- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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: The overturn
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:47 am to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:47 am to Vacherie Saint
After review it was pretty clearly incomplete. I saw it immediately and trust me people in the bar were very mad at me when I said so before the overturn. 
Parts of it are definitely subjective. The biggest problems are your arguments are mostly the wrong ones.
Parts of it are definitely subjective. The biggest problems are your arguments are mostly the wrong ones.
1
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:47 am to Fun Bunch
Even the guy in your image thinks it’s a catch.
Catch
Steps
Crossed plane
Knee down
All before the ground slightly moves the ball. And that gets reversed? So much for irrefutable evidence.
Catch
Steps
Crossed plane
Knee down
All before the ground slightly moves the ball. And that gets reversed? So much for irrefutable evidence.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:48 am to Fun Bunch
It doesn’t matter that the second step was out of bounds, since he had already gotten one foot in to satisfy that part of the catch.
He had possession, took two steps (one in, one out) and crossed the goal line. Whole thing was complete before he hit the ground.
Even then, although the ball touched the ground, which it can, he still appeared to have firm control.
He had possession, took two steps (one in, one out) and crossed the goal line. Whole thing was complete before he hit the ground.
Even then, although the ball touched the ground, which it can, he still appeared to have firm control.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:49 am to Vacherie Saint
His steps are as he is falling which attaches relevance to the ground.
He loses control on the ground very clearly.
LSU won. It’s not a big deal now.
He loses control on the ground very clearly.
LSU won. It’s not a big deal now.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:49 am to Fun Bunch
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:49 am to Vacherie Saint
Even if you take control to the ground into account, I didn’t see enough movement to warrant calling it incomplete, much less overturning the call. His hands moved with the movement of the ball which meant he still had control.
I admittedly haven’t watched it in super slow motion, so perhaps I can be proven wrong.
I admittedly haven’t watched it in super slow motion, so perhaps I can be proven wrong.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:50 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Now do the catch rule, subsection B
The completion of a catch is irrelevant at that point. He clearly had possession.
They are arguing he didn’t make a football move but his second foot was down before the ball came out after he hit the ground. Both the second foot in the end zone and the first foot in bounds were the nail in the coffin. They were wrong even with the 2023 change.
It was bull shite and LSU needs to file a complaint with the justice department for rigging bringing up the multiple examples through the years. It impacts gambling as much as anything. The league office is a complete joke.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:50 am to ForeverEllisHugh
quote:
he still appeared to have firm control.
No
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:51 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
They argued he DIDNT have possession
That's wild, when they ruled that Bauer Sharp DID have possession on that strip fumble, when he didn't even have time to turn around before he lost it.
That crew should not be allowed to officiate anything past JUCO.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:51 am to BhamTigah
Even if you want to apply “survive the ground”, zoom 10x and look for a millimeter of ball movement, that’s still not enough to OVERTURN. Had it been called incomplete on the field maybe it wouldn’t be so egregious.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:51 am to Biggiebam
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:53 am to wadewilson
This is what annoys me about Fun Bunch on this. He’s acting like it’s clearly incomplete but there’s a thousand shades of grey there. If it were upheld, there’d be zero controversy and it’d be a SC top 10 play. lol
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:53 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
They argued he DIDNT have possession, therefore breaking the plane didn’t matter, but I disagree
Huh? Not only did he have possession when he hit the pylon but as the ABC official consult said "he made a football move". If someone is claiming he didn't have possession, that is just an EXCUSE. The ONLY time he didn't maintain possession was going to the ground out of bounds. But giving the breaking of the plane and the football move, that is irrelevant to the rule they are trying to SCAM people with. The guy in Birmingham either didn't know the rule or needs prescription lenses.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:54 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
This is what annoys me about Fun Bunch on this.
He probably doesn't even believe himself, he's just doing it for attention.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:54 am to ForeverEllisHugh
Right. The standards to overturn are supposed to irrefutable. It cannot be irrefutably argued that he didn’t make a football move
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:55 am to ForeverEllisHugh
Yeah it was clear as day. I knew they would take it back. But the rule is the problem. Still don’t understand why they haven’t revisited this. If you establish ball control with a step and breaking the plane or pilon it should be a TD 
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:55 am to wadewilson
He’s picking a weird hill to die on when even the rules expert on the broadcast said he disagreed with the overturn. Those guys never seem to contradict the replay officials.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:56 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
Do you not understand what a runner vs in the act of the catch is?
bullshite man! Brown was NOT in the act of the catch. As the ABC official consult said, "the receiver had made a football move". That is NOT the same as diving for the ball and losing it on the way down to the ground. The football move makes the "act of the catch" moot.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:57 am to NotaStarGazer
And every football talking head is saying the rule needs to be changed after watching the play. Most say it should have been a TD
Posted on 8/31/25 at 11:57 am to Biggiebam
Correct. He established possession by pulling the ball in, getting a foot down and touched the pylon. The rule that SHOULD have been utilized is the same one used when Durham scored in the first half and lost the ball after he hit the ground.
Page 2 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News