This call that went against us (illegal man downfield), which would have been pass interference in our favor had it not been called, seems like a crucial setback in the game. The replay where the (god awful) announcers said "you can see right there is the wide receiver on the line covering the tight end making him an ineligible receiver," seemed to show the wide receiver back from the line of scrimmage. Has this already been discussed other than in the game thread? Has anything been made of that call with the SEC?
Was the WR really covering up the TE?
5,264 Views |
46 Replies |
Last: 3 days ago by Rebbasser
It seemed close but i thought he was off the LOS
World's worst proofreader
Refs calling ticky tacky calls against us in critical points in the game forcing us to be perfect while ignoring our opponent's obvious PIs, false starts, and holds? Shocked?
People say "just dont put yourself in a position where the refs matter" don't see how refs can impact a game. Refs can call a game where on paper penalties are even but on closer inspection it can be seen where the opponent is only called for procedural penalties while we are called for action penalties (holding, PI, facemask) while the refs clearly ignore the opponent. This forces us to play perfect which is unrealistic. A false start on Auburn makes it 1 & 15. A ticky tacky hold on us makes it 2nd & 17 or 1st & 20. Those things add up.
Down the stretch when Auburn had the ball they committed several holds and a false start but none were called. Why does that always happen? Sure if Reed doesn't drop the snap maybe its moot. But why should we again have to be perfect to win while the other team can just do what they want? This is not bitterness either, I have watched it for a decade and so have others.
People say "just dont put yourself in a position where the refs matter" don't see how refs can impact a game. Refs can call a game where on paper penalties are even but on closer inspection it can be seen where the opponent is only called for procedural penalties while we are called for action penalties (holding, PI, facemask) while the refs clearly ignore the opponent. This forces us to play perfect which is unrealistic. A false start on Auburn makes it 1 & 15. A ticky tacky hold on us makes it 2nd & 17 or 1st & 20. Those things add up.
Down the stretch when Auburn had the ball they committed several holds and a false start but none were called. Why does that always happen? Sure if Reed doesn't drop the snap maybe its moot. But why should we again have to be perfect to win while the other team can just do what they want? This is not bitterness either, I have watched it for a decade and so have others.
Glad you brought this up. I was really confused when I saw the replay. He was definitely not right on the line…it was borderline at best.
The offensive PI pick call against them that put them at 2nd and 25 instead of 1st and goal was the highest impact call of the night, and anyone who is being honest has to admit that call was highly suspect.
I thought is was obvious but I also stopped listening to the ESPN homers that were selling it as a bad call. A WR cant just half stop block in front of a player.Scotts Tot said:
The offensive PI pick call against them that put them at 2nd and 25 instead of 1st and goal was the highest impact call of the night, and anyone who is being honest has to admit that call was highly suspect.
Frank Grimes said:
This call that went against us (illegal man downfield), which would have been pass interference in our favor had it not been called, seems like a crucial setback in the game. The replay where the (god awful) announcers said "you can see right there is the wide receiver on the line covering the tight end making him an ineligible receiver," seemed to show the wide receiver back from the line of scrimmage. Has this already been discussed other than in the game thread? Has anything been made of that call with the SEC?
I don't think he was on the line, but this is very easy to avoid and every player is taught it: look at the ref and tell him you're off. If he needs you to back up he'll tell you.
Scotts Tot said:
The offensive PI pick call against them that put them at 2nd and 25 instead of 1st and goal was the highest impact call of the night, and anyone who is being honest has to admit that call was highly suspect.
Idk. Looked to me like their guy intentionally ran out of his route to get in front of our guy. I've never seen a dig/cross route that quickly gets 2 yards deeper in the middle of the field.
As a former high school WR, the only thing I can think of is that he told the ref he was supposed to be on and was checking to make sure he was close enough to the line. I didn't go back and check the replay to see if there was any interaction though.
On the refs overall, I think they were pretty fair in the bad calls. I don't think they were picking on us. I just don't think they were that good
Did the WR signal to the Ref that he was off the line? If not and he was close, then the ref is going to assume he's on the line.Frank Grimes said:
This call that went against us (illegal man downfield), which would have been pass interference in our favor had it not been called, seems like a crucial setback in the game. The replay where the (god awful) announcers said "you can see right there is the wide receiver on the line covering the tight end making him an ineligible receiver," seemed to show the wide receiver back from the line of scrimmage. Has this already been discussed other than in the game thread? Has anything been made of that call with the SEC?
They were flagged several times for false start in the 4th quarter...We were called on 7 penalties for 40 yards. Auburn had 9 for 62 yards.
It's called confirmation bias. You think it exists so you find instance to prove your thoughts are true. The fact is we spotted them 21 points in the beginning of the game. There isn't some conspiracy to get us. It's honestly pretty embarrassing when you guys start this whining. In your mind, teams need to conspire with the refs to win. In reality, we are a 1st year team under a new coach with some holes to fill due to injuries/positional whiffs by the last coach.
It's called confirmation bias. You think it exists so you find instance to prove your thoughts are true. The fact is we spotted them 21 points in the beginning of the game. There isn't some conspiracy to get us. It's honestly pretty embarrassing when you guys start this whining. In your mind, teams need to conspire with the refs to win. In reality, we are a 1st year team under a new coach with some holes to fill due to injuries/positional whiffs by the last coach.
I never played WR, but its seems like most receivers check with the ref. Are they checking to be on or to be off? It seems like they most often check that they are on the line when they want to be. If they also routinely check to be off the line, it probably did not happen this time. I also wonder how that communication might be disrupted in loud environment.agracer said:Did the WR signal to the Ref that he was off the line? If not and he was close, then the ref is going to assume he's on the line.Frank Grimes said:
This call that went against us (illegal man downfield), which would have been pass interference in our favor had it not been called, seems like a crucial setback in the game. The replay where the (god awful) announcers said "you can see right there is the wide receiver on the line covering the tight end making him an ineligible receiver," seemed to show the wide receiver back from the line of scrimmage. Has this already been discussed other than in the game thread? Has anything been made of that call with the SEC?
Just to be clear, I am not looking for a conspiracy. It just looked like a bad call in a crucial situation.tjburns said:
They were flagged several times for false start in the 4th quarter...We were called on 7 penalties for 40 yards. Auburn had 9 for 62 yards.
It's called confirmation bias. You think it exists so you find instance to prove your thoughts are true. The fact is we spotted them 21 points in the beginning of the game. There isn't some conspiracy to get us. It's honestly pretty embarrassing when you guys start this whining. In your mind, teams need to conspire with the refs to win. In reality, we are a 1st year team under a new coach with some holes to fill due to injuries/positional whiffs by the last coach.
I hear what you are saying, I really do. But what about the blatant missed calls in the 4th quarter late? A false start and two holds, one of which likely ends the game? You just said they were penalized in the 4th but down the stretch when it mattered the most all the sudden the rules dont need to be followed. The refs want to let them play fine but the obvious holds literally in front of refs game in and game out are exhausting.tjburns said:
They were flagged several times for false start in the 4th quarter...We were called on 7 penalties for 40 yards. Auburn had 9 for 62 yards.
It's called confirmation bias. You think it exists so you find instance to prove your thoughts are true. The fact is we spotted them 21 points in the beginning of the game. There isn't some conspiracy to get us. It's honestly pretty embarrassing when you guys start this whining. In your mind, teams need to conspire with the refs to win. In reality, we are a 1st year team under a new coach with some holes to fill due to injuries/positional whiffs by the last coach.
I actually did, and coaches always told us "look at the ref to confirm on/off the LOS" and most of the time you'll see WR's at all levels do this. But sometimes they forget.Frank Grimes said:I never played WR, but its seems like most receivers check with the ref. Are they checking to be on or to be off? It seems like they most often check that they are on the line when they want to be. If they also routinely check to be off the line, it probably did not happen this time. I also wonder how that communication might be disrupted in loud environment.agracer said:Did the WR signal to the Ref that he was off the line? If not and he was close, then the ref is going to assume he's on the line.Frank Grimes said:
This call that went against us (illegal man downfield), which would have been pass interference in our favor had it not been called, seems like a crucial setback in the game. The replay where the (god awful) announcers said "you can see right there is the wide receiver on the line covering the tight end making him an ineligible receiver," seemed to show the wide receiver back from the line of scrimmage. Has this already been discussed other than in the game thread? Has anything been made of that call with the SEC?
The Chiefs lost a TD last season when one of the WR actually lined up over the LOS and on the replay, he never looked at the line judge to confirm his position relative to the LOS. He was in fact lined up offsides.
Not saying the WR did or did not, just asking if anyone watched the replay to confirm the WR checked.
I thought he was off the LOS, thus a bad call.
He was a full yard back. Maybe that's too close and allows a judgement call, but definitely not on the LOS.
They must have sent a memo out about this call because the one called against Bama was egregiously bad.
Your initial post is fine. It's our friend VP at Pierce and Pierce that I should've replied to.
Very crucial play in the game. OBVIOUS holding. Not called. That would have set them back another 10 yards. No guarantee they make the field goal.
here is a screenshot with my drawing a line across the center's beltline parallel to LOS.
Actually, it would have been a 10 second run off and ended the game. Honestly, I feel like that's why it wasn't called.Heineken-Ashi said:
Very crucial play in the game. OBVIOUS holding. Not called. That would have set them back another 10 yards. No guarantee they make the field goal.
100%, but it was nice to see Bama on the receiving end of one of those egregiously bad calls....Thisguy1 said:
They must have sent a memo out about this call because the one called against Bama was egregiously bad.
Would that have also been a 10s runoff or loss of TO for Auburn?Heineken-Ashi said:
Very crucial play in the game. OBVIOUS holding. Not called. That would have set them back another 10 yards. No guarantee they make the field goal.
Ags2013 said:Actually, it would have been a 10 second run off and ended the game. Honestly, I feel like that's why it wasn't called.Heineken-Ashi said:
Very crucial play in the game. OBVIOUS holding. Not called. That would have set them back another 10 yards. No guarantee they make the field goal.
Incorrect. The clock was not running prior to the start of the play (coming out of A&M timeout) and the holding would have been a live ball foul. So no 10 second run off.
I think you're right. My bad.
Wow. That is egregious. And the ref (line judge?) is right there straddling the line....Logos Stick said:
here is a screenshot with my drawing a line across the center's beltline parallel to LOS.
Looks to me like not enough guys ON the line. Did the refs make the right call but say the wrong explanation?Logos Stick said:
here is a screenshot with my drawing a line across the center's beltline parallel to LOS.
WR was a full yard off the LOS
Interesting that Alabama had an amazing TD catch by Ryan Williams called back for a similar reason. For the life of me I can't figure out what was wrong with the formation, but it was a HUGE call against Bama. They still might have lost, but who knows what happens if they count the catch. You can only control what you can control. We have been screwed countless times by the Refs and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.
"They who would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
As a WR you are taught that if you are on the LOS your foot should be at the same yard line as the refs foot(the foot closest to you). The ref won't tell you what to do just confirm whether you are on or off.
So in your photo the WR (if he was on) should have had his foot even with the refs right foot. It clearly wasn't and therefore the call was absurd.
So in your photo the WR (if he was on) should have had his foot even with the refs right foot. It clearly wasn't and therefore the call was absurd.
Interesting this is the talking point and not the phantom offensive pass interference against Auburn that was a gift as well.
I literally made a comment when it happened that we finally got a call where it was so egregious that it appeared the league was actually trying to protect us from our own ineptitude.
I literally made a comment when it happened that we finally got a call where it was so egregious that it appeared the league was actually trying to protect us from our own ineptitude.
Dear lord, that was not a bad call. You can maybe claim it was subjective, but a WR running into a defender downfield and impeding their movement is not allowed. They will let it go if he's actively in route and reasonable measures can't be taken to avoid another player, but not when he runs directly at the opponent, contacts them, and then stops his route. It's a tragedy it's not called a lot more, as it happens multiple times in every single game.AgLA06 said:
Interesting this is the talking point and not the phantom offensive pass interference against Auburn that was a gift as well.
I literally made a comment when it happened that we finally got a call where it was so egregious that it appeared the league was actually trying to protect us from our own ineptitude.
Yeah, there are WAY worse calls multiple times every week across college football. The announcer going on, and on, and on about how it was the MOST HORRIBLE call he had ever seen got old quick. Was it bad? Maybe. Was it THAT bad? No.Heineken-Ashi said:Dear lord, that was not a bad call. You can maybe claim it was subjective, but a WR running into a defender downfield and impeding their movement is not allowed. They will let it go if he's actively in route and reasonable measures can't be taken to avoid another player, but not when he runs directly at the opponent, contacts them, and then stops his route. It's a tragedy it's not called a lot more, as it happens multiple times in every single game.AgLA06 said:
Interesting this is the talking point and not the phantom offensive pass interference against Auburn that was a gift as well.
I literally made a comment when it happened that we finally got a call where it was so egregious that it appeared the league was actually trying to protect us from our own ineptitude.
Featured Stories
See All
Lone Star Showdown revival pits Aggies vs. Longhorns as SEC rivals
by Olin Buchanan
2025 Cocoa (FL) quarterback Brady Hart commits to Texas A&M
by Ryan Brauninger
6:42
7m ago
97
44:52
3h ago
1.4k
7:40
4h ago
1.7k
WestAustinAg
2025 Cocoa (FL) quarterback Brady Hart commits to Texas A&M
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
258
SLCag
2025 Cocoa (FL) quarterback Brady Hart commits to Texas A&M
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
64
E King Trill
2025 Cocoa (FL) quarterback Brady Hart commits to Texas A&M
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
63