For informational purposes only.

[LuckyLuther]

 

 

Why do you keep feeling the need to tell me your life story ? Is that now supposed to justify you not liking me and for you to be offended because I said we lost because of 4 turnovers ? Why are you not telling déhaven5 your story , or I guess you didn't have a problem with him saying Maryville sucked ? And Senator ... No problem with him at all , I get it now big dog , I've hurt your feelings a time or 2 , you're a big boy it sounds like , you'll get over it . Seriously man , you spend a lot of time worrying about me apparently , I assure you I don't stalk you on the DII boards , never even crossed my mind . If you want me to , I'll start sending you every post I'm about to make for your approval , if that's what you want .

DONT WORRY ABOUT IT PEP...BAYLOR WANTS EVERYONE TO FEEL SORRY FOR HIM BECAUSE HE WAS AT MICHIGAN FROM 95-99. ALSO "BRIEF STINT WITH TN TITANS" IS CODE FOR UNDRAFTED FREE AGENT THAT WAS CUT IMMEDIATELY AFTER OTA'S. TRUST ME ON THAT ONE.

Edited December 4, 2012 by LuckyLuther

[BigDaddyReb]

Play #159 Hudl. Look at both angles in slow motion. Watch which direction the Ump was looking and when u see his right hand reaching for his flag. U be your own judge. I know what I saw.

[STARSNBARS]

Play #159 Hudl. Look at both angles in slow motion. Watch which direction the Ump was looking and when u see his right hand reaching for his flag. U be your own judge. I know what I saw.

 

BDR I didn't have access to Hudl until yesterday to view it....And you are right.....He was wanting to throw the flag and was looking for an excuse....But the eye in the sky caught him....As do the still photos and both show his lack of incompetence and/or fairness.....Personally I think he's unfit to be on a football field, at the very least....and unfairly tried to pin #50 for something he didn't commit in the biggest down and biggest game of his life....Undoubtedly, he did not want the team wearing white to win for whatever reason...and the integrity of the game and it's fairness suffers.....

Edited December 4, 2012 by STARSNBARS

[countryREB]

Watching the game in person, alot of the calls during the game left me scratching my head wondering what was going on. After seeing it on DVR it was plain to see that this crew only cared about how much TV time they were getting, and there was bias in the crew. There were many missed or bad calls against both sides. I believe the crew was determined to make a difference in the game for one side or the other. I believe there was division between the crew resulting in the 'made up call' being a 'make up call' for the running into the kicker.IMO

[BigDaddyReb]

I am sad for the coaches and players on both teams. No one wants a win with a controversial call. WH played a great game and capitalized on our turnovers. We allowed the game to be close which let Mr. Opportunity present himself and have a major impact in these two great programs. The only thing that would have changed is the play calling on WH side. The true outcome will never be known.

 

Nothing will be done except an investigation in the video of the UMP and his actions before, during and after the play. This will be no different than the Seahawks vs. Packers controversial TD to end their game.

 

I have heard before how bad the WH fans are, Well My experience was completely different with the WH fans me and my family ran into before and after the game. I look forward to seeing these two great programs meet for many years to come.

 

Rebels, you all played your hearts out and I was proud to be part of it. I know you can't change the outcome of the game but you can change the outcome in the future. Use this experience to learn and grow. You all have the most respected leader and coaching staff in the state. You acted the way you have been taught, exceptional and professional young men with your heads held high. Thank You.

 

Proud to be a REBEL!!

 

 

BDR I didn't have access to Hudl until yesterday to view it....And you are right.....He was wanting to throw the flag and was looking for an excuse....But the eye in the sky caught him....As do the still photos and both show his lack of incompetence and/or fairness.....Personally I think he's unfit to be on a football field, at the very least....and unfairly tried to pin #50 for something he didn't commit in the biggest down and biggest game of his life....Undoubtedly, he did not want the team wearing white to win for whatever reason...and the integrity of the game and it's fairness suffers.....

[STARSNBARS]

Gooder points cR and BDR......And cR lets knott fergit tha mistree time added baick on tha clock......aftur tha WH timeout on thair laist drive....

[countryREB]

Gooder points cR and BDR......And cR lets knott fergit tha mistree time added baick on tha clock......aftur tha WH timeout on thair laist drive....

YEP!

[oldrebel]

[click on the pictures for larger views]

 

 

The first picture shows where everybody is as the pass leaves #7's hands. I marked the yard lines to help myself see exactly where the players were; I didn't want the camera angle to distort what I was seeing.

 

#50 is clearly behind the 3 yard line at this point.

 

 

The picture show's where the players where as the pass crossed the LOS/neutral zone. As the rule states, this is the point where an ineligible downfield blocker is determined. You'll notice the umpire, Gary Darden, has a clear view of our completely legal play.

 

Also, it has been claimed that #16 was blocking downfield. Those people are either untruthful or not smart [trying to keep it PC here]

 

 

 

Going a bit farther with the play, this last picture shows the play as #11 catches the ball in the endzone. Some mistakenly thought the ineligible downfield blocker was determined at the time of the reception, and even under this [wrong] version of the rule #50 is still outside the 1 yard line.

His feet are closer to the 2 yard line. Did Gary Darden drop his flag with an agenda? Who knows, but it's a shame this call was made.

 

[STARSNBARS]

[click on the pictures for larger views]

 

 

The first picture shows where everybody is as the pass leaves #7's hands. I marked the yard lines to help myself see exactly where the players were; I didn't want the camera angle to distort what I was seeing.

 

#50 is clearly behind the 3 yard line at this point.

 

 

The picture show's where the players where as the pass crossed the LOS/neutral zone. As the rule states, this is the point where an ineligible downfield blocker is determined. You'll notice the umpire, Gary Darden, has a clear view of our completely legal play.

 

Also, it has been claimed that #16 was blocking downfield. Those people are either untruthful or not smart [trying to keep it PC here]

 

 

 

Going a bit farther with the play, this last picture shows the play as #11 catches the ball in the endzone. Some mistakenly thought the ineligible downfield blocker was determined at the time of the reception, and even under this [wrong] version of the rule #50 is still outside the 1 yard line.

His feet are closer to the 2 yard line. Did Gary Darden drop his flag with an agenda? Who knows, but it's a shame this call was made.

 

GARY DARDEN IS GUILTY OF FALSELY ACCUSING AN INNOCENT YOUNG MAN WITH A "MADE UP CALL"......AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE GAME SUFFERS WITH CLOWNS LIKE THIS!!!!

[OldRebel2]

Rule 7-5 Art. 12 Reads: "Ineligible A players may not advance beyond the expanded neutral on a legal forward pass play before a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone is in flight."

 

After re-reading the rule and after talking to several refs, I realize that the rule says before a legal forward pass "is in flight". That means it's when it leaves the passers hands. The there was no eligible player down field, but some of us were measuring from when the ball left the neutral zone and that is not the rule. The rule about the ball leaving the neutal zone is about all long the free blocking zone exists, not in regards to an ineligible receiver. The call is even worse now!

 

Am I missing something here?

Edited December 4, 2012 by OldRebel2

[oldrebel]

Rule 7-5 Art. 12 Reads: "Ineligible A players may not advance beyond the expanded neutral on a legal forward pass play before a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone is in flight."

 

After re-reading the rule and after talking to several refs, I realize that the rule says before a legal forward pass "is in flight". That means it's when it leaves the passers hands. The there was no eligible player down field, but some of us were measuring from when the ball left the neutral zone and that is not the rule. The rule about the ball leaving the neutal zone is about all long the free blocking zone exists, not in regards to an ineligible receiver. The call is even worse now!

 

Am I missing something here?

 

Actually, I think you're right. The "crosses the neutral zone" language basically restates that the rule is in regards to forward passes, and has nothing to do with the determination of when you look at downfield blocking.

My earlier posts are wrong. Of course, that just makes Gary Darden's call even worse. The applicable photo is the first one from my 3 pic post.

 

 

[click on the pictures for larger views]

 

[STARSNBARS]

Actually, I think you're right. The "crosses the neutral zone" language basically restates that the rule is in regards to forward passes, and has nothing to do with the determination of when you look at downfield blocking.

My earlier posts are wrong. Of course, that just makes Gary Darden's call even worse. The applicable photo is the first one from my 3 pic post.

 

 

Another thang I like about your pic too oldreb is that it shows #16 on the line of scrimmage too exactly where he's supposed to be.....(YOU DO SEE THAT RIGHT BLACK HAVEN SENATOR???)......

Edited December 4, 2012 by STARSNBARS