- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 32 photographs of Reid's interception
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:02 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:02 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
9-6 
1
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:03 pm to BayouWrangler
This photo seals the deal for me...
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:04 pm to GumboPot
In the one where Reid's feet are on the ground and he is crouched but the receiver has not hit the ground, it appears that the ball is loose in the air between them.
The next shot where the shoulder of the receiver, 89, has just hit the ground, before his legs have touched, you can see clearly that the ball is in Reid's gut, not the receiver's. That is the shot that ices it. You have to have possession of the ball when you hit the ground in order to have a catch. Even in a case of simultaneous possession, you still have to have possession. The receiver did not have possession when he hit the ground.
The next shot where the shoulder of the receiver, 89, has just hit the ground, before his legs have touched, you can see clearly that the ball is in Reid's gut, not the receiver's. That is the shot that ices it. You have to have possession of the ball when you hit the ground in order to have a catch. Even in a case of simultaneous possession, you still have to have possession. The receiver did not have possession when he hit the ground.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:04 pm to GumboPot
What is infuriating to me is that had Bama been given this call like they were given the gift of Peterson's INT in 2009, they likely would have scored and won. And had LSU fans brought up the evidence that shows this was an INT (I admit it isn't absolutely conclusive as Peterson's INT was), Bama fans probably would have used the same argument they used in 2009:
"It doesn't really matter which way the call was made. LSU couldn't do anything at all on offense, so Bama would have won anyway." How often did LSU fans hear that argument in 2009 as some sort of elixir to help LSU fans swallow the truth that the game had been robbed from LSU.
"It doesn't really matter which way the call was made. LSU couldn't do anything at all on offense, so Bama would have won anyway." How often did LSU fans hear that argument in 2009 as some sort of elixir to help LSU fans swallow the truth that the game had been robbed from LSU.
This post was edited on 11/9/11 at 4:08 pm
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:05 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
By the time they hit the ground the Bama reciever had one hand on the ball pinning it to Reids chest. Interception
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:06 pm to TulaneLSU
quote:
if that wasn't call a interception on the field, we could very well be 8-1
What do you people not understand?? After they reviewed the play the referee said the call was "CONFIRMED" meaning there was undisputable video evidence that he did intercept it.. Meaning if they had called it a complete pass and reviewed it, it would have been overturned
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:07 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
that was after hitting the ground, Reid stripped the ball from him, but after he had caught the pass and his butt hit the ground.
i'll give you that.
But the notion of thinking Reid came into possession of the ball that quick without the ball already out of the receiver's control is nonsense.
Doesn't matter though. It was confirmed. end of story. 9-6 i'm moving on.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:07 pm to CottonWasKing
So...anybody know what's up with his shin? Looks fricking gross.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:08 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
The play is not over yet. The receiver maintains possession with both hands on the ball until he hits the ground
quote:
THEN Reid strips the ball
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:09 pm to dreaux
just watched it. Look like an interception to me.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:09 pm to TulaneLSU
I think we should now forfeit.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:10 pm to TBoy
if a ball comes loose when a reciever hits the ground is that a complete or incomplete pass?
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:11 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Is that a contusion on Reid's right shin?
WTH is that? It looks like it is part of his skin flapping over his sock...
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:13 pm to TulaneLSU
I don't know how Reid's hands moved that much in such a short period. An interception looks all but impossible until the very last frame.
Although I've said Reid deserves credit as making what might go down as one of the top 3 greatest single plays in LSU history, these frames make me want to put a little more blame on the BAMA TE. Halfway through, he's the only one with the ball in his hands, and somehow, within a split second, Reid has taken it from him.
Although I've said Reid deserves credit as making what might go down as one of the top 3 greatest single plays in LSU history, these frames make me want to put a little more blame on the BAMA TE. Halfway through, he's the only one with the ball in his hands, and somehow, within a split second, Reid has taken it from him.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:15 pm to Tiger_n_ATL
quote:
The play is not over yet. The receiver maintains possession with both hands on the ball until he hits the ground, THEN Reid strips the ball. Hitting the ground effectively ends the play. What happens after that is a moot point.
God, you're just so wrong.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:16 pm to TulaneLSU
Pretty good "pictures" but still not conclusive to me. What we are not seeing is the action b/w images 6-7. That's where the footage on TV replay makes it IMPOSSIBLE to argue! Looks like these images/pics were NOT from that angle of the TV camera. Would be nice to see those - if you are an LSU tiger fan that is.....
Looking back it may have been better to let them call it a catch and then review. Either way (on the call) it would/should have gone in LSU's favor.... However, we all remember 2009 w the PP7 interception. I guess this is 'Bama's version..... See you next year Crimson! Maybe earlier than originally scheduled. Let it happen.
NOTE: I heard that Tim Brando had to quiet the Ala. faithful on his call in show. He got 4 calls in a row about that play!
Looking back it may have been better to let them call it a catch and then review. Either way (on the call) it would/should have gone in LSU's favor.... However, we all remember 2009 w the PP7 interception. I guess this is 'Bama's version..... See you next year Crimson! Maybe earlier than originally scheduled. Let it happen.
NOTE: I heard that Tim Brando had to quiet the Ala. faithful on his call in show. He got 4 calls in a row about that play!
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:21 pm to GregMaddux
One of those is making my avatar!
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:21 pm to TwinkleToez
the ncaa rulebook says the ground can cause a incomplete pass, just like a fumble. So if that's the case, even if he hits the ground it's a dead ball but never touches the ground because reid kept possesion.
Case closed
Case closed
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:25 pm to dreaux
quote:
the ncaa rulebook says the ground can cause a incomplete pass, just like a fumble. So if that's the case, even if he hits the ground it's a dead ball but never touches the ground because reid kept possesion.
exactly.
No difference in the play than say the receiver having the ball bounce off his chest on the ground (ball never touching ground) and falling into the DB's hands on the ground beside him.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:26 pm to PJ250R
like the bible study plug in there..
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News