First time back on here since the game and without going through all the threads thought this needed its own. How could the replay officials get that spot so wrong? Wilson’s hand was the first thing that touched the field and made him down. At that point the ball was right on the 35 yard line. Even the pro-Georgia announcers were questioning the spot. Am I missing something here? How can that spot be 2 feet back from the 35?
I already made my opinion on this matter known. Best case they "confirm" initial spot and ruling worst case the get the "call stands" due to not having indisputable video to overturn the call. And that goes both ways because the key to that review was the original ruling/spot on field was marked at the 1st down. Had it been ruled short originally I'd say the same thing.... no indisputable video to overturn call. It really made.it worse.when they re spotted it and placed it 2 ft further back from where the ball.really was.
Watched replay in slo mo several times. Very close and was a matter of 3” either way. How they overturned the call with “indisputable” is baffling and to make it 2’ short is borderline criminal. Changed the 4th down play call for sure.
It is not this play. Watch closely to every game we play. They mark us 2 ft farther back almost every play and their players 8 inches farther forward. It is not every ref in sec but every ref on each crew seems to be biased against us. It is getting old
Not sure what you mean. The rule is that you are down when any part of your body OTHER THAN your foot or hand touches the ground. (Emphasis is mine)
What I meant was his hand touched the ground before any other part of his body like a knee. When his hand touched the ground, the ball was at the 35 yard line. I would like to hear an explanation of why they spotted the ball 2 feet further back.
Called a first down on the field as I recall. I have no idea how they could've overturned the call based on video review.
Kirby got out there and specifically asked them to review- he put his full weight behind it. The refs, frankly, are intimidated by this 2 time NC winner with the 25 game streak. He talks- they listen. They are human- and the SEC office knows who has brought home the bacon. Esp w/ Saban aging as he has. The refs want to stay in the SEC office's good graces. So they saw what they wanted to see, and gave Kirby what he wanted. I think CBN was so taken aback that he made a bad decision to go for it. I'm sure it seemed so unfair- and it was. He thought he could right the wrong and erase the injustice. He does need to change this way of thinking. IMO that was a mistake.
I thought the ball is marked at it's position when the knee hits the ground. The refs seemed to mark the ball where the knee hit the ground not where the ball was. It is all very confusing and inconsistent.
Are you really asking how the replay refs could get that wrong? Dude, we all saw the same thing — that whole replay scam was deliberate to kill our early momentum.
Oh, I get what happened. Just very frustrating. Usually when a call is overturned they give their reasons why, this one just said the runner was down at the 34. Everyone watching the game and saw the replays knew that was a screw job!
The worst part is that the ball is spotted where his knee is in the fram you posted. Not even close to where the ball is.
