, maybe even sports gambling  (although obviously gambling probably had millions on the line 10 years ago)

Maybe not, but the stakes were still extremely high. Teams cheated their ass off 90 years ago just as much as they ever did.

I mean there weren't millions of dollars at stake in 1992, but the refs still made sure Baylor won Grant Teaff's last game.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Maybe not, but the stakes were still extremely high. Teams cheated their ass off 90 years ago just as much as they ever did.

I mean there weren't millions of dollars at stake in 1992, but the refs still made sure Baylor won Grant Teaff's last game.

I remember that, and I'll never not be pissed about it.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gofuckyourself said:

Yep, worst call I've seen. Ejection for targeting. Aggy was something like 2nd and 35 and it gave them a first down, then scored a TD afterwards.

 

Did no one explain to the refs that aggy likes being targeted in the ass?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Maybe not, but the stakes were still extremely high. Teams cheated their ass off 90 years ago just as much as they ever did.

I mean there weren't millions of dollars at stake in 1992, but the refs still made sure Baylor won Grant Teaff's last game.

Forward progress stopped, my ass. And the beauty part is that that bullshit call wouldn’t have been reviewable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dcar00 said:

It is absolutely targeting since 2022.  official needs 3 things to call targeting.

1. Is the player defenseless?

2. Is there an indicator?

3. Was the crown of the helmet used to make forcible contact on the opponent, or, if the player was defenseless, do we have forcible contact above the shoulders?

Indicators per the NCAA rulebook

  • Launch: A player leaving his feet to attack by upward thrust of the body in the head or neck area.
  • Crouch: A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to the head or neck area, even though both feet are still on the ground.
  • Leading with the helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack the head or neck area forcibly.
  • Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.

Bottom line - good call, correct call for aggy

Well, you covered all the salient points and backed it up with virtually unimpeachable documentation.

But it's something that benefited aggy, so I am forced to retort with

goodnight-my.gif.5aba9a6049600861ebe7baad2a875f96.gif

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is absolutely targeting since 2022.  official needs 3 things to call targeting.

1. Is the player defenseless?

2. Is there an indicator?

3. Was the crown of the helmet used to make forcible contact on the opponent, or, if the player was defenseless, do we have forcible contact above the shoulders?

Indicators per the NCAA rulebook

  • Launch: A player leaving his feet to attack by upward thrust of the body in the head or neck area.
  • Crouch: A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to the head or neck area, even though both feet are still on the ground.
  • Leading with the helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack the head or neck area forcibly.
  • Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.

Bottom line - good call, correct call for aggy


If this is in regards to the Aggy call, he didn’t target the areas mentioned in #3.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watched the ‘69 Arkansas game for the hell of it the other night. It was beautiful. No bringing out the chains. No “WAS HIS KNEE DOWN BEFORE CROSSING THE PLAIN”. No intention roughness. Non of that crap. Just line up and play. Refs were basically invisible as they should be. It was very refreshing. Then I watched the aggy-Florida game Saturday and it was a non stop flag fest. Just awful. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...