You were spot on 'nut

[BanditVol]

Mizzou just got absolutely jobbed out of a fumble.

Yeah, they were full of explanations but none of them added up.  Supposedly it was "forward progress", but the ball clearly came out before the whistle, forward progress or no.  If the ball comes out before the whistle, it's progress, period.

Slive has amply demonstrated over the years that he only cares about money and not the integrity of the game.  Just one more piece of evidence.

I'll give him credit though...providing the head of SEC officiating to be on call to CBS to justify the bullshizzle was a stroke of genius.   

[VinnieVOL]

Lol, yes this game is so obviously rigged.   

Slive must've been in the bathroom on that pick play Mizzou just ran for a td that didn't get flagged.  Same play that DID get a flag earlier this year that took away ND's win over FSU.

But yeah, it's all a setup though.   

[BanditVol]

Lol, yes this game is so obviously rigged.   

Slive must've been in the bathroom on that pick play Mizzou just ran for a td that didn't get flagged.  Same play that DID get a flag earlier this year that took away ND's win over FSU.

But yeah, it's all a setup though.   

Did you see the replay of the fumble?  Tell me it wasn't a fumble.

What about the BS targeting call on the SEC's sack leader?  All the talking heads at half time said it clearly was not targeting...the player led with his hands.  It was a late hit and PF, but not targeting. 

If you don't believe that with the millions at stake Slive will do everything in his power to ensure that bammer wins, you are incredibly naive.

But...you were also certain Gruden was coming to UT, so....

[BanditVol]

As for the pick play, it happens all the time and is never called. But against ND, Jimbo Fisher complained to the ACC refs and got his way the second time.  Hey, coach pressuring the refs works some times, which is why they do it.   

[VinnieVOL]

Did you see the replay of the fumble?  Tell me it wasn't a fumble.

What about the BS targeting call on the SEC's sack leader?  All the talking heads at half time said it clearly was not targeting...the player led with his hands.  It was a late hit and PF, but not targeting. 

If you don't believe that with the millions at stake Slive will do everything in his power to ensure that bammer wins, you are incredibly naive.

But...you were also certain Gruden was coming to UT, so....

I never said Gruden was coming, you must be thinking of someone else.

Just let me get this straight, you actually believe Slive has arranged the outcome of this game and he's instructed the officials "don't let Mizzou win"?  And I'm naive if I don't share your belief?

[VinnieVOL]

And the targeting call was correct.  I don't like the rule, but you can't hit the QB in the mouth late nowadays and expect to not get tossed.

Looks like Slive paid off all the Missouri defenders, too.   

[TheRealOrange]

I'm not watching the game, but here are the targeting rules:

Rule 9-1-3: Targeting and initiating contact with the crown of the helmet. No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.

Rule 9-1-4: Targeting and initiating contact to head or neck area of a defenseless player. No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul.

If the contact was with the hands, unless they were making a fist, it might be a penalty, but probably should not be targeting. 

[VinnieVOL]

I don't care either way, really.. but it sure looks to me like the top of Ray's helmet is hitting the QB's facemask.  Regardless, when in doubt they're going to call it.  Plus, they reviewed it and it was upheld.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2291587-missouri-defensive-end-shane-ray-ejected-for-targeting-vs-alabama

[JeffCountyVolFan]

I don't care either way, really.. but it sure looks to me like the top of Ray's helmet is hitting the QB's facemask.  Regardless, when in doubt they're going to call it.  Plus, they reviewed it and it was upheld.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2291587-missouri-defensive-end-shane-ray-ejected-for-targeting-vs-alabama

If that ain't targeting - by the rule - then there ain't never been one.  And I could care less what any talking head says. Enforce it or get rid of it (or rephrase it).

[VinnieVOL]

If that ain't targeting - by the rule - then there ain't never been one.  And I could care less what any talking head says. Enforce it or get rid of it (or rephrase it).

Plus it's a late hit, so by that definition he was defenseless. 

[TheRealOrange]

I don't care either way, really.. but it sure looks to me like the top of Ray's helmet is hitting the QB's facemask.  Regardless, when in doubt they're going to call it.  Plus, they reviewed it and it was upheld.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2291587-missouri-defensive-end-shane-ray-ejected-for-targeting-vs-alabama

Yeah, that looks like targeting to me.

[Creek Walker]

I'm LOL'ing so hard at this thread. Just so I'm sure I'm correct: If you don't believe that there was a grand conspiracy to not allow Missouri to win -- a conspiracy that involved the SEC front office, the officials on the field, the replay officials upstairs, and they are all going to keep quiet and not spill their guts about said conspiracy -- if you don't believe all that, then YOU are the naive one? That's like the 9/11 truthers claiming the rest of us are the ones who are nuts. 

I didn't even see the fumble in question. I had turned the game off by that point because Alabama had it well in hand (which begs the question: how would a single play at that point in the game make a difference in the outcome?) but it's possible that the officials just screwed up without trying to throw the game to Alabama, right? I mean, we can agree on that -- it's at least possible -- can't we? And the Mizzou player deserved to be ejected. Even if it wasn't targeting by rule he deserved to be ejected. If more players were ejected/suspended for BS hits like that one, we would see less of them.

Bandit, I can appreciate your passion but sometimes you let your hatred for Alabama cloud any sense of reality. Earlier this week you said that Missouri had a chance because Lane Kiffin is a one-trick pony. Well, that one-trick pony put up 42 on one of the SEC's best defenses today. It amazes me that there are still people who refuse to accept that Kiffin is an excellent offensive coach. I can't stand the smarmy jackass and I want him to lose every time he takes the field, but there's no denying that he was a great hire for Saban...and the proof is in the pudding, as Alabama will return to the national championship this year.

[BanditVol]

I'm LOL'ing so hard at this thread. Just so I'm sure I'm correct: If you don't believe that there was a grand conspiracy to not allow Missouri to win -- a conspiracy that involved the SEC front office, the officials on the field, the replay officials upstairs, and they are all going to keep quiet and not spill their guts about said conspiracy -- if you don't believe all that, then YOU are the naive one? That's like the 9/11 truthers claiming the rest of us are the ones who are nuts. 

I didn't even see the fumble in question. I had turned the game off by that point because Alabama had it well in hand (which begs the question: how would a single play at that point in the game make a difference in the outcome?) but it's possible that the officials just screwed up without trying to throw the game to Alabama, right? I mean, we can agree on that -- it's at least possible -- can't we? And the Mizzou player deserved to be ejected. Even if it wasn't targeting by rule he deserved to be ejected. If more players were ejected/suspended for BS hits like that one, we would see less of them.

Bandit, I can appreciate your passion but sometimes you let your hatred for Alabama cloud any sense of reality. Earlier this week you said that Missouri had a chance because Lane Kiffin is a one-trick pony. Well, that one-trick pony put up 42 on one of the SEC's best defenses today. It amazes me that there are still people who refuse to accept that Kiffin is an excellent offensive coach. I can't stand the smarmy jackass and I want him to lose every time he takes the field, but there's no denying that he was a great hire for Saban...and the proof is in the pudding, as Alabama will return to the national championship this year.

I didn't even bother to read this...it's too long.

What I see at quick glance....

"blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah"

 

And note to both you and Vinnie...read the top line.  This was a post to NUT.  You would think someone who actually works in the media would have better reading comprehension skills. 

[Creek Walker]

I didn't even bother to read this...it's too long.

What I see at quick glance....

"blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah"

 

And note to both you and Vinnie...read the top line.  This was a post to NUT.  You would think someone who actually works in the media would have better reading comprehension skills.  

Oh, you read it all right. Who do you think you're kidding?

[VinnieVOL]

I didn't even bother to read this...it's too long.

What I see at quick glance....

"blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah"

 

And note to both you and Vinnie...read the top line.  This was a post to NUT.  You would think someone who actually works in the media would have better reading comprehension skills. 

Did you think you were sending Nut a PM?   

[Volznut]

The game was not close in the 4th qtr. Had it been close, you would have seen some weird call by the refs

They did job Mizzou on that targeting call- he didn't target, it was a late hit, but not targeting. That took out their best defensive player.

[Volznut]

And the targeting call was correct.  I don't like the rule, but you can't hit the QB in the mouth late nowadays and expect to not get tossed.

Looks like Slive paid off all the Missouri defenders, too.   

Wasn't targeting, did not lead with helmet. Late hit. bullshizzle call

[Volznut]

Grand conspiracy? No. However, money talks, and I don't trust Slive. Seen it many times with Bama in the past few years. Not naive enough to think that it's all on the up and up when so much money is at stake

I'm LOL'ing so hard at this thread. Just so I'm sure I'm correct: If you don't believe that there was a grand conspiracy to not allow Missouri to win -- a conspiracy that involved the SEC front office, the officials on the field, the replay officials upstairs, and they are all going to keep quiet and not spill their guts about said conspiracy -- if you don't believe all that, then YOU are the naive one? That's like the 9/11 truthers claiming the rest of us are the ones who are nuts. 

I didn't even see the fumble in question. I had turned the game off by that point because Alabama had it well in hand (which begs the question: how would a single play at that point in the game make a difference in the outcome?) but it's possible that the officials just screwed up without trying to throw the game to Alabama, right? I mean, we can agree on that -- it's at least possible -- can't we? And the Mizzou player deserved to be ejected. Even if it wasn't targeting by rule he deserved to be ejected. If more players were ejected/suspended for BS hits like that one, we would see less of them.

Bandit, I can appreciate your passion but sometimes you let your hatred for Alabama cloud any sense of reality. Earlier this week you said that Missouri had a chance because Lane Kiffin is a one-trick pony. Well, that one-trick pony put up 42 on one of the SEC's best defenses today. It amazes me that there are still people who refuse to accept that Kiffin is an excellent offensive coach. I can't stand the smarmy jackass and I want him to lose every time he takes the field, but there's no denying that he was a great hire for Saban...and the proof is in the pudding, as Alabama will return to the national championship this year.

[TheRealOrange]

Wasn't targeting, did not lead with helmet. Late hit. bullshizzle call

In the video clip Vinnie posted, he has his hands out but clearly drops and leads with his helmet IMO.

[VinnieVOL]

In the video clip Vinnie posted, he has his hands out but clearly drops and leads with his helmet IMO.

Helmet-to-facemask hit seems like a no-brainer to me.

[TheRealOrange]

Helmet-to-facemask hit seems like a no-brainer to me.

And, "When in question, it is a foul."  The difference of opinion here seems to show it was in question, so....   

[BanditVol]

I'm not watching the game, but here are the targeting rules:

Rule 9-1-3: Targeting and initiating contact with the crown of the helmet. No player shall target and initiate contact against an opponent with the crown (top) of his helmet. When in question, it is a foul.

Rule 9-1-4: Targeting and initiating contact to head or neck area of a defenseless player. No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, fist, elbow or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul.

If the contact was with the hands, unless they were making a fist, it might be a penalty, but probably should not be targeting. 

He clearly did not initiate contact with his helmet.  He hit him first with his hands in the chest area, then his head kind of snaps up and hits the helmet incidentally.  Which is what four of four talking heads said at halftime.   

Now, I will grant you, I can see where it could be called targeting, but he clearly does not lead with his helmet.

Regardless it was a stupid move by Ray anyway.  He could probably not have avoided contact, but he could have tried a lot harder at least, and perhaps if he had they would give him the benefit of the doubt.  Heck, it was a TD anyway.

But funny how no one wants to talk about the fumble. Or should I say "non-fumble"...the game was really close at that point, and had bammer not scored Mizzou would have been right in it.  Would have been a huge momentum shift.

In all my years of watching football, I have never seen a fumble invalidated by "forward progress"....BEFORE the whistle is sounded.  It was a horrible non-call, period, dot.  What is telling is that the head of SEC officiating IMMEDIATELY weighed in on it to Vern and Gary in the booth.  That I think is probably the most telling part of any of this.   

[TheRealOrange]

He clearly did not initiate contact with his helmet.

....he clearly does not lead with his helmet.

And I think he clearly initiates contact and leads with his helmet.  So, when in question, it's called (and upheld).  Seems like the correct call and decision to me.  And you may dislike bama more than I do, but that's also in question. 

[TheRealOrange]

But funny how no one wants to talk about the fumble. Or should I say "non-fumble"...the game was really close at that point, and had bammer not scored Mizzou would have been right in it.  Would have been a huge momentum shift.

I can't speak to the fumble, as I didn't see even one play of the game (or any other games) yesterday.  I have found that I'm really not much of a college football fan anymore.  I just watch the Vols and sometimes the Irish and Ducks.   

[JeffCountyVolFan]

Didn't see the fumble. The hit to Sims was blatant targeting, imo.

Even if you think he makes contact with his hands first, he puts the crown of his helmet squarely in the chin of the QB at almost exactly the same moment. If that hit is made on Dobbs, I'd dare say this board would unanimously be screaming ejection.

I personally don't see that he led with his hands, though. His right arm is extended, but it appears to me that it is outside of the QB's body and doesn't make contact first. The left hand/arm is folded in close to Ray's chest and doesn't hit Simms until the helmet makes contact.

The dude took a cheap shot and got exactly what he observed.