Screenshot of the overturned TD in OT
- Thread starter Moose Stuff
- Start date
CountryFrog
Active Member
Among many of the problems with the way Todd was arguing about the photo (particularly with drawing that line) is that we know from other angles that only part of Max's foot was actually on the ground. That immediately negates any overhead shot that you have because even if you say that a part of his shoe is over the line then you can't determine if it's just hovering over the line or actually touching the line. If it's not actually physically touching the line then he's not out.
Which again leads us back to the pretty clear fact that the replay booth engaged in at least some guess work in their decision which is inexcusable.
Which again leads us back to the pretty clear fact that the replay booth engaged in at least some guess work in their decision which is inexcusable.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
IMO there is absolutely zero conclusive proof he was out of bounds. Was he out of bounds? MAYBE, and quite possibly PROBABLY, but in no universe CONCLUSIVELY.
CountryFrog
Active Member
Only thing I disagree with on your post here is the "IMO" because there really is no debate at all that the replay decision was debatable.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
In my defense I added “IMO” because I feel like my opinions are basically facts unless posted in Game Day threads. I’m kidding..... kind of..... but not about the Game Day threads. I’m basically Sonny Cumbie calling plays in those things.
CountryFrog
Active Member
For people who were at the game, the video board had a better shot of this than anything I've seen on TV or internet. It was a SUPER zoomed in view of Max's foot that showed only his toe on the ground and you could actually see green between his foot and the sideline. It actually seemed like evidence to CONFIRM the call but certainly gives doubt to the reliability of the other angles that look like he MIGHT have been out.
Essentially it seems the booth simply went with the thought that "there's no way he actually stayed in bounds there" and went about trying to confirm that belief which is certainly not the mission of the replay official.
Essentially it seems the booth simply went with the thought that "there's no way he actually stayed in bounds there" and went about trying to confirm that belief which is certainly not the mission of the replay official.
Zebra Frog
KMA
The only way to have IVE is if the camera was positioned exactly down the sideline, on this play it wasn't. A camera angle from inside the line "pushes" the picture out. A camera angle shooting from outside the line "pushed" the picture in. The networks, in a lot of games, have the ability to freeze the picture and then zoom in. Some clarity is lost, but it can sometimes be a huge aid for the RO. The RO is charged with NEVER making a decision based on what he "thinks."
If this had been a play in the NFL, it would have been a stands, as they almost never confirm or overturn a call unless it is very obvious the call on the field was incorrect. They almost always try to support the call on the field. In the NCAA, this isn't always the case. And, the decision isn't always made by the RO in the booth. Most large conferences have other officials in a central command center that helps collaborate to deliver the decision.
If this had been a play in the NFL, it would have been a stands, as they almost never confirm or overturn a call unless it is very obvious the call on the field was incorrect. They almost always try to support the call on the field. In the NCAA, this isn't always the case. And, the decision isn't always made by the RO in the booth. Most large conferences have other officials in a central command center that helps collaborate to deliver the decision.
WhiteHispanicFrog
Curmudgeon
ShreveFrog
Full Member
Ok, so did you watch?
flyfishingfrog
Active Member
You mean they need a “quality” win for OU after Texas decided to be Texas and suck again
so they need a 9-0 Baylor, that way when OU kills them twice at least they can say they were the only team to beat Baylor so Baylor’s 10 win season will be better than the 8-4 season they should have had
Mean Purple
Active Member
Correct
PurpleBloodSpitter
Active Member
We didn't need 2.
Frog-in-law1995
Active Member
Mandatory to go for two in the 3rd overtime.
CountryFrog
Active Member
The other thing about this is that we just had to accept the scenario of "not enough visual evidence" last week against OSU when it seemed to a lot of people pretty clear that Stoner did NOT catch that 3rd and long pass in the end zone. Then we get a TD taken away from us this week on something that seemed to have even less video evidence to overturn.
I sure hope ADJD is raising hell with the Big 12 office over this. Not that it helps at this point, but it sure seems like we've been on the wrong end of too many of these close calls in football and basketball the last few years.
I sure hope ADJD is raising hell with the Big 12 office over this. Not that it helps at this point, but it sure seems like we've been on the wrong end of too many of these close calls in football and basketball the last few years.
PurpleBloodSpitter
Active Member
Yes... We didn't NEED it. If we didn't get it, 4th OT.
Frog-in-law1995
Active Member
Oh, I see what you mean.
Pharm Frog
Full Member
Why raise hell with the people who made the call?
Peacefrog
Degenerate
The struggle is real. You’ll bounce back soon.
CountryFrog
Active Member
Touche
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
Interesting angle. You'd think this guy, that called it a TD had a good view.
Latest posts
-
-
Frogs Advance to Third Straight NCEA Semifinal (GoFrogs - Equestrian)
- Latest: Endless Purple
-
