Any chance if the exact same play happened to a Rutgers wr it would be reversed? Penn state is a great team no doubt, but they get every break every single time.
Well if we were the refs it looked like an int. to me. Indisputable evidence Int. stands. Remember it's not supposed to be a guess but indisputable evidence, I didn't see any. Call on the field should have stood either way TD or Int..Looked like a td to me
I think the ref didn't know who had it and was just seeing who had it last, not really noticing who had it first. I thought the evidence was good enough to overturn it myself.I’m actually surprised they called an INT initially. Tie usually goes to the WR in that instance.
They do that often though like I was saying above. He gets it near the receivers and they do a nice job of adjusting or going up getting it.And Penn State gets a mcsorely needed touchdown on a total hail mary 50/50 ball. Luck of the Irish for the PSU quarterback.
It might be Notre Dame.Really hope whoever finishes #4 can crush penn state? If they win the national championship, I may have to give up watching sports and get a new hobby.
This is not burnishing GS's resume.
Who does?Wow. That was more BS than the PI call. The fix is in. They DESPERATELY want PSU in the National Championship game.
B10/Delany like the BE in that WVU/Pitt game some time back. At least that's the thinking.Who does?
I don't defend, what I don't do is blame.Isn't it shocking that you defend the refs every time?
Delaney couldn't give two ***** who winsB10/Delany like the BE in that WVU/Pitt game some time back. At least that's the thinking.
It would take an unlikely scenario for the B10 not to have a rep in the playoff most years. So as long as there is a rep I don't think he or the B10 cares who it is.Delaney couldn't give two ***** who wins
Right. you save that for the coaches.I don't defend, what I don't do is blame.
When I think applicable, not today though.Right. you save that for the coaches.
I thought #3 controlled the bal with his left hand against his shoulder all the way to the ground and only after they were both on the ground the os guy pulled it away. Just my opinion but I thought it was pretty clearly a td.Well if we were the refs it looked like an int. to me. Indisputable evidence Int. stands. Remember it's not supposed to be a guess but indisputable evidence, I didn't see any. Call on the field should have stood either way TD or Int..
I thought the OSU defender had a hand in their and a lot of jostling of the ball to the ground. Couldn't tell who had control until on the ground and the defender had it at the end. I likened the play to controlling it through the catch. As there wasn't definitive evidence that he did. Just like the Sterling Shepard play where he didn't control the ball all the way through the catch. So no TD. College rules are the same in that regard.I thought #3 controlled the bal with his left hand against his shoulder all the way to the ground and only after they were both on the ground the os guy pulled it away. Just my opinion but I thought it was pretty clearly a td.
When I think applicable, not today though.
What I do know, is it damn sure wasn't the refs
I have no problem calling a ****** call...******The refs didn't cause the loss. However had they called the game correctly and fairly then at least we would have had more of a chance. It's not asking for too much to make a proper call. There as absolutely no reason why the refs reviewed the spot to give UM the 1st down and then not review the 4th down, which IMHO was CLEARLY short. Curious as to your thoughts as to why that play wasn't reviewed?
Do you think the hold on Maietti was a good one? That gave UM 7 points. Do you thin UM was holding free for the whole game ?
Do you think that was not a blatant block in the back that was obvious to everyone on a key play ?
And btw I do not subscribe to conspiracy theories either. I don't think they "wanted " UM to win. I'm just tired of being shafted.
Call a ****** call a ****** call.
I have no problem calling a ****** call...******
I have a problem with you thinking refs purposely favor one team over another at this level
I felt that way too on one of the replays but from another I thought it was clearly a catch and it was not a fight until they were both on the ground.I thought the OSU defender had a hand in their and a lot of jostling of the ball to the ground. Couldn't tell who had control until on the ground and the defender had it at the end. I likened the play to controlling it through the catch. As there wasn't definitive evidence that he did. Just like the Sterling Shepard play where he didn't control the ball all the way through the catch. So no TD. College rules are the same in that regard.
We need to figure out how Penn State does it. Being outgained 2-1 and only 218 yards yet they are winning 35-27. We seem to have no trouble being outgained 2-1 and only getting 200 yards. 35 points sure would have been nice today.
We need to figure out how Penn State does it. Being outgained 2-1 and only 218 yards yet they are winning 35-27. We seem to have no trouble being outgained 2-1 and only getting 200 yards. 35 points sure would have been nice today.
Well our Purdue game we were outgained and won. We had some good STs with the punter that day. PSU has had 2 KO returns leading to 14 pts. A few other big plays as well just like we had a couple big plays against Purdue.We need to figure out how Penn State does it. Being outgained 2-1 and only 218 yards yet they are winning 35-27. We seem to have no trouble being outgained 2-1 and only getting 200 yards. 35 points sure would have been nice today.
Ok, I can buy that.I don't think they call it against us on purpose. See my "i don't believe in conspiracy theories" quote.
I do think that today we get screwed on several occasions.
Do you think those examples I mentioned were ****** or do you think the refs got it right?
Ok, but why would you "take away" great playsTake away the opening kick return and points off turnovers and they're losing.