All Forums | College Football

No way that's a TD

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 2686
Posts: 59
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 1439
Posted: #26
Quote Originally Posted by theguru1:

Who's the tool now since you lost asshole.

I didn't lose I pushed just like you dipshit
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2011
Posts: 403
Posted: #27

Quote Originally Posted by theguru1:

Damn I knew I should have bought down to Mich -2.5  but figured it wouldn't matter, because usually it doesn't matter.

You pushed and your celebrating. You are a tool. Wait till you pick one right to talk shit.

 

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 16332
Posted: #28
His elbow touched first that was a td
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2009
Posts: 52
Posted: #29
ball was trapped. you lost get over it
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 1439
Posted: #30
Quote Originally Posted by baseballchemist:

ball was trapped. you lost get over it


Ummm pretty sure no one lost
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2002
Posts: 1672
Posted: #31
guru, congrats on winning your bet, but I'm not sure what replay you were looking at. That ball never moved in any of the 5 replays i watched & he was definitely in bounds. That was a great catch & even if it was close there sure as hell wasn't indisputable evidence to overturn it. If it would have been ruled incomplete fine, but that never should have been overturned.
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 12265
Posted: #32
the ball hit the ground...it was a good call...i pushed on va tech +3
LonghornHoosier
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 11845
Posted: #33
can't believe people are trying to argue that it was a TD... or even that there wasn't enough evidence...

ball was moving, and he was immediately out of bounds... not a chance in hell that was a TD!


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 11845
Posted: #34
Quote Originally Posted by dg84:

guru, congrats on winning your bet, but I'm not sure what replay you were looking at. That ball never moved in any of the 5 replays i watched & he was definitely in bounds. That was a great catch & even if it was close there sure as hell wasn't indisputable evidence to overturn it. If it would have been ruled incomplete fine, but that never should have been overturned.


just goes to show the power of perception... the mind sees what it wants to see... because that ball definitely hit the ground, and definitely was not secured when it did... and by the time it was secured, he was definitely out of bounds...

the mind is an amazing mechanism...
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2011
Posts: 403
Posted: #35

Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:



just goes to show the power of perception... the mind sees what it wants to see... because that ball definitely hit the ground, and definitely was not secured when it did... and by the time it was secured, he was definitely out of bounds...

the mind is an amazing mechanism...

Eyesight is an amazing mechanism as well try getting yours checked

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 42
Posted: #36

Quote Originally Posted by theguru1:

And for once I am on the right side of a moose ending. So far have been on bad end every time. Iowa was the worst one

If you are betting on the big ten than the moose isnt your problem you are hoping not betting. I hope Michigan wins was your play. The big ten was beat down again this bowl season, and if Urban Meyer is not successful at Ohio St its going to get worse.

The interception was a catch and the TD was a catch. I watch a lot of games and the same exact play is quite the occurence. The call has consistently gone with catch. however this game was lost by Beamer and the fake punt. Michigan only scored when they had good field position. Georgia and Beamer are terrible in close games and win those mostly by luck. Michigan falls into that category as well. I would say that any game that is too close to call should be a no play. If you backed your school today it was risk, and michigan backers dodged a bullet. LOL.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2007
Posts: 5038
Posted: #37
Call was made, all u degens can argue all u want, if u backed tech ur a loser tonight, if u backed Michigan ur a winner, bottom line, move on. Lol
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2009
Posts: 5673
Posted: #38
I think the problem is that it could have gone either way.  If there are that many people seeing it both ways then it's not conclusive and should have stuck with the ruling on the field which was td.

I think it was a legit catch.  He caught the ball, the nose of the ball hit the ground but he maintained control and the ball did not move, his elbow hit in-bounds before he went out and he maintained control of the ball all the way to the ground out of bounds.

I won my VT +3.5 and VT +10.5 & U59 wagers so I'm glad it did not count but I think it was inappropriately overturned.
 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2007
Posts: 2103
Posted: #39

They're College REFs, can't turn into PRO, they should let that kid have the ball, it's a beautiful diving and one hand graping perfectly.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2002
Posts: 1672
Posted: #40
Ice, I didn't have money on the game & I'm not a VT fan so who's mind is seeing what it wants here? The ball never moved after he caught it & he was in bounds when he originally caught it so....You talk about your football IQ, but what does that have to do with anything in this case? This is just an example of did he catch it or not & doesn't involve any interpretation of the rules. I've been watching & betting football for 35 years so why do you have superior ability to decide what is & is not a catch? Yes, the ball hit the field, but just like the pros, that doesn't matter if the player has control of the ball & the ball doesn't move. Both of those criteria were met with that catch. I honestly don't know what the minority who claim it moved were looking at. I thought for sure it had to move by the way he landed, but it didn't & was a great catch. Your opinion is no better that anyone else's here so try not to be so condescending towards someone that knows every bit as much about the sport & it's rules as you do.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 42
Posted: #41

Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:

can't believe people are trying to argue that it was a TD... or even that there wasn't enough evidence...

ball was moving, and he was immediately out of bounds... not a chance in hell that was a TD!


Texas Tech versus Oklahoma arlier this year same exact play ruled a catch the ball may touch the ground as long as it is possessed and not moving. Both the INT and TD the ball was possessed with a forearm or hand under the ball with the portion of the ball touching the ground. Possession was maintained throughout the play, so its a catch. The only thing I can credit the officials with is that the calls were consistent.

The game was simply lost on the fake punt. If VT punts the ball then they would most likely get the ball back in great position to set up a game winning fg. Bad coaching decision led to VT defeat and credit Mich kicker for making those FGs. Kicking is crucial in big games as seen with Albama loss earlier in the year and Stanford loss OK ST.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2008
Posts: 3288
Posted: #42
I won on VT 2H so no sour grapes here, but good grief that was a horrible overturn.

That was a catch, way more so than any of the other grabs that was reviewed during the game.  And as others have mentioned, there was no conclusive evidence to overturn it, so ruling on the field should have stood.

Refs were very one-sided tonight.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2002
Posts: 1672
Posted: #43
I've watched this on freeze frame on my DVR 10x now & can't see the ball move. If someone that says it did can point out to me the exact moment they are seeing the ball move, please tell me because I will definitely need to take back my high def TV & get a refund.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2010
Posts: 1439
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by dg84:

Ice, I didn't have money on the game & I'm not a VT fan so who's mind is seeing what it wants here? The ball never moved after he caught it & he was in bounds when he originally caught it so....You talk about your football IQ, but what does that have to do with anything in this case? This is just an example of did he catch it or not & doesn't involve any interpretation of the rules. I've been watching & betting football for 35 years so why do you have superior ability to decide what is & is not a catch? Yes, the ball hit the field, but just like the pros, that doesn't matter if the player has control of the ball & the ball doesn't move. Both of those criteria were met with that catch. I honestly don't know what the minority who claim it moved were looking at. I thought for sure it had to move by the way he landed, but it didn't & was a great catch. Your opinion is no better that anyone else's here so try not to be so condescending towards someone that knows every bit as much about the sport & it's rules as you do.

agreed
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2011
Posts: 1132
Posted: #45
Quote Originally Posted by troy9828:

Call was made, all u degens can argue all u want, if u backed tech ur a loser tonight, if u backed Michigan ur a winner, bottom line, move on. Lol


What if you had Michigan-3 or VTech +3? No one won or lost in that scenario.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 42
Posted: #46

Quote Originally Posted by atl4tigerfan:

I won on VT 2H so no sour grapes here, but good grief that was a horrible overturn.

That was a catch, way more so than any of the other grabs that was reviewed during the game.  And as others have mentioned, there was no conclusive evidence to overturn it, so ruling on the field should have stood.

Refs were very one-sided tonight.

 

Refs called a good game despite the two no catch calls. The game was lost due to poor coaching. The fake punt was ridiculus. If you are going to go for it than use your best weapon, QB sneak. And if the philosophy was to go for win, then they should have forgone the fg earlier and went for it as well.

I like the Bravado and it worked successfully all bowl season for teams that were committed to that philosophy. Lousiana Laffeyette and OK ST are teams that I will back next bowl season if the coaching staffs remain because that attitude wins ball games.

Hesitation and indecisiveness creates doubt amongst staff and players. So I cant back teams like Georgia and VT because that hesitation and doubt always bring about the Moose.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 42
Posted: #47
Based on the Michigan win you can say that the Big Ten is making progress in 2011-12. They improved by one win this bowl season, Congrats! LOL!
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 10333
Posted: #48
Quote Originally Posted by theguru1:

It can't be a TD if your body comes down outta bounds before your feet touch the ground.


Why would you start a thread ,,you obviously do not know the RULES...
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2009
Posts: 10333
Posted: #49
Quote Originally Posted by troy9828:

Call was made, all u degens can argue all u want, if u backed tech ur a loser tonight, if u backed Michigan ur a winner, bottom line, move on. Lol


All the tools are out....I had VT +3 ...and VT-1/2 2end half...Explain as a VT backer, How I lost
 
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2006
Posts: 710
Posted: #50
IMO the ball was never in control.when his elbow hit the ground,so did the ball.on to the next game...
All Forums | College Football
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.