Officiating In the SEC

[bigbird 60,523]

WT you are reinforcing my notion that all refs are blind.

[WarTiger 3,901]

Just now, corchjay said:

You’re wrong.  Don’t want to be rude but you’re very wrong on this.  Was this game lost because of officials?  No.  But that was a horrible no call that led directly to a TD.  

 

Like I said, you have your opinion, I have mine.   You're entitled to yours and I'm entitled to mine.

[corchjay 5,311]

Just now, bigbird said:

WT you are reinforcing my notion that all refs are blind.

Lol at no point is the LSU player engaging in a block to the side or front of Miller or Dean.  I’ll attach the video.  WT please watch it at regular speed and then watch it in slow mo if needed and you’ll clearly see 2 blocks in the back at the point of attack.  

 

[WarTiger 3,901]

Just now, corchjay said:

Lol at no point is the LSU player engaging in a block to the side or front of Miller or Dean.  I’ll attach the video.  WT please watch it at regular speed and then watch it in slow mo if needed and you’ll clearly see 2 blocks in the back at the point of attack.  

 

Clearly you didn't read all of my original post.  I have the game on my computer.  I'm able to advance the video frame by frame and there's just nothing there to support a block in the back.  Sorry.       Again, it could be that you put 10 officials in a room,, 5 of them may call that a block in the back.  I just don't see enough there to warrant that flag.  Sorry.

[corchjay 5,311]

Just now, WarTiger said:

Like I said, you have your opinion, I have mine.   You're entitled to yours and I'm entitled to mine.

When you have videos evidence it’s not opinion it’s fact.  There’s no interpretation of the rule that those 2 blocks weren’t clearly in the back.

i know you’re an alpha male but it’s ok to say they missed it.  Like I said we find a way to lose that game but it was a missed no call

[WarTiger 3,901]

5 minutes ago, bigbird said:

WT you are reinforcing my notion that all refs are blind.

Comments like this enforce my notion (and its validated every day) that coaches don't know the rules.

[bigbird 60,523]

5 hours ago, WarTiger said:

Comments like this enforce my notion (and its validated every day) that coaches don't know the rules.

Some of the time, but I sure know a block in the back when I see it.

[aujeff11 6,243]

I actually agree with WT that it wasn’t block in the back on the return. 

 

I was the only poster that asked during the gamethread why the refs  didn’t call targeting on the LB that launched into Stidham’s head though and still believe it to be targeting.

Also, Gus didn’t even notice that time was inappropriately taken off the clock. That’s on us.

[WarTiger 3,901]

Just now, corchjay said:

When you have videos evidence it’s not opinion it’s fact.  There’s no interpretation of the rule that those 2 blocks weren’t clearly in the back.    I used the exact same video evidence dude.   There's just nothing there.    Take off the orange and blue glasses.

i know you’re an alpha male but it’s ok to say they missed it.  Like I said we find a way to lose that game but it was a missed no call   I'll be the first one to say when I think they screwed up.  I've done it repeatedly in this forum.  Clearly you don't read much.    Go read the football rules/interpretations thread.  You may learn something.  

 

[muxi87 148]

We lost...and I'm sick of Gus.

so we all agree there...

How anyone other than Ray Charles didn't see a block in the back there is beyond my wildest imagination...  I didn't photoshop that pic I posted.  

[corchjay 5,311]

Just now, WarTiger said:

 

I’ve ref’d to make extra money at the youth levels.  So I know the jig.  Ok I provided my video and picture proof.  

With your superior video capabilities show me proof not your opinion that it wasn’t block in the back since you can go frame by frame.  Should be as easy as 123.   But you won’t because you can’t show it wasn’t.  

[yngwie1995 2,229]

We should have never been in a position to lose, after being up 20-0.... but, there were some BAD calls in this game....

1. The multiple blocks in the back on that punt return.

2. Etling's knee was down on that one throw (2nd down). Should have been a sack. 

3. Blatant holding on Jeff Holland on the very next play (3rd down).

4. Their 2nd TD looked like a trap. 

5. Potential targeting on Stidham that wasn't called. Pretty sure the post-game show was talking about it.

[FoundationEagle 637]

31 minutes ago, ALLINtheFamily said:

Is this the Phantom from Montgomery radio?

Not sure what that means....don't live in Montgomery

[Southwest 186]

Doesn't matter intent or motion or movement,if player impededs the opposing players ability to make a tackle by pushing,hitting,shoving,etc.. It's a block in the back.

[bigbird 60,523]

1. A block in the back is contact against an opponent occurring when the force of the initial contact is from behind and above the waist. When in question, the contact is at or below the waist (see Clipping, Rule 2-5) (Rule 9-3-6). (A.R. 9-3-3:I-VII) (A.R. 10-2-2:XII)
2. The position of the blocker’s head or feet does not necessarily indicate the point of initial contact.

https://www.ruletool.info/ifaf-rule-2-definitions/#IFAF2-3-4

 

[aujeff11 6,243]

Peace. Be Still.

Does anybody have footage of the possible targeting against Stidham? 

Carry on

[corchjay 5,311]

19 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Peace. Be Still.

Does anybody have footage of the possible targeting against Stidham? 

Carry on

It’s in another thread and yes definitely targeting.  

Amd for those blaming Gus we agree with you but we expect good officials as well.  In the SEC they make between $2-3k per game.  

[aujeff11 6,243]

Just now, corchjay said:

It’s in another thread and yes definitely targeting.  

Amd for those blaming Gus we agree with you but we expect good officials as well.  In the SEC they make between $2-3k per game.  

Link it or tell me which thread please sir.

[bigbird 60,523]

@aujeff11

 

[aujeff11 6,243]

11 minutes ago, bigbird said:

@aujeff11

 

Those photos seem to suggest targeting for sure. Looked even worse live. 

[Johndunc 33]

After reading most of the comments maybe Officials need to be paid on performance during games instead of a set salary.  Most businesses give their employees salary increases and bonuses after a performance review. It would be very easy to review the missed calls and the good calls in just a few hours after the game is over.  Wouldn't a Ref love to get a bonus for good officiating? Bet they wouldn't miss very many calls!!!

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

1 minute ago, Johndunc said:

After reading most of the comments maybe Officials need to be paid on performance during games instead of a set salary.  Most businesses give their employees salary increases and bonuses after a performance review. It would be very easy to review the missed calls and the good calls in just a few hours after the game is over.  Wouldn't a Ref love to get a bonus for good officiating? Bet they wouldn't miss very many calls!!!

 

But if the REC is paying their salaries...........LOL 

[corchjay 5,311]

2 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

But if the REC is paying their salaries...........LOL 

The REC isn’t paying them.  They are just usually between 45-60 years old and been doing it for 25 years working their way up and stubborn and call what they think happened instead of what they really saw.  The speed of the game is difficult but easy middle of the field stuff should be seen.

[SumterAubie 3,031]

5 hours ago, corchjay said:

Lol at no point is the LSU player engaging in a block to the side or front of Miller or Dean.  I’ll attach the video.  WT please watch it at regular speed and then watch it in slow mo if needed and you’ll clearly see 2 blocks in the back at the point of attack.  

 

Dean is knocked off stride.