Official 2012-2013 NCAA Football Thread

[fathom]

Not being able to get half a yard in three plays is a joke, and pointing things out about the refs is for losers.

 

No excuse for them not to review the 2nd down play.

[cabiness42]

No excuse for them not to review the 2nd down play.

 

The excuse is that they are trained referees and you aren't.

[fathom]

The excuse is that they are trained referees and you aren't.

 

Haha, wow. Same trained refs that apparently don't know how to spot a ball at the right 49 yard line?

[LittleHurt05]

And awful Qb play from other teams. Irish fans will be more unbearable if they win this.

 

 

Refs in the ND-Stanford game were PAC-12 officials. Whining about the refs is for losers.

 

 

The excuse is that they are trained referees and you aren't.

 

[farmteam]

Refs in the ND-Stanford game were PAC-12 officials. Whining about the refs is for losers.

You know it's ok to admit your team got a break, right? No one will think less of you.

[cabiness42]

You know it's ok to admit your team got a break, right? No one will think less of you.

 

It's ok to admit you're a sore loser, right? No one will think less of you.

 

Were you on here saying ND got robbed in the Bush Push game in 2005 or are you just a hypocrite?

[Buehrle>Wood]

And with that, HickoryHuskers takes homerism to a new level on this board, a truly impressive feat.

[DukeNukeEm]

The officials made the right call. He's right.

[cabiness42]

And with that, HickoryHuskers takes homerism to a new level on this board, a truly impressive feat.

 

And with that, you have taken hypocrisy to a new level on this board, a truly impressive feat.

[Soxbadger]

Not being able to get half a yard in three plays is a joke, and pointing things out about the refs is for losers.

 

And Stanford got half a yard, the refs just jobbed them and made up a new rule that if you fumble into the end zone the game is over. Because there were only 2 things that could have been called on the replay: 1) TD or 2) fumble with recovery by Stanford for td.

 

 

I like how validly pointing out the refs blew the game is whining.

 

Thats not even getting into the nonsense personal foul for hitting a Notre Dame player too hard.

 

 

[cabiness42]

And Stanford got half a yard, the refs just jobbed them and made up a new rule that if you fumble into the end zone the game is over. Because there were only 2 things that could have been called on the replay: 1) TD or 2) fumble with recovery by Stanford for td.

 

 

I like how validly pointing out the refs blew the game is whining.

 

Thats not even getting into the nonsense personal foul for hitting a Notre Dame player too hard.

 

You can't see both of the runners knees to know for sure that he wasn't down before crossing the goal line, and the last time I checked, hitting somebody in the head is a personal foul.

 

And validly pointing out the officiating now but not doing so after the USC game in 2005 is hypocrisy.

 

[Soxbadger]

You can't see both of the runners knees to know for sure that he wasn't down before crossing the goal line, and the last time I checked, hitting somebody in the head is a personal foul.

 

And validly pointing out the officiating now but not doing so after the USC game in 2005 is hypocrisy.

 

You werent even on this board in 2005, how do you know what any of us said?

 

I dont like bulls*** games, whether its USC winning or ND. Yesterday was a joke and basically every non-biased viewer is agreeing.

 

From the whiners at ESPN:

 

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=322870087

 

Taylor went up the middle and was knocked back, but kept reaching and turning with bodies underneath him. His knee never did hit the ground before reaching the ball across the goal line.

 

Your team won because Stanford had to play against ND and the refs. If you want to deny that, so be it. But what happened in 2007 is irrelevant.

[ZoomSlowik]

You can't see both of the runners knees to know for sure that he wasn't down before crossing the goal line, and the last time I checked, hitting somebody in the head is a personal foul.

 

And validly pointing out the officiating now but not doing so after the USC game in 2005 is hypocrisy.

 

You're getting pretty ridiculous here. I'm going to ignore the touchdown play and just go with the other two...

 

1) Hitting a player in the head with your shoulder is not a penalty, especially on a ball carrier.

 

2) Unless you can find an instance, ever, where they called a penalty on a play where a teammate pushed his teammate into the end zone, stop using it as an example.

[Soxbadger]

Zoom,

 

Didnt you know that if you dive head first the defense has to avoid you because they cant hit you in the head.

 

 

[cabiness42]

You werent even on this board in 2005, how do you know what any of us said?

 

I dont like bulls*** games, whether its USC winning or ND. Yesterday was a joke and basically every non-biased viewer is agreeing.

 

From the whiners at ESPN:

 

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/recap?gameId=322870087

 

 

 

Your team won because Stanford had to play against ND and the refs. If you want to deny that, so be it. But what happened in 2007 is irrelevant.

 

Because you're pretty predictable. The refs could make any number of bad calls AGAINST ND and you'd never say a damn thing. All you ND haters are a bunch of f***ing hypocrites.

 

[Soxbadger]

Because you're pretty predictable. The refs could make any number of bad calls AGAINST ND and you'd never say a damn thing. All you ND haters are a bunch of f***ing hypocrites.

 

Yep like when I went insane over the phantom block in the back call when the Rocket returned the TD against Colorado.

 

Care to generalize more, or do you just want to massacre your credibility?

 

If you are wondering, that was a long time before 2005.

[cabiness42]

You're getting pretty ridiculous here. I'm going to ignore the touchdown play and just go with the other two...

 

1) Hitting a player in the head with your shoulder is not a penalty, especially on a ball carrier.

 

2) Unless you can find an instance, ever, where they called a penalty on a play where a teammate pushed his teammate into the end zone, stop using it as an example.

 

So, blatantly not enforcing a rule is fine when it goes against ND, but not being able to be 100% certain as to whether the runner got hit with a head or a shoulder at full speed is a travesty.

 

I see where you're coming from.

[cabiness42]

Yep like when I went insane over the phantom block in the back call when the Rocket returned the TD against Colorado.

 

Care to generalize more, or do you just want to massacre your credibility?

 

If you are wondering, that was a long time before 2005.

 

Easy to make up a story from 20+ years ago.

[ZoomSlowik]

So, blatantly not enforcing a rule is fine when it goes against ND, but not being able to be 100% certain as to whether the runner got hit with a head or a shoulder at full speed is a travesty.

 

I see where you're coming from.

 

When have you ever seen it called? It's not remotely comparable to determining whether the player got into the end zone or not (which he did). It's like expecting them to call a pitch thrown at the armpits a strike or call a travel every time a player takes more than two steps in the NBA.

 

I've been watching football for 20 years and have NEVER seen that play called. It's not really comparable to determining whether or not a player crossed the line.

 

Also, Golson had the ball. How often do you see helmet-to-helmet called on a guy carrying the ball? It's not the same as if he was standing there in the pocket or a receiver going over the middle.

Edited October 14, 2012 by ZoomSlowik

[Soxbadger]

It didnt matter if he got hit in the head, for it to have been a legitimate penalty the Stanford player would have had to lead with his helmet.

 

At full speed it was an easy call, but as soon as the ND qb was rolling on the ground the flag came. When that call was made it seemed clear the refs were going to job Stanford.

[fathom]

So, blatantly not enforcing a rule is fine when it goes against ND, but not being able to be 100% certain as to whether the runner got hit with a head or a shoulder at full speed is a travesty.

 

I see where you're coming from.

 

Teammates push each other to get extra yards probably in every single game that will take place in college football/NFL this year. It is never called. Hate to break it to you, but even Notre Dame players push their own in a pile to get extra yards.

[cabiness42]

When have you ever seen it called? It's not remotely comparable to determining whether the player got into the end zone or not (which he did). It's like expecting them to call a pitch thrown at the armpits a strike or call a travel every time a player takes more than two steps in the NBA.

 

I've been watching football for 20 years and have NEVER seen that play called. It's not really comparable to determining whether or not a player crossed the line.

 

You're right, it's not comparable. The video evidence is 100% conclusive that Bush was pushed. The video evidence isn't 100% that the player wasn't down before crossing the line.

[Soxbadger]

Easy to make up a story from 20+ years ago.

 

You mean like your story about Soxtalk posters when you werent even here in 2005? Because I was and people said the call was bad.

 

/shrugs

 

Care to actually defend the game last night, or do you want to discuss a call that occurred in 1960?

[Soxbadger]

You're right, it's not comparable. The video evidence is 100% conclusive that Bush was pushed. The video evidence isn't 100% that the player wasn't down before crossing the line.

 

You cant call a penalty on replay, if they even had replay in 2005.

 

Do you even understand the rules?

[fathom]

You're right, it's not comparable. The video evidence is 100% conclusive that Bush was pushed. The video evidence isn't 100% that the player wasn't down before crossing the line.

 

I can't believe someone is saying posters are losers for whining about the refs in a game that happened less than 24 hours ago, but then complaining about a play from 2005 on a call that is never flagged as a penalty. I guess those weren't trained refs in 2005 then that know better than random message board posters?