deer corn said:

---

SEC refs fixing games. Not that you missed it, but it is a thing.

---

if it has to be done, let's hope it's for the good guys next week.

if the table was turned , record wise, you know they'd help sip.

We probably lose to SIPS, no SEC championship, CFB tries to knock us below them, watch and you will see how the refs make BS calls that swing the game

Side judge immediately started sprinting up the field like there was a fight or something. I thought there must have been a penalty consult about to happen, but no it was just a purposefully shortened punt marking in progress. Just atrocious.

I counted no less than three defensive non-calls on the first arkie possession I saw upon tuning in late. Wouldn't have changed the outcome in the slightest but it just reminded me how biased the referees are in sips favor. And we have to deal with this **** every year again for the rest of my time here on earth. Screw you sankey and all the SEC asses that you rode in here on...

I did not see the ball in flight. Only saw it hit 1 ft out of bounds at about the tu 40. Is it possible it hit out bounds further up field and the bounce that the cameras caught that we saw at the tu 40 was the second bounce? Only explanation that would make sense for the ball being spotted were it was, other than the refs are cheating or incompetent.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

---

I couldn't believe it when I saw it live…didn't know how ref could get it so wrong. Only explanation I could think of is if there was significant wind and he shanked it (went out early) and started to come back bc of wind.

I live in Austin. Maybe it was windy down there, but it wasn't windy in north Austin at all yesterday.

Yes sir. It was so nice to not have to put up with that biased BS of tu for those few years. Now we are stuck in the same quick sand again.
I remember when it was common to say, when we were playing the sips, that we had to be twice as good as them because, not only did we have to score enough to beat the team, we had to score enough to beat the refs too!

it wasn't windy yesterday - perfect fall day.

I was wondering the same thing. Watching it in real time, I see the ball land and the ref just jogging 30 yards downfield. Jesse Palmer mentioned it and they freeze framed where the ball landed.

Doesn't make sense that a ball hooked that much either. Right footed punter won't draw a punt usually and that would have to be an insane amount of draw to cross where they said it did and then land where it did. Just doesn't make sense at all.

It seemed like the punter got crushed, but no call. Was it partially blocked? Because that should have been running into the kicker, at a minimum.

They also blasted the punter and it wasn't called.

A right footed kicker shanking it to the right that bad would have to have it come off the outside of his foot. Theres no way it could have exited the field at the 35 but somehow dropped at the opposing 41, 1 ft outside the boundary.

It wad a terrible terrible, highly subjective call that totally changed the feel of that game at that moment. It probably wouldnt have changed the outcome but just another example of the **** tu gets away with

Having watched the way the ref's mark a punt that goes out of bounds, I don't think they account for wind. I believe one ref, standing behind the punter, moves up and stands where the punter was when he punted the ball and looks for the spot that the ball landed out of bounds. Then he directs the sideline ref up the sideline until he is in alignment with a straight line between the punter and the place where the ball landed and that is the spot.

Anyone here who has worked as an official have any input?

There was no wind and certainly not strong enough to account for the disparity between the 41 and the 35

I don't think wind should come into it. Only in so far as it affects where the ball landed initially out of bounds. They are not trying to figure out where it actually crossed the side line, only where it crossed as one would draw a straight line from the punter to where it initially landed out of bounds. Anything else is too complicated and would be far too difficult to judge. At least that's my understanding. Imagine if it was a windy day and crossed the sideline slightly up in the air and then the ball is blown back onto the field!

barstoolexpert said:

---

Broadcast showed the video. Ball landed out of bounds before taking that long roll

---

But nowhere near where they actually spotted it.
Terrible spot

Unsurprising that there was zero discussion or replay of that entire sequence….from the roughing to the egregious spot. Jessie Palmer and his midget buddy carrying sip water based butt lube for the ESPN once again.

I had to go back a rewind it to make sure I saw it correctly. I thought it hit out of bounds at the tu 40, but when they spotted it at the Ark 35 I had to rewind and check to make sure it didn't hit out at the Ark 40. But no, it hit at the tu 40.

Again, the only thing that makes sense to me is if the bounce at the tu 40 (that was caught by the camera) was the 2nd bounce and that the ball's 1st bounce (not caught by the tv cameras) was further towards the Ark side of the field and maybe further out of bounds.

A. G. Pennypacker said:

---

I had to go back a rewind it to make sure I saw it correctly. I thought it hit out of bounds at the tu 40, but when they spotted it at the Ark 35 I had to rewind and check to make sure it didn't hit out at the Ark 40. But no, it hit at the tu 40.

Again, the only thing that makes sense to me is if the bounce at the tu 40 (that was caught by the camera) was the 2nd bounce and that the ball's 1st bounce (not caught by the tv cameras) was further towards the Ark side of the field and maybe further out of bounds.

---

You realize that would require an incredibly HUGE (and wildly unlikely) bounce for the ball to 1st hit around the Arky 35, for the 2nd bounce to be at the t.u. 40….right?

Pretty sure they just F'd it up.
And I'm blown away Bobby P didn't raise 9 kinds of hell.

Quote:

---

And I'm blown away Bobby P didn't raise 9 kinds of hell.

---

Likely knows he has one more game to coach at arkie and won't be retained. Saving his energy for the upcoming job search. *****ing about bad calls, even a call as bad as this one, doesn't enhance the resume much

AggieVictor10 said:

---

**** t.u. I FULLY expect some buttwhack goofy officiating when we play them.

---

It is a given. Officials can easily influence scoring by 7-10 points with carefully placed bad/no calls.

Especially against tu, the Ags will have to make the winning margin too big to be overturned by purposefuly negative officiating.

Has any team had more TD's called back on penalties than the Ags this year?

We've got to have at least 5. Marcel has directly had about 100 yards and 2 TD's wiped out by phantom holds.

Too big to rig

TxAg76 said:

---

A. G. Pennypacker said:

---

I had to go back a rewind it to make sure I saw it correctly. I thought it hit out of bounds at the tu 40, but when they spotted it at the Ark 35 I had to rewind and check to make sure it didn't hit out at the Ark 40. But no, it hit at the tu 40.

Again, the only thing that makes sense to me is if the bounce at the tu 40 (that was caught by the camera) was the 2nd bounce and that the ball's 1st bounce (not caught by the tv cameras) was further towards the Ark side of the field and maybe further out of bounds.

---

You realize that would require an incredibly HUGE (and wildly unlikely) bounce for the ball to 1st hit around the Arky 35, for the 2nd bounce to be at the t.u. 40….right?

Pretty sure they just F'd it up.
And I'm blown away Bobby P didn't raise 9 kinds of hell.

---

Not necessarily. Look at that field graphic someone posted. If the ball hit around the 50, but maybe 10 yds out of bounds (following the orange line extended to the 50) and then bounced back towards the field it could have made the 2nd bounce 1yd OOB at the 40.

This is pure speculation on my part to try to explain what happened. I just can't believe the refs could be that far off.

It's only scripted until someone throws water bottles onto the field.

The big question no one's asking is what was the fiekd judge who stands behind the punter doing and hiw did he react to the ref sprinting diwn the sideline.

We need the full field overhead view. It is up to the ref behind the punterto signal when the sideline ref crosses the imaginary line from the contact point of the punter to the spot where ball landed.

It is NOT up to the side judge, so e actly what the hell was going on between the two of them?

Can someone post the video?