Unless you were the official, you have no idea what the official saw live.
LInk the b1g statement that states it was the correct call.
Refs Strike Again at Michigan
- Thread starter ryoder1
- Start date
LInk the b1g statement that states it was the correct call.
Exact words that you want to hear are not necessary for something to have been said/conveyed. That's not how the actual world works. There's no one who would reasonably see the steps that have been taken, and things that have been said since, and determine that the Big Ten didn't admit the call was wrong.
They, in fact, never defended the call. Nothing they said could even be construed as any kind of defense. In fact, they changed their way of officiating the call so that kind of call didn't happen again.
Crazily, you even undercut your own assertion (I'd say "argument" but you never laid out an argument about any aspect of this discussion ... just an unsupported assertion) when you admitted that the Big Ten would never admit they were wrong. If your assertion was true, then even if the Big Ten realized they were wrong, they'd never outright admit it ... they'd do other things to indicate it was wrong. You know, like issue a statement in which they never stated they stood by the call, and then ask the NCAA to OK a change in their officiating procedure to get more eyeballs on this particular call in the future. And, when a directly interested party later stated that the coordinator of officiating of the Big Ten admitted to him that the call shouldn't have been made, they would have come out with a statement that this was never said, if it was never said.
So, you can just sit there and repeat "the proof is the photo" without actually indicating HOW the photo is proof, since the photo shows every body part onside, even after the kick, and you can continue to repeat that they're defending the call, without explaining how their words not defending the call should actually be interpreted as defending the call, and so on.
But you can't do anything other than just throw out unsupported assertions, because you know you can't explain them, as there is no support for you to give.
Last edited:
Given his condition, we should all be saying a prayer for HandoCammando, rather than laughing at him but...... he's just so damn hilarious even if it is a result of his mental handicap.
Actually, he's trying to claim Pereira was saying he wasn't sure if he was offsides despite the fact that Pereira made an absolutely unequivocal declarative statement that the Minny player was not offsides in his expert opinion:
Good morning, Penn State fans.
The date is: October 4, 2024.
The time is: 7:48 AM Eastern
Lando is: still wrong.
The date is: October 4, 2024.
The time is: 7:48 AM Eastern
Lando is: still wrong.
I know I don't ever leave but when I do because I'm busy I must be hiding--it's cute
You're the one that side they "whitewashed" it meaning didn't acknowledge it was incorrect
You read what is written. Fleck said this from his conversation with B10 office. So he says something different from what B10 said? Lying. Can't remember a key discussion? Get with it.
You said they whitewashed it meaning it was defended
If I'm wrong share it--you won't though because I'm right
Also, I said it meant they didn't admit the call was incorrect not that you said it was correct
You are not in B10 office. No one knows,what was discussed. Can't say they think call is correct. Wrong again. Dumb opinion to say B10 believes call is correct. Get better.
That's not lying. That's him being emotional about it and not quoting things accurately. That happens all the time.
How can you say the call was wrong then?
They clearly believe it was correct based on their statement
All you have to do is provide a Big Ten statement saying it's wrong and you win but that doesn't exist because they haven't and won't
Per GSPMax they released a statement speaking of the game and didn't say an error occurred. That's very simple that they don't believe one did.
Pereira is not saying the call is correct. Again you are wrong on this point. This is amusing how ignorant you are.
They released a statement about this call in this game. In the same statement they changed the protocol on onside kicks. They whitewashed admitting the official made a bad call by changing protocol.
But keep beating that dead horse you are trying to ride. You are wrong and your horse is dead.
BTW: In your mind what advantage did the minn player gain in your incorrect opinion of the call
Yes he gained an advantage
Again, if they mentioned the play and they didn't state the call was wrong they're defending the decision. As they should
One thing all reasonable, non-neurodivergent humans can agree upon ... Pereira is NOT saying it could go either way. He's clearly saying it's not offsides. The closest he gets to saying anything else is to say it's close ... but he says, multiple times, that it's not offsides.
Another epic fail by Lando.
This is almost as bad as when you tried to claim your view it was offsides was supported by the Big Ten because they didn't explicitly say the words "we were wrong," only to then say that the Big Ten wouldn't ever say they were wrong (even if they were).
You'll make yourself look as foolish as possible, just so someone will pay attention to you.
This is as good a time as any to remind everyone that Lando recently stated that if every single penalty flag that's ever been thrown in college football HADN'T been thrown, he would be fine with that. And that's because they're all such close judgment calls that they could be called, or couldn't be called, and he wouldn't care (in other words, there is no "correct" call). But he's here arguing that the call was correct.
Lando Logic strikes again.
Lando Logic strikes again.
jumping in for the first time on page 17, guess I am a masochist. The term "lying" requires it to be intentional.
Show us WHERE and WHEN the Big Ten said the refs got it right.
The tool is a blithering moron and keeps misquoting Pereira in the way he used the term "think"! He did not use the term to lighten or shade his opinion of the call - trollboy is 100% incorrect and wrong in his analysis of Pereira's statement. His statement was one sentence and absolutely declarative - "I don't think he's offsides." (referring to Minnesota player named). That was all he said (along with a short video to support his clear, unambiguous opinion). Absolutely used "think" to identify it as his opinion, and no one else's.... This is identical to him saying, "I think he's onsides." - he just choose the diction relative to the penalty called, but he absolutely declares that it is his opinion that the Minnesota player is not offsides.... and leaves no doubt about what his opinion of the call is - he unequivocally believes the call is incorrect and the player "is not offsides".
1. There is no doubt that BIG officiating is horrible today. And it is horrible all around. The obscene amount of holding that is ignored is amazing.
2. Anyone who watched PSU in the 90s realizes how bad PSU got screwed on the regular. At that point, PSU was new guy in town and the conference was quite divided on even allowing PSU in which showed up in a lot of officiating calls. It certainly didn't help that PSU was able to run the table in its s season second in the Big. Luckily, I think all of those Refs are gone now, so the outright hostility to PSU is gone.
3) UM and OSU still get more than their fair share of calls. Anyone who has watched us in big games against those teams have not only seen questionable calls, they have seen indefensible calls
- (watch Mauti get mugged in real time
- was it 05 UM the 2 seconds added on game? I don't even beef the 2 seconds added, however, the fact that Avant was clearly out of bounds on the first reception of the drive but replay wasn't even used to reviewed and we won't even get into the horrible spots all game long that created phantom first downs...
-OSU- once again in 2012 (same game as Mauti getting mugged) PSU was called for defensive holding (holding the long snapper after he snapped the ball, only time in my 45 years of watching sports I have seen that call)...Read the Black shoe diaries recap of that game, pretty funny
- The bogus pick in 2014 that somehow wasn't reviewed, and somehow the end of the half FG that wasn't called for a penalty despite the ball being snapped 3 seconds after the play clock expired.
4) While I am on a rant, that 2019 Iowa game still pisses me off despite winning. PSU has produced God knows how many first round talents over the years, and the amount of holding calls generated are always damn few (just look at what Illinois got away with last week, only getting called after game was essentially over). Jared Odrick, Michael Hanyes, Courtney Brown etc can have hour long montages of being dragged down from behind with no calls. Yet at Iowa, PSU was called for 3 holding calls in 4 plays, negating two TDs. Not to mention, the officials overturned a TD on the lone play where there wasn't a holding call (incorrectly so as well).
While we don't get screwed as often as we did in the 90's, it is clear that the officiating is bad, and UM and OSU tend to get a few more breaks than others in the conference for whatever reason.
2. Anyone who watched PSU in the 90s realizes how bad PSU got screwed on the regular. At that point, PSU was new guy in town and the conference was quite divided on even allowing PSU in which showed up in a lot of officiating calls. It certainly didn't help that PSU was able to run the table in its s season second in the Big. Luckily, I think all of those Refs are gone now, so the outright hostility to PSU is gone.
3) UM and OSU still get more than their fair share of calls. Anyone who has watched us in big games against those teams have not only seen questionable calls, they have seen indefensible calls
- (watch Mauti get mugged in real time
- was it 05 UM the 2 seconds added on game? I don't even beef the 2 seconds added, however, the fact that Avant was clearly out of bounds on the first reception of the drive but replay wasn't even used to reviewed and we won't even get into the horrible spots all game long that created phantom first downs...
-OSU- once again in 2012 (same game as Mauti getting mugged) PSU was called for defensive holding (holding the long snapper after he snapped the ball, only time in my 45 years of watching sports I have seen that call)...Read the Black shoe diaries recap of that game, pretty funny
- The bogus pick in 2014 that somehow wasn't reviewed, and somehow the end of the half FG that wasn't called for a penalty despite the ball being snapped 3 seconds after the play clock expired.
4) While I am on a rant, that 2019 Iowa game still pisses me off despite winning. PSU has produced God knows how many first round talents over the years, and the amount of holding calls generated are always damn few (just look at what Illinois got away with last week, only getting called after game was essentially over). Jared Odrick, Michael Hanyes, Courtney Brown etc can have hour long montages of being dragged down from behind with no calls. Yet at Iowa, PSU was called for 3 holding calls in 4 plays, negating two TDs. Not to mention, the officials overturned a TD on the lone play where there wasn't a holding call (incorrectly so as well).
While we don't get screwed as often as we did in the 90's, it is clear that the officiating is bad, and UM and OSU tend to get a few more breaks than others in the conference for whatever reason.
How about his bullshit about him "using think twice"??? The f'ing moron can't even count - here is Pereira's X Post:
Now tell me, do you see Pereira using the term twice???? How f'ing bullshit is this guy in that he claims Pereira used the term in a manner he absolutely did not, but then mis-claims that he used it twice in this fashion to try and completely change what Pereira said which is nothing like what troll douche-boy is claiming His statement leaves no room for interpretation and he definitely states that the Minnesota player is not offsides in his professional expert opinion (what he is paid for by the network iow).
His semantics are comical - he says that he does not believe Fleck when Fleck unequivocally states that the B1G Coordinator of Officiating, Bill Carullo (in a formal response to Fleck's submission), told him specifically that "the flag should not have been thrown"...... but he isn't saying that Fleck is lying (i.e., fabricating this statement and attributing it to the B1G Head of Officiating)???? Huh??? I'm confused - could someone explain to me how he can both believe, and not believe, Fleck's very clear statement at the same time??? Maybe HandJoCommando is a schizophrenic with multiple personality disorder.
I am convinced that Lando is that breed of a-hole that if you said the world is round he would insist it’s flat and show you a map on the table and say look the map is flat and that proves the world is flat.
Nope, he never said it could go either way. Watch the video.
And again you have avoided the key question. In your warped world if it could go either way according to Pereira then it is not the 100% right call as you proclaim. You lose. How cute you are carrying on this, like a little child.
I was going to paste an image of Charlie Sheen "WINNING" and add he's related to Lando, but didn't want to go too far overboard.
He absolutely does not say "it's not offside" Not once
Watch the video and quote him saying "the play was onside" or anything to that effect
"Think" is the key word
Correct--and if it isn't intentional he's not lying. Hence I've never used the word "lied" or "liar"
