HomeBred_Texan
Veteran
http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/5979210?FSO1&ATT=HMA
I smell something brewing in OK and it isn't coffee....
I smell something brewing in OK and it isn't coffee....
Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!
Espn is reporting (10pm sports center) that the replay official is getting death threats and is up set beyond all condolences. He is also the one that recieved the lightest punishment. My knee jerk is that to nullify any inference of any impropriaty,at all, et. el. ...they were bought, the feild officials should be suspended for the year. The replay official who seems to be a really good guy...should never be allowed to work another NCAA game again. Ever. Yes Dorthy it was that egregious. They may have not been bought. But barring auditing them, we'll never really know. To miss that many calls over such a short period of time, they're either bought or grossly incompitent. Both are damming for the pac ten.The larger and much more important debate about the onside kick, though, is a debate that's worth having in football circles: where is the point when bad officiating (and bad replay evaluating) becomes something more than mere "bad luck," and winds up tainting the outcome of a game in a manner akin to a gambling fix or a stolen election? The point of this question is not to promote conspiracy theories; any suggestions that referees or conference commissioners are somehow "on the take" is irresponsible, grossly unfair, and mean-spirited. The point of the above question is to draw an important distinction between losses that are due to bad luck, and losses in which a team is truly robbed. Since pass interference is a judgment call, one can say that LSU received "bad luck" against Auburn, but that the outcome wasn't "tainted." However, it sure seems that Oklahoma didn't just get a bad break; the Sooners fell under the category of teams that got robbed in broad daylight. This opens up a larger discussion about officiating and luck in college football.