How close did DJ come to dropping the INT vs uga?

[Northeast Stinger]

Would it have been best if he just went on down to the ground as he is catching the ball and not tried to run out from under Mitchell?

It looked to me like he was afraid to let the refs make a judgment call and kept the play going until he was sure he heard the whistle. Could have been ruled down more than once but, you know, JT fumble on goal line call and all of that.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Not a play you want to leave up to the refs.

Exactly.

 

[Skeptic]

And Justin Thomas's forward progress was stopped.

Not a play you want to leave up to the refs.

Great play by DJ

Shoot, Georgia not only had him stopped, but in full reverse, 3-4 yards backing up. Based on that only, you're right. Like one of those 3rd strikes that are too close too call: don't let 'em call it.

 

[GTJackets]

I love that now almost 3 months removed we can find complete confidence in those refs to make the right call by simply dimissing it as "his knee was down" or "they would have reviewed it." I don't see that they earned such a confident response.

 

[GTpdm]

He bobbled the ball after his knee went down. I do think it's interesting you didn't hear a whistle until after he slid down a few seconds later after that. But even if he lost control of it before the slide and the refs never blew the whistle and therefore blew another call it wouldn't matter because it would have been reviewed.

Yeah, like the way they reviewed our goal line fumble stopped forward progress, earlier in the game. The fact that the refs would have reviewed the bobble does not mean they would have made the right call.

Given the way the two end zone refs were looking back and forth at each other after The Kick--each obviously reluctant to be the one to signal the FG--you could tell that the whole officiating crew was rooting for the dwags.

I, for one, am glad it didn't come down to a review.

Thanks, DJ! THWG!

 

[Skeptic]

Yeah, like the way they reviewed our goal line fumble stopped forward progress, earlier in the game. The fact that the refs would have reviewed the bobble does not mean they would have made the right call.

Given the way the two end zone refs were looking back and forth at each other after The Kick--each obviously reluctant to be the one to signal the FG--you could tell that the whole officiating crew was rooting for the dwags.

I, for one, am glad it didn't come down to a review.

Thanks, DJ! THWG!

I kind of reluctantly agree with the fumble/progress part of this, though I am less inclined to give referee bias the credit actually due incompetence. But my take on the field goal was them making sure each called the same thing. Had they given that hesitation and called it short, well ...

 

[Squints]

Yeah, like the way they reviewed our goal line fumble stopped forward progress, earlier in the game. The fact that the refs would have reviewed the bobble does not mean they would have made the right call.

Look, a lot of GT fans don't want to hear it but the review was correct for the JT fumble. The on field referees messed up but you can't review forward progress. The call on the field was bad but the review was correct. A knee being down is clear cut and it was. Two different situations.

Given the way the two end zone refs were looking back and forth at each other after The Kick--each obviously reluctant to be the one to signal the FG--you could tell that the whole officiating crew was rooting for the dwags.

Oh you gotta be kidding me with this. The FG was barely made. Whenever that happens the officials are trained to look at each other and confirm that they agree or discuss why they disagree. Go watch the replay. As soon as the ball goes through they look at each other, nod, and make the call. There's no hesitation or reluctance. What do you want them to do? Throw a party while they make the call? To use that as some evidence that the crew was rooting for UGA is absurd.

 

[jwsavhGT]

Look, a lot of GT fans don't want to hear it but the review was correct for the JT fumble. The on field referees messed up but you can't review forward progress. The call on the field was bad but the review was correct. A knee being down is clear cut and it was. Two different situations.



Oh you gotta be kidding me with this. The FG was barely made. Whenever that happens the officials are trained to look at each other and confirm that they agree or discuss why they disagree. Go watch the replay. As soon as the ball goes through they look at each other, nod, and make the call. There's no hesitation or reluctance. What do you want them to do? Throw a party while they make the call? To use that as some evidence that the crew was rooting for UGA is absurd.

So are you saying that the refs were COMPLETELY unbiased in that game?

 

[Skeptic]

Exactly.

Somebody on the board posted one of the Georgia radio broadcasters whining about the "ACC referees" giving Tech a good spot. It was glorious, a memorable moment in UGA football broadcasting. I have wondered since if the SEC reviewed that fumble/progress, and if so, were the referees and head linesman disciplined in any way. My impression of Johnson when he was in Thomas's face on the sideline afterward was that it was not necessarily having the ball taken away -- he was in an impossible situation -- but in allowing himself to get flipped on his back, which is what they all try to prevent for exactly the reason we saw. Not sure Thomas could have prevented that, either. But something more than a called fumble down there got Johnson hot, because he nurtured Thomas on the sideline all year. But I think he has with all his QBs.

 

[Squints]

So are you saying that the refs were COMPLETELY unbiased in that game?

Well no one can truly say for sure because we're not mind readers. I'd say that's a far more likely possibility than the refs making calls to intentionally swing the game UGA's way. I think some GT fans are looking through their gold colored glasses and are attaching malice that's not there to the referees. They screwed up and made a bad call. The end. It's that simple. It happens. And it happens all the time. Doesn't prove someone's preconceived belief the refs were out to get us.

 

[AE 87]

orward progress crossing the Goal Line is reviewable

Look, a lot of GT fans don't want to hear it but the review was correct for the JT fumble. The on field referees messed up but you can't review forward progress. The call on the field was bad but the review was correct. A knee being down is clear cut and it was. Two different situations.



Oh you gotta be kidding me with this. The FG was barely made. Whenever that happens the officials are trained to look at each other and confirm that they agree or discuss why they disagree. Go watch the replay. As soon as the ball goes through they look at each other, nod, and make the call. There's no hesitation or reluctance. What do you want them to do? Throw a party while they make the call? To use that as some evidence that the crew was rooting for UGA is absurd.

I suspect you know this but for the sake of clarity, they could and did review whether forward progress crossed the touch line. I think on this point the review was incorrect. I think the video evidence was sufficient to call a touchdown.

 

[swampsting]

First time I watched the replay I noticed how DJ didn't have a good grasp on it until he got down on the ground. And if Mitchell had caught the ball, IJ was fixin to come blow him up.

 

[Squints]

orward progress crossing the Goal Line is reviewable


I suspect you know this but for the sake of clarity, they could and did review whether forward progress crossed the touch line. I think on this point the review was incorrect. I think the video evidence was sufficient to call a touchdown.

Yep that's right. I was specifically talking about using forward progress to overturn a fumble called on the field which can't be done iirc. Probably should have been more specific on that. I disagree that there was sufficient evidence to overturn it though. The video wasn't clear cut enough. I didn't expect them to change the call. But whatever it's in the past.

 

[Eastman]

Guess I had a different concern than most in that my initial concern was that there might be an interference call based on the contact with the receiver. Not that there should have been one, but I was worried it might happen and I was listening closely, while jumping around, to hear if a penalty was mentioned. I simply can't even think about that game without smiling.

 

[GTJoeBrew]

It all still feels like a dream to me. The refs took so much away from us in that game. The irrational part of me feels like they are going to come back and take the W away...

 

[kg01]

That clip with the UGA broadcast underneath is pure GOLD. Gift that just keeps on giving.

 

[ClydeBrick]

While the topic of the thread is not specifically the refs, they have become The Issue in this thread as they are part of the reason The Pick could have been just an incompletion if DJ lost the ball in the act of downing it for a second time. Those ref's late whistles had already cost GT a 14 point swing and Smelter's ACL.

The 3rd Quarter "fumble" started out as 3rd & Goal from the 2. JeT moved beyond the LOS. JeT was stripped of the ball at the 3. The distances involved and the time it took all indicate that JeT should have been called down by forward progress. Except the professional referees that were at the game somehow did not see it that way. To me there are only two answers as to why this is:

A) The crew at the game was actively giving the SEC team an edge.
or
B) The crew at the game was incompetent, thus they let this play go as a fumble.

Then we have the 4th quarter "fumble". JeT either committed Intentional Grounding or threw an incomplete pass. Except no, the refs called a fumble. This leaves me with the same A or B from above. While I will admit that this call is not as cut-and-dried wrong as the first "fumble" it is unconceivable that this crew made this kind of call twice in the same game.

I do not have non-game-tape proof that the ref were actively giving the mutts an edge, but the game itself if proof that either they were or they had no business calling anything other than a pee wee rec game. Gold colored glasses or not.

COFH 2014, with its highs and lows will probably go down as the most incredible COFH in my lifetime. In a way those refs helped make the game what it was. If GT had lost this game the level of despair around the program would have been unbelievable - it would have been an awful way to lose, just ask the mutts. Would GT had done as well against F$U in the ACCCG? Would GT have even been invited to the Orange Bowl?

This game is in the past. GT won. Why did GT win? Because GT's players never gave up and even though those refs sucked, God was watching.

THWG

 

[Northeast Stinger]

They screwed up and made a bad call. The end. It's that simple. It happens. And it happens all the time. Doesn't prove someone's preconceived belief the refs were out to get us.

Somebody may have already said this but my take on it is that they were extremely biased. That does not mean it was intentional but it also doesn't make it any less unfair.

The example that I have given in the past about SEC refs is this. They are subconsciously brainwashed into thinking that the SEC team is superior and therefore tend to give them the benefit of the doubt on close plays. They also seem to be waiting (again subconsciously) for the big play that will swing the tide in favor of the SEC team. Does this sound paranoid? It doesn't if you have spent years watching sports. In every contest their is a subconscious bias. I have seen star pitchers get strikes called that ordinary pitchers didn't. I have seen certain boxers get away with things in the ring because they were undefeated. I have watched the same play in basketball be called a charge one way or a foul the other way based on giving the benefit of the doubt to the stronger athlete. I believe last November in Athens we saw more of that same phenomenon playing out in spades. If Tech could beat uga 3 or 4 years in a row then the calls would start to even out more.

 

[Squints]

Somebody may have already said this but my take on it is that they were extremely biased. That does not mean it was intentional but it also doesn't make it any less unfair.

The example that I have given in the past about SEC refs is this. They are subconsciously brainwashed into thinking that the SEC team is superior and therefore tend to give them the benefit of the doubt on close plays. They also seem to be waiting (again subconsciously) for the big play that will swing the tide in favor of the SEC team. Does this sound paranoid? It doesn't if you have spent years watching sports. In every contest their is a subconscious bias. I have seen star pitchers get strikes called that ordinary pitchers didn't. I have seen certain boxers get away with things in the ring because they were undefeated. I have watched the same play in basketball be called a charge one way or a foul the other way based on giving the benefit of the doubt to the stronger athlete. I believe last November in Athens we saw more of that same phenomenon playing out in spades. If Tech could beat uga 3 or 4 years in a row then the calls would start to even out more.

Yea sure I could buy some of that going on but I think even "extremely biased" is overstating it. And it's a pretty big logical leap from something that to claiming the whole officiating crew is rooting for the other team.

 

[DrJacket]

The whole time I was screaming at him to get down. I was so worried he start running and it'd pop or get knocked out.

Not long after that day, I saw a story where Tremayne McNair said, "He looked like was going to run with it. I was yelling at him to get down....get down!!"