I agree that I don't see how you say this isn't targeting. Situations like this are why they put these rules in place.
OSU player not suspended for 1st half
- Thread starter sss
- Start date
Don't forget the ref standing in perfect position and staring at the 'bounce pass' then calling it complete.
SMH.....
Can't wait for the apologies from the Big Ten office on Sunday. Too many things have happened over the years to benefit the two darlings in our games for it to be just coincidental. That said, we do get some benefit of the doubt as a second tier against lower schools. I'll take the label of conspiracy theorist, there should not be a pecking order but to think there isn't in a business that generates billions of dollars is extremely naive.
psuno1 is pointing out just one game...there are many....
The Big Ten said in a statement "a breakdown in officiating mechanics occurred and the crew failed to properly monitor the play clock. There is flexibility for a slight delay between the play clock and the snap of the ball, but in this case, the timing far exceeded the tolerance for normal play clock procedures. The proper ruling should have been a five-yard penalty for delay of game."
The Big Ten said "the video feed to the replay booth was tested and confirmed on Friday and prior to the game on Saturday, but at the start of the game, the booth was no longer receiving all available feeds. The technician in the booth followed procedure by contacting the production truck, which immediately began working on the issue. Due to these technical difficulties, only one isolated shot from the overhead camera was available and the view did not provide sufficient information to reverse the call. As a result, the play stood as called. The production truck rectified the technical issues shortly thereafter, and the replay booth had access to multiple feeds for the remainder of the game.”
Here's a tip for you ... when you're repeatedly shouting variants of "Never" or "always" ... it's likely an extremist take.
Yes, of course a call has cost teams games. Yes, you can say the team should have done more here, or more there, or shouldn't have done this or that ... and those can all be true ... and that's what the team should focus on improving, and the team and the fans shouldn't get hung up on the ref's call. And, yes, incorrect ref calls will typically even out over a large enough sampling. But the ref's call still cost them the game in that instance.
Here, we're going to head off your extremist illogic ... when a team loses ... generically speaking, what determines the outcome of the game (in your opinion)?
All I want to understand on this reversal of targeting call to benefit OSU is if this has ever happened before in the B10, ever? Has any other team in the B10 ever benefitted from a targeting call being reversed two days after it happened?
LOL! When the ball first impacts the receiver and he attempts to catch it, he's in the air ... neither one of his feet are touching the ground. What you're seeing is him landing as he's attempting to secure the catch ... he doesn't take 2 steps subsequent to catching the ball. He lands with both feet as he's catching the ball, then picks up a foot, and before he can complete that single step, he's rocked by a barred forearm that is being purposefully shoved forward and upward, into his neck/facemask area. You can see that the forearm is barred and close to the defender's body well before he gets to the receiver, then you see it being extended as impact is about to happen, and then you see it farther extended after impact. Targeting. Get the eff off the field.
Never is sometimes factual. Lamar's never won a SB. One play has never decided a game. You have all game to oercome it. That's a loser's mentality where you have to blame others for your inability to succeed.
Again--not extremist. Fact not opinion. And, even Va Tech's coach (Pry), said that when they lost. So did Minnesota's coach. Every competitor knows this--at least ones that understand accountability.
You failed to answer my question (I'll revisit any other aspects of your post, if needed, after we deal with this). Focus. I'll restate it ... when a team loses ... generically speaking, what determines the outcome of the game (in your opinion)?
Last edited:
They would have ruled a fumble pending outcome of penalty. But it was immediately waved off as incomplete pass.
The entirety of the game--not one play....never the refs
You have all game to overcome a drop (drops), overcome a bad call(or calls), overcome a missed assignment (missed assignments)
The refs have never and will never determine the outcome--again, the only thing close is Mizzou/Colorado and they could have topped then
I know you like making excuses--that's not my problem
So, everything that happens in the game, determines the outcome of the game, in your opinion? So, blocks, tackles, play calls, throws, etc. ... all these things determine the outcome of a game. And that would include ref's calls ... because those are obviously something that is part of the game, and affects the outcome. And, in case there was ever any question this was true ... let's quote the creator of LandoLogic ...
So, the collection of blocks missed, assignments missed, throws missed, throws made, blocks made, assignments nailed, etc ... those all collectively determine the outcome of a game. Just like, calls are missed. So, calls impact the outcome of a game ... by your own freaking admission and LandoLogic.
You know that's where you LandoLogic leads you, which is why you, after including ref calls, then try to specifically exclude ref's calls. Why? They impact the game just like anything else that occurs, so why do you try to exclude them, when they objectively impact the game?
See, this is what I've said before, and will continue to say ... you take something that may be true, and then you can't cognitively deal with it properly, so you end up going to an extreme point. Here, that something that is true is that a team shouldn't focus on the ref's calls ... because they can't control them, and you need to work on fixing what you can fix. No use crying about something out of your control.
But here's what normal, rational people can do ... they can acknowledge that ref's calls impacted the game. Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot.
AND they can also acknowledge that you can't focus on that aspect of the game, because it's not in your control, and the only way to get better is to work on what you can control.
See? Very simple for rational people.
Stop whining about the refs ... because you can't control it. Losers focus on the refs. Yup. True.
But that, in no way, to a logical, rational person, means you can't acknowledge that ref's calls impact the outcome of a game.
Otherwise you end up in LandoLand, a victim of LandoLogic ... where he acknowledges that ref's calls impact the outcome of a game, just like missed blocks, missed assignments, and missed throws ... but then suddenly shouts out that ref's calls don't impact the outcome of a game.
It's crazy town. It's LandoLand.
Just laughable nonsense - I guess it's an optical illusion that his shoulder drives directly into the facemask of the receiver ON FILM. LMAO. BTW, the receiver is absolutely still in the process of securing the ball when he is hit and beyond that, a second defender coming in is ALSO A STATED CRITERIA FOR A RECEIVER OR RUNNER TO BE DEEMED "DEFENSELESS" UNDER THE RULE. Everything you said is complete laughable, made up bullshit as is your claim that waiving the penalty two days after it happened, and was further CONFIRMED by the central B1G Replay Review Center, is not utterly unprecedented. According to this insane logic - teams that have Targetting calls waived off (or even uncalled) could appeal them to have them post-game enforced and we all know that is laughable bullshit. Once again the b1g douches prove what cheating Homers they are (a la not even Reviewing Avante's clear OB "catch" in 2005 despite the Rule at the time STATING that any such catch on the sideline is a mandatory review inside 2 minutes to play (which it was - it was, IN FACT, inside 1 minute to play when they fraudulently awarded the catch which accounted for 35% of the yards on the drive - and then subsequently in the drive fraudulently added 2 seconds to the clock so scUM could get an extra play - the play they scored on was snapped with 1 second remaining, the prior play was an incompletion.)).
This league is a ****ing joke with it's homerism and everyone outside the "traditional big ten" knows it.
Last edited:
Are they going to put more time on the clock too? Or maybe ignore the play clock to make up for throwing him out of the Nebraska game?
See, this is you just being unreasonable. If all calls are factor one never determines a game. Missed calls are simply part of the game. Just like everything else and never determine the outcome. Just like Fleming's drop didn't. Just like the pick six didn't. All just small moments in a large game.
AGAIN--a call has never determined the outcome of a game. FACT not opinion.
Blaming a call for losing a game is 100% a fan (or player) making excuses. Not once. Never in the history of sport. Has a call determined the outcome.
Thank you for further illustrating the absolute insanity of LandoLogic. Per your LandoLogic, because multiple things determine the outcome of a game, NOTHING determines the outcome of a game.
Pssst ... I already explained away your red herring about "excuses." It's a nonsensical attack that you need to drop. You have much bigger fish to fry.
No, no. Not "no one thing" ... NOTHING determines it. According to LandoLogic, NOTHING determines the outcome of a game.
Well Colorado's 5th Down (rules say you only get 4 on "Goal To Go" situations) unquestionably cost Missouri the win. The 5th down was snapped with only 2 seconds remaining - the ball was supposed to be turned over to Missouri after the failed 4th down play. Given that the Officials were responsible for awarding an illegal 5th down - it is beyond factual that the Officials "wrong call" absolutely and unquestionably changed the outcome of the game and were responsible for changing a clear Missouri win into a loss on the record books.
Exactly wrong. That's me explaining your logic to you. You're stuck, dude. LandoLogic has led you here.
What you WANT to say is that everything that happens in a game affects the outcome. You also WANT to say ref's calls don't affect the outcome of a game.
The problem you have there is that ref's calls happen in a game, so they, by definition, affect the outcome of a game. You've acknowledged that they're just like missed blocks and missed assignments, which affect the outcome of the game. But then you try to futilely exclude them from affecting the outcome of the game, just by stating as such.
Which is completely insane, obviously.
And you end up spinning an illogical loop that leads you to NOTHING determines the outcome of the game. It's LandoLogic.
I like his absolute fact, not opinion bullshit when he is provably diametrically wrong yet again as Colorado was awarded an illegal 5th Down with only 2 seconds remaining by the refs in 1990 when the Refs unquestionably and irrefutably changed a clear Missouri WIN into a Missouri LOSS with a FACTUALLY PROVABLY BAD CALL (the Rulebook clearly states you only get 4 Downs, not 5, to score on a "First And Goal" series.). So bozo troll-boy is provably FACTUALLY WRONG yet again, what a shocker.
Last edited:
Googling it, there have been several reversals of targeting calls in the NCAA this year after review. So not unprecedented, but...the overwhelming majority have been in games that did not have instant replay review. From what I read, before this weekend, 3 out of twenty something that were reviewed via instant replay and confirmed ended up getting overturned on appeal. I could only find a clip of 1 which was a Boise State player hitting Oregon's QB while he slid. While there was contact to the head, I think that one was deemed it wasn't "forcible" contact. So I'm sure this is just another case of misfortune for PSU against OSU 🙄
No, it hasn't and it isn't just the call on the field being reversed - they are also reversing the call of the centralized B1G Replay Review Center which CONFIRMED TARGETTING ON THE PLAY. So following the insane logic of the PRECEDENT this bush homer f'ing league just set, a team that has Targetting Reversed on replay (or even a team that believes Targetting occurred but was failed to be identified by the B1G Centralized Replay Review Center) has grounds for submitting appeals to the League and asking that these calls be posthumously enforced!!! Think about the absurdity of the precedent this bush f'ing homer cheating league just set! Just beyond absurd especially when you consider the actions of the classless duhO$U fans when the call was CONFIRMED on Review (they began throwing bottles and cans on the field a la the Texas fans during UGa game). How much you want to bet that the Officials and League wouldn't come down hard on PSU fans [and their coach] if they did what the classless scumbag duhO$U fans and coach did last week after the call? But this home league rewards duhO$U after the ridiculous behaviour of their fans, and Day, following the call - go figure. This bush Conference is such a joke.
Any idea who the people are who comprise the NCAA committee empowered to review and subsequently overturn the ruling? Do the bring in or consult with the people who were in charge of making the game time decision and review? Are they always the same people?
Is there a governing body that monitors the finances of the people who are in charge of the review process?
With a process that lacks transparency (I'd love to be able to observe their discussions that they had during their decision making process) and with the advent and popularity of crypto, there are too many opportunities for these people to be persuaded.
So sad that I have to even contemplate that these things can happen.....
False.
I would challenge you to lay out your logical syllogisms here, but you've proven incapable of doing that in the past.
Fact ... you have claimed everything in the game affects the outcome of the game.
Fact ... you have acknowledged that ref's calls are like missed blocks, assignments and throws
Fact ... you have acknowledged missed blocks, assignments and throws affect the outcome of a game.
The necessary logical conclusion, given these premises is that ref's calls affect the outcome of the game.
That's not me wanting it to say this. This is logic. This is the science of logic.
However, YOU go on to claim that ref's calls don't affect the outcome of a game.
For this assertion/conclusion to hold true, the premises need to be altered ...
LandoFact ... nothing in the game affects the outcome of the game.
LandoFact ... ref's calls are like missed blocks, assignments and throws
LandoFact ... missed blocks, assignments, throws don't affect the outcome of the game
LandoConclusion ... ref's calls don't affect the outcome of the game
Now, I could have condensed 2 of those premises in both examples into one premise, but I wanted to highlight what's actually been said. I could have also flipped a premise to be the conclusion, but I wanted to highlight the crazy of LandoLogic.
You will not be able to provide us with a valid and sound logical syllogism that supports your stance. Try it.
Wandering Spectator
Well-Known Member
I really hope they don’t throw anything. We know it’s likely that a questionable call is going to go against us. If the fans throw stuff, my guess is it will result in an unsportsmanlike penalty on the home team. Just a wild guess that I hope doesn’t come to fruition.
From Sporting News, the review of a player ejection is new beginning in 2022. "Only one significant NCAA rule change has been implemented for the 2022 season, and it has to do with reviewing a player's eligibility for his team's next game after he is called for targeting." Here is the actual rule:
"In games that have instant replay, when a targeting foul occurs in the second half, the carryover penalty (of sitting out the first half of that player's next game) will be eligible for further appeal.
The process will begin with a conference submitting a request to the NCAA national coordinator of officials, who would review video of the play. If it is obvious that a player was incorrectly penalized for targeting, the call would be overturned, and the player would be cleared to play in the first half of the next game."
OSU obviously initiated the review, but according to the rule the conference makes the official request, so it appears that other schools signed on to OSU's objections. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nca...ule-penalty-ejection/yqdcwtpqt13vpmj7bcseti5d
I agree with this 100%. I believe any OSU fans caught throwing water bottles on the field should be banned for a minimum of 5 years if not for life. Total lowlifes.
False--that's again your interpretation of what is being said when and goes away from the entire point of the discussion with is what you always do. Notice your "conclusion" is never logical or about what is said but rather about what you want others to say. That works on some people here--not me.
A call has NEVER decided the outcome of a game. FACT--never.
Soo - if a ref misses a clear interference call in the end zone on the last play when a catch would have won the didn't decide the outcome of the game? - interesting theory.
As I knew, you couldn't provide a logical syllogism to dispute what I stated.
Because what I stated is true.
And, no, it's not an interpretation of what you've said. It's exactly what you've said, put into logical syllogism form (i.e. logic), along with the glue piece that makes it "logical" ... that makes it a valid syllogism. It may not be sound (it's not ... because you said it), but it's valid. These are all alien concepts to you, I know ... because you have no legal background. But these are all real things.
So, if I were going to tackle your latest regurgitation of your unsupported assertion (because you never support ... you only restate the unsound conclusion), I would again ask, what HAS decided the outcome of a game. List out everything that HAS decided the outcome of a game. That's step 1.
If you are this unhappy with the B1G, why don't you get with fellow believers and petition PSU to leave the conference and join another (ACC? MAC? SEC?). Then you would be rid of the hated B1G and even more hated "duhO$U". Maybe the ACC would treat you better.
CJFisJoePaII complains about every call, and every non-call. 90% of the time (conservatively) he's wrong, but he just keeps going.
He makes everything about the ref's calls. If he was right with every complaint, we'd have never won a game.
Here, however, he happens to be correct regarding the silliness of claiming this wasn't targeting.
But, again, this isn't limited to calls benefitting OSU ... targeting is just called all over the map, and there isn't a guiding principle that lets you agree what *should* be targeting with what is called targeting, because it's completely variable. Unlike, let's say ... travelling in basketball, where they completely revised what travelling is, and it doesn't look anything like what it used to be, or what the rulebook says, but it's pretty consistently called a different way now ... targeting, on the other hand, is a coinflip often times.
What is concerning is what appears to be an apparently unprecedented (to my knowledge .. then again, it's not something I've followed closely, so maybe this happens all the time and I'm not aware of it) post-game reversal of a targeting call. Especially when it was clearly a targeting call - it wasn't, for example, one of those unreviewable calls everyone knew the ref messed up, but we couldn't do anything about it until the league office stepped in, or something like that. We have video showing targeting. We have video review which upheld targeting. And now we a reversal of that. It's bonkers.
Correct. Same logic Minnesota's coach made used when saying that the kickoff offside call didn't determine that game. A call never determines it. Never has never will. The one potential exception remains the extra down in Mizzou/Colorado but even then they just had to stop them again.
That wasn't the question asked - the question was if it was unprecedented for the B1G to do a reversal two days after the call AND Replay Review Confirmation. Including all conferences is ridiculous as many don't video every single game and have a feed to their state-of-the-art Centralized Review System. It is utterly unprecedented for the B1G and beyond absurdly ridiculous.
Similar threads
