CBHS vs MBA update thread

[eh3]

PurpleWave06,

 

Look at the film and then make the same statement with a straight face, I'm sure you haven't seen the film or you would be embarassed.

[silverbullett]

PW06-

 

Watch the film. The offensive PI call could not have been on the receiver catching the ball. Maybe was someone else. The receiver did not even touch anyone after passing the line of scrimmage. As for the inel man downfield on the throw to the one, it may be that the TE was covered by the wideout. Could not tell by the film.

 

As for the field, can someone in Memphis say just how much rain memphis got in the days before the game. Apparently, the practice field was relatively dry and someone from near Memphis told me that it did not rain enough where he was to make a difference(an inch or so) so.

 

Again, I thought it was a great game and the CB fans could not have been nicer to me(and I had a shirt with an MBA logo on it). The PA announcer was a little overly biased but what the heck.

[yoyo34]

What was wrong with the field. I understand that Memphis got a lot of rain this week but the rest of the campus seemed to be relatively dry compared to the game field.

[brothers15]

There are two reasons for the poor field conditions at the CB game. 1) CBHS just put down new sod to repair some damage done to the field in the recent past. 2)CBHS played a JV game on it Monday night. The rain poored down and the field was torn up pretty bad. If you had seen the field Tuesday, you wouldn't complain about the way it looked Friday.

[BigRed3]

to clear up the PI call on tom santi on the touchdown that got called back.

 

MBA's receiver Santi's side was on the ball in a two tight end formation, meaning tom santi was "covered up" and not allowed to go downfield and catch a pass. instead on the penalty being illegal man down field, the ref said that since the ball went to santi, and he touched the ball, that that made the penalty PI instead.

[rollredroll]

to clear up the PI call on tom santi on the touchdown that got called back.

 

MBA's receiver Santi's side was on the ball in a two tight end formation, meaning tom santi was "covered up" and not allowed to go downfield and catch a pass. instead on the penalty being illegal man down field, the ref said that since the ball went to santi, and he touched the ball, that that made the penalty PI instead.

I don't get it. Why does touching the ball, whether you're an offensive or defensive player, constitute pass interference? Don't you have to touch a person to have PI?

Edited October 13, 2003 by rollredroll

[bigblah]

i guess that's a rule found only in memphis

[AintSkeerd59]

hey for all you cool guys that cant take a loss, look mba ran all over yall. thanks for watering the field. to bad your running game did nothing for yall. the idea of watering the field was a horrible one.. it affected your passing game more then ours.. just take the loss like a man. all that complaining is getting you no where. we still won and that cant change.. accpet it, purple colored team (not a cool team color, who wants to be purple...might as well be hott-pink)

[TheBigRedDog]

AintSkeerd,

 

That post is embarrassing. I haven't seen a post from you in awhile and this one seems a bit out of character, so I'm hoping maybe someone got on your computer and is playing a joke.

[rollredroll]

I've seen AintSkeerd59 post before and am pretty confident that someone logged on under his name and made the post. That's not his style. I'm sure he will erase it when he finds out.

[itzme]

I agree...no way it's him.

[MBAalumnus]

rollredroll,

 

not quite that old...class of '93...

 

seems like the call should have been illegal touch. Usually, that's what the call is when a qb is trying to set up a screen and dumps it into one of the linemen's backs...sounds like a strange game...maybe round 2 will come in the post-season...