re: Teams with legit shot to win CFP every year

quote:

---

Yes, reality

---

In your reality, how does a too many men penalty work?

quote:

---

In your reality, how does a too many men penalty work?

---

Back to this?

My understanding of the rulebook is that the penalty is to be enforced (flag thrown) when the offensive team breaks the huddle with more than 11 players, has more than 11 players in the huddle or formation for more than 3 seconds, or snaps the ball with more than 11 players on the field.

From what I could tell, a flag was not thrown after the 3 seconds mark in the formation nor immediately following the snap. The timeout would render the penalty moot, assuming it was called prior to the infraction enforcement. A replay could be performed to determine the number of players on the field even if the timeout doesn't happen.

Two issues I have with this hypothetical of Smart not doing anything but burning a timeout are: 1. the refs on the video footage do not seem to even be reaching for a flag before the whistle was blown on the timeout, though it appears 3+ seconds and a snap occur, giving them time to do so, and 2. even if there were no time out, and there were not flags thrown on the field, we have to assume that replay did catch the 12-man penalty and would have reviewed it. Given that Kirby didn't seem to notice it nor mentioned anything about it after the game (to my recollection), it seems that no one on his staff noticed it, which doesn't give me confidence that many others would have seen it, either, and given the propensity of the officials to blow calls, I don't have confidence that the result would have been anything other than a 1st down and potentially the end of the game with OSU winning.

Unfortunately with these things, we don't know what could or would have happened. All we know is what did happen, and that is that a timeout was called before the snap, but signaled after the snap, and no penalty flags were thrown (and subsequently picked up), though flags should have been thrown at the same time as the timeout whistle due to the snap (the other officials were watching the game, not watching the sideline judge who whistled the play dead for the timeout).

All this is moot anyway, because even if everything worked the way it should have, OSU still wouldn't have picked up the 1st down and the result is the same but Kirby doesn't get as much praise for it (and who cares about that?)

So yeah, I'm living in reality and you are a pathetic troll who doesn't accept reality for what it is.

quote:

---

Isn't this the 3rd coach in a row that UT fans have said this about?

---

Exactly. Maybe its You and not Them?

quote:

---

lol no I didn't.

---

You did. It makes no difference to me how you reason that.

quote:

---

The reason why it matters whether or not flags were thrown was to show that if the refs were on top of what they saw

---

What did they see? Maybe four to five seconds?

You also seem to be wrapped up in the snap. That's irrelevant, assuming you actually know the rule. You've demonstrated that you don't, so I won't say that I'm surprised by your continued confusion.

The snap does not matter for the penalty. Period.

quote:

---

You're grasping at straws here by saying I "[fell] on [my] face" by expecting to see flags flown due to how late the whistle was blown.

---

Nope.

You fell on your face because your assertion that it wouldn't have been called is based on "I saw no flags in that play." First, it wasn't a play. Second, you don't fully understand the rule or how it's applied.

quote:

---

And yes, I looked up the rule because I wanted to be precise in my language with you, because you nit-pick everything inconsequential while ignoring important statements.

---

Well, you need to look at it again.

quote:

---

Yep, and we know that the refs aren't perfect. And we know that the whistle was blown after the snap. And we know no flags were on the field. We know a lot of things that actually happened, but all we know is what did happen.

---

And none of that leads to "it wouldn't have been called."

quote:

---

At the least, flags should've been thrown or been in the process of being thrown when the whistle was being blown due to the lateness of the whistle blowing the play dead.

---

Nope.

I'll yet again refer you to the rulebook.

quote:

---

Texas?

---

Based on what?

quote:

---

You did. It makes no difference to me how you reason that.

---

You have to be joking. No rational person can say what you're saying if they've been following along.

quote:

---

What did they see? Maybe four to five seconds?

You also seem to be wrapped up in the snap. That's irrelevant, assuming you actually know the rule. You've demonstrated that you don't, so I won't say that I'm surprised by your continued confusion.

The snap does not matter for the penalty. Period.

---

You aren't paying attention. I'm not surprised. You cherry-pick only thing things you think you can "win" with and ignore everything that refutes your statements. It's no different here. I'm sure you'll drop this point once the lightbulb turns on for you.

But just to throw you a bone: I agree that the snap doesn't make a difference to whether or not the penalty counts. I wasn't saying otherwise. I was talking about whether or not the penalty was caught by the refs. Since the whistle was blown so late, if the refs would have noticed the 12th man on the field, they should have thrown a flag for it. The point of the timing of the snap is to show that it doesn't look like the refs caught the penalty.

If true, then it means that without the timeout, the replay booth would have had to catch it, as the UGA coaching staff didn't seem to catch it to call to yell for a review. Obviously we're still getting into what-ifs, which are absolutely pointless, but there's a reason why I'm talking about the snap beyond the legitimacy of the penalty.

quote:

---

Nope.

You fell on your face because your assertion that it wouldn't have been called is based on "I saw no flags in that play." First, it wasn't a play. Second, you don't fully understand the rule or how it's applied.

---

You're lying, since I've shown already that I do understand the rule and how it's applied.

The "I saw no flags" was in relation to whether or not the refs would have caught the penalty, not whether or not the penalty would have counted due to the time out (it wouldn't have, because the time out negated everything that followed).

I also understand that the play is reviewable, so even if the refs missed it, it could have been reviewed and the play overturned had the timeout not happened. However, those plays have been missed in the past, so there's no guarantee that it would have been caught, especially since a team like UGA--who had the most to gain from the review--had missed it.

quote:

---

Well, you need to look at it again.

---

So typical of you. Assertion without evidence. I basically quoted the rule from the rule book (which you acknowledge by saying I looked it up). I can reference it for you if you'd like, but you have made no effort to do anything like that. Even with this particular "rebuttal", you don't bother to say where I'm wrong, only that I am and that's it's on me to "look at it again".

Nah, I don't think I will. I already looked at it once and you've shown no evidence that you have. If you think I'm wrong, prove it. Otherwise you are making a fool of yourself again, which is par for the course.

quote:

---

And none of that leads to "it wouldn't have been called."

---

Are you quoting me again? Perhaps you should cite your references so people know what you're talking about.

quote:

---

Nope.

I'll yet again refer you to the rulebook.

---

No wonder you don't know how to argue. You don't know how to understand what you're reading.

I didn't say the flags should have been thrown per the rule book. I said they should have been thrown as an evidence that the penalty was caught due to the timing of the whistle. Keep up.

41-42

Goddamn, can some people clutter up a thread or what?

Define current? 2019/2020 not that long ago

quote:

---

Define current? 2019/2020 not that long ago

---

Yeah, it is. A coach ago. A class ago. A rulebook ago.

quote:

---

You are refusing to have a serious discussion about this 

---

It doesn't appear that you read the rulebook. If you did, you missed or misunderstood something. I can't do anything about that, nor would I if I could.

If you had read and understood it, you'd know how ridiculous it is for you to continue this thought that a flag not coming out matters.

quote:

---

You are pathetic and I feel sorry for you.

---

I always knew you were full of shite.

I'll keep this in mind next time you jump up and start proselytizing.