That call was total horse shit...

DugtheDoog

DugtheDoog

New Fish
Did it hit the ground? You can't fucking tell and that's the point. There is simply no evidence to indisputably say it hit the damn ground and overturn the call.

With that said, you can't outgain a top 5 team by 210 yards on the road and lose the game. The refs fucked it up but this one is on Sark. If we're disciplined we would have just beaten a top 5 team on the road by 2+ touchdowns. Inexcusable.
 
Agree, but we put it all on us. Refs were bad and we are an undisciplined football team that doesn't do the little things. Abundance. Of course, doogs will focus only on the call
 
Agree, but we put it all on us. Refs were bad and we are an undisciplined football team that doesn't do the little things. Abundance. Of course, doogs will focus only on the call
Click to expand...
That's exactly the point of the thread. Refs made an abysmal call but this one's on Sark.
 
Agree, but we put it all on us. Refs were bad and we are an undisciplined football team that doesn't do the little things. Abundance. Of course, doogs will focus only on the call
Click to expand...
That's exactly the point of the thread. Refs made an abysmal call but this one's on Sark.
Click to expand...

It's abysmal to call a pass where the ball is on the ground an incomplete pass now?
 
If you can see the ball between the two arms on the ground, the ball has to have hit the ground.

Physics 101.
Click to expand...
Right, but you said in the game thread you didn't think there was enough to overturn it. I agree with the logical conclusion, but that's not the same as indisputable evidence.

 
If you can see the ball between the two arms on the ground, the ball has to have hit the ground.

Physics 101.
Click to expand...
Right, but you said in the game thread you didn't think there was enough to overturn it. I agree with the logical conclusion, but that's not the same as indisputable evidence.
Click to expand...

I watched it again and went frame by frame. It's abundantly clear when you look really closely at it.
 
If you can see the ball between the two arms on the ground, the ball has to have hit the ground.

Physics 101.
Click to expand...
Right, but you said in the game thread you didn't think there was enough to overturn it. I agree with the logical conclusion, but that's not the same as indisputable evidence.
Click to expand...

I watched it again and went frame by frame. It's abundantly clear when you look really closely at it.
Click to expand...
You think they went frame by frame?

 
If you can see the ball between the two arms on the ground, the ball has to have hit the ground.

Physics 101.
Click to expand...
Right, but you said in the game thread you didn't think there was enough to overturn it. I agree with the logical conclusion, but that's not the same as indisputable evidence.
Click to expand...

I watched it again and went frame by frame. It's abundantly clear when you look really closely at it.
Click to expand...
You think they went frame by frame?
Click to expand...

They have the technology to do so now, thanks in part to the Oklahomo ($75k) v Oregon fiasco.

ESPN did a lazy job with replays all through the game, and their work at the end was no exception.
 
Arguing about indisputable evidence is being a pussy. Either you think it hit the ground or not. If you don't think it did, call it bullshit. I have no issue with that. But again, if you think it did, and are arguing about indisputable evidence, then you're being a cunt.
 
Last edited:
If you can see the ball between the two arms on the ground, the ball has to have hit the ground.

Physics 101.
Click to expand...
Right, but you said in the game thread you didn't think there was enough to overturn it. I agree with the logical conclusion, but that's not the same as indisputable evidence.
Click to expand...

I watched it again and went frame by frame. It's abundantly clear when you look really closely at it.
Click to expand...
DNC's right. The ref's didn't go frame-by-frame. And I never said it did or didn't hit the ground. I said there really is no way to say definitively one way or the other in the 3 minutes the refs had.

But that wasn't even the point of my post. The point was that everyone will blame the call when in fact it was on sark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top