SEC Network replay official from our game was a UGA grad/fan

Animal02

Banned
Messages
6,269
Location
Southeastern Michigan
Wrong... the most egregious non-call was on the fake field goal by the dwags. I'm surprised more people didn't notice it. The "block" that freed the kicker to get the first down was the best tackle by the dwags all day. Number 87 grabbed the front of Jamal Golden's jersey in full view of the sideline ref. It was action besides the kicker in that whole area of the field. The ref swallowed his whistle hoping for a ugag TD. Forward to the 2:25 mark on video.



Wow....did not notice that .......how the hell do you fall like that without being grabbed?
 

Towaliga

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,132
There was one holding call called in the entire game and it was called on Tyler Marcordes. Ugag ran 67 offensive plays in the game.

What's funny about that is that on one of the dwag rant sites, one of the Walmart employees (uga fan) asked how GT could play an entire game and not have a single holding call against them, because all teams hold on almost every play. It must have been those biased refs that were trying to give the game to Tech.
 

daBuzz

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
965
My own thoughts:
1) There's no way the replay booth was going to overturn the fumble on the goal line. The problem was that the officials on the field didn't blow the whistle to stop the clock. I supposed it's possible for a replay official to study the frames and determine if all forward progress is stopped but I don't know if he would even have the authority to overturn the call based on that. The fault in this case goes to the refs on the field.
2) Justin's play was a fumble....plain and simple. I don't like that it happened but it did. Watch how far his arm goes past where his normal release point was. He pump fakes and tries to pull the ball down. By the time the ball comes out of his hand, it's down near his leg...and no one throws a pass from down there; not even Tim Tebow with his awful throwing motion. If I had been refereeing the game, I would have ruled it a fumble as well, despite the fact that it nearly snatched my heart out of my throat, threw it on the ground and stomped it flat.
 

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
5,135
What's funny about that is that on one of the dwag rant sites, one of the Walmart employees (uga fan) asked how GT could play an entire game and not have a single holding call against them, because all teams hold on almost every play. It must have been those biased refs that were trying to give the game to Tech.


+1. Everyone gripes about the refs. apparently, few gripe about them after a win as much as we do. to be honest, though I rarely ever read other boards unless someone has a link. the few instances of laughter are not worth wading through a ton of B.S.
 

DTGT

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
530
I supposed it's possible for a replay official to study the frames and determine if all forward progress is stopped but I don't know if he would even have the authority to overturn the call based on that. The fault in this case goes to the refs on the field.
The whistle on forward progress is one of those judgement calls and it is up to the on-the-field refs to make it live. Not reviewable.

It is just like a PI penalty; even with zero contact, the penalty can't be reviewed and hence can't be overturned.
 

Towaliga

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,132
Just to be clear, I was pointing out the irony that the dwag fan was complaining about GT not getting called for holding because almost every team holds every play, but uga didn't get called for holding once either.

As a matter of fact, I seem to recall CPJ making the comment earlier this year that during a 3 game stretch against 3 teams that threw a lot (including Duke) that holding was not called once against the other team, and that was with 60+ passes being thrown in those games.
 

augustabuzz

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,412
The whistle on forward progress is one of those judgement calls and it is up to the on-the-field refs to make it live. Not reviewable.

It is just like a PI penalty; even with zero contact, the penalty can't be reviewed and hence can't be overturned.
PI is reviewable to verify if the pass was touched upfield of the PI. But, the PI itself is not reviewed.
 
Top