|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1
|
110%er [6644]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 9/22/11
|
Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 20, 2021, 11:05 PM
|
|
They were absolutely terrible, esp. Mark Jones. I could not believe they kept denying that touch on the Auburn player on that last punt, which was obvious esp. on one angle. They denied even after the long look by the refs confirmed it. And Mark Jones is a real SEC homer.
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [2525]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2279
Joined: 9/21/11
|
Re: Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 20, 2021, 11:09 PM
|
|
I like RG3 ???????
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6644]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 9/22/11
|
RG is much better, but why were they both so determined
Nov 20, 2021, 11:11 PM
|
|
that the ball did not touch the Auburn player on that last punt?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
I thought RGIII thought it possible
Nov 20, 2021, 11:15 PM
|
|
But I still haven't seen an angle that was definitive.
The other guy certainly was overly-dismissive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Wait, you saw an angle that was an obvious touch?
Nov 20, 2021, 11:14 PM
|
|
I honestly, didn't see ANY angle that was definitive.
Which of these did you think was definitive? Honestly, curious.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I52wasdEl2w
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48004]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14848
Joined: 11/7/20
|
Re: Wait, you saw an angle that was an obvious touch?
Nov 20, 2021, 11:51 PM
|
|
When they show the ball on the knee pad, if it's blown up enough as they can do with their equipment, it was definitive. Right call obviously. One thing that didn't help was the guy throwing his arms up.
As for announcers, I think they just wanted the last minute drama.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Ok, to each their own
Nov 21, 2021, 12:20 AM
|
|
To me that angle could be touching, but is far from definitive. I don’t ever see the ball change direction and that particular view doesn’t have any sort of depth of angle to it. But, again, to each their own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1202]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1958
Joined: 10/27/06
|
I’ll take the announcers if we can pass on the
Nov 20, 2021, 11:14 PM
|
|
refs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10798]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12651
Joined: 9/28/10
|
Re: Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 20, 2021, 11:24 PM
|
|
Nah I'm sure it's whoever is the team for SEC Saturday Night Football on their network. They will be homers for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67612]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115373
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 20, 2021, 11:32 PM
|
|
I think it is Mowins and Ed Cunnigham next week w/ Munson as their special guest in charge of hash mark reporting
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22412]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11481
Joined: 10/12/14
|
Re: Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 21, 2021, 10:09 AM
|
|
We won’t. They were on ESPN and our game is on SEC network. Announcers will probably be worse. Careful what you ask for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4412]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6277
Joined: 10/26/05
|
Re: Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 21, 2021, 10:29 AM
|
|
Couldn’t agree more with the your assessment of the announcers. They were awful! I don’t like RG3.
Couldn’t disagree with you more though on the ball touching the Auburn player. In no way was there enough evidence to overturn the call on the field. Personally, I don’t think it touched him. Auburn should have kept possession of the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9298]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6391
Joined: 11/17/03
|
Re: Hope we don't have tonight's S.C. announcers next week...
Nov 21, 2021, 11:49 AM
|
|
I don't see how anyone that can see could say that ball didn't touch the Auburn player. The ball CHANGED directions. Do you think a big gust of wind came into the stadium 1 foot above the playing field? It was obvious it grazed his leg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
