Block Charge play (Video)

[stick]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Really? It also appears the sun is bright but it might not be.

Use your imagination....

What could the defender possibly have done that we couldn't see in the video that would make it a block? What could the official, if he was looking at the defender as he should have been, possibly have seen the defender do that would make it a block?

Yes really.
And btw, as to your questions, I believe I was pretty clear in already explaining what the calling official might have seen from his angle as to why he called the play a block. Go back and read them if you dare. If you disagree with what I posted, fine, no problem. If you don't like it, that's just too bad for you. Go seek out that calling official and pick his brain. (rolling my eyes)

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by stick

Yes really. It does appear that your an official but you might be a coach in disguise.
And btw, as to your questions, I believe I was pretty clear in already explaining what the calling official might have seen from his angle as to why he called the play a block. Go back and read them if you dare. If you disagree with what I posted, fine, no problem. If you don't like it, that's just too bad for you. Go seek out that calling official and pick his brain. (rolling my eyes)

Stick:

I hate to burst your bubble but it was a charge and the L missed the call. People in this forum that when it is Guarding/Screening (block/charge) that I am the go to guy. And I will very very very rarely question an official's judgement call I will if he misses a block/charge because it is the easiest call in the book to make.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. The Kansas-Texas thread and John Adam's comments really has my blood boiling.

[stick]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Stick:

I hate to burst your bubble but it was a charge and the L missed the call. People in this forum that when it is Guarding/Screening (block/charge) that I am the go to guy. And I will very very very rarely question an official's judgement call I will if he misses a block/charge because it is the easiest call in the book to make.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. The Kansas-Texas thread and John Adam's comments really has my blood boiling.

FWIW, I'm not challenging yours or anyone elses view on that. If I was that official I may have called it that way also. I was asked to explain to a coach how it could be a block. I only offered what it might be. I can't speak for the calling official.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by stick

FWIW, I'm not challenging yours or anyone elses view on that. If I was that official I may have called it that way also. I was asked to explain to a coach how it could be a block. I only offered what it might be. I can't speak for the calling official.

If I were evaluating you and you called it a block I would have told you were wrong and to review the rule book and referee defense from now on.

MTD, Sr.

[stick]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

If I were evaluating you and you called it a block I would have told you were wrong and to review the rule book and referee defense from now on.

MTD, Sr.

That's fine Mark and I appreciate your advice.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by stick

Yes really.
And btw, as to your questions, I believe I was pretty clear in already explaining what the calling official might have seen from his angle as to why he called the play a block. Go back and read them if you dare. If you disagree with what I posted, fine, no problem. If you don't like it, that's just too bad for you. Go seek out that calling official and pick his brain. (rolling my eyes)

You prior claims of what he might have seen are not even in the ballpark of possibilities. You might as well claim he might have seen the defender punch him in the nose, pull his shorts down, and spit in his face.

There are certainly calls that are debatable and this really is not one of them even though you keep trying.

[stick]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You prior claims of what he might have seen are not even in the ballpark of possibilities. You might as well claim he might have seen the defender punch him in the nose, pull his shorts down, and spit in his face.

There are certainly calls that are debatable and this really is not one of them even though you keep trying.

LOL A true funny man you are. And fwiw, I'm not debating or challenging anyones version of the call at all. Only answering what I was asked. No need for you make it personal.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by stick

... And fwiw, I'm not debating or challenging anyones version of the call at all. ....

You watched the video and made this statement:

"Tough call to make. The replay does show the defender moving upon impact. The official made a god call afaict."

That's what's your were questioned about. Nobody asked you explain what the official the video was thinking.

[stick]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You watched the video and made this statement:

"Tough call to make. The replay does show the defender moving upon impact. The official made a god call afaict."

That's what's your were questioned about. Nobody asked you explain what the official the video was thinking.

And I addressed that, but it's not my problem that it might not satisfy you. FWIW, I never stated what that official WAS thinking, there's no way anyone but him could say what that was. I only stated what he MIGHT have been thinking. And that was in response to a members question.
Now, I'll let you be last word lucy.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by stick

And I addressed that, but it's not my problem that it might not satisfy you. FWIW, I never stated what that official WAS thinking, there's no way anyone but him could say what that was. I only stated what he MIGHT have been thinking. And that was in response to a members question.
Now, I'll let you be last word lucy.

I'm glad I'll never have to read one of your indecisive, pass-the-buck, game reports.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by stick

LOL A true funny man you are. And fwiw, I'm not debating or challenging anyones version of the call at all. Only answering what I was asked. No need for you make it personal.

Personal? What was personal about what I said?

What you're doing is defending the indefensible.

[stick]

[QUOTE=Camron Rust;923937]Personal? What was personal about what I said?

Explain what the intent of posting this was:

"You might as well claim he might have seen the defender punch him in the nose, pull his shorts down, and spit in his face."

[Camron Rust]

[QUOTE=stick;923986]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Personal? What was personal about what I said?

Explain what the intent of posting this was:

"You might as well claim he might have seen the defender punch him in the nose, pull his shorts down, and spit in his face."

Not personal, just pointing out the absurdity of the position you're taking.

And if you think that is personal, wow. You must have a tough time being an official.

Originally Posted by stick

Explain what the intent of posting this was

Camron didn't say anything personally attacking you. He just used a reductio ad absurdum argument against you. A fallacious argument maybe, but not personal.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Camron didn't say anything personally attacking you. He just used a reductio ad absurdum argument against you. A fallacious argument maybe, but not personal.

I'm glad I'm in an ethics class, so I halfway understand this.