I would like to go beyond this emotional hearsay, and approach this logically and factually. I would like to see Mr. Pylon’s video again, but first, explain how to logically interpret his video. I now present Exhibit A:
From Mr. AeroTiger’s (retired 29 year NASA veteran) explanation, it should be apparent that the ball came sufficiently close enough to going straight over the pylon as to not show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it didn’t. This statement is backed by the official SEC reviewers at the game. Note that, as explained in Exhibit A, the commentators jibber jabber should be inadmissible as evidence as it was based on unreliable off-angle views.
Speaking of the commentator’s jibber jabber based on unreliable off-angle views, I would now like to present Exhibit B:
As clearly pointed out by Mr. ChE_1535’s geometry-based analysis, even within reasonable errors in assumptions of the exact x-y coordinates of the launch point and landing point, it still proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the ball did indeed pass over, or perhaps even inside of, Mr. Pylon.
In my closing statements, I would to say that the defense has more than proved that the allegations of impropriety have been logically and factually disproved today. I would also like to point out that Texas A&M has a great football team, and that I fully expect them to upset AT LEAST one SEC team on their grueling remaining schedule. But I also must point out that the fan base of this team who were so quick to base the outcome of the game on officiating should duly note the numerous no-call holds perpetrated by their OL’s on Clemson’s DL’s. Here is a sample: