like it fucking matters.

if we were half the team chuck claims we are, we would have won going away.

9/9/2006 10:24:46 PM

They aren't going to go back and change it, so we have to deal. We got to get ready for our next game.

9/9/2006 10:25:27 PM

this shit was a clean loss

9/9/2006 10:27:19 PM

aborino speaks the truth as clearly as one can.

We won.

9/9/2006 10:28:57 PM

fine

but dont even try to say we're a great fb team

9/9/2006 10:33:27 PM

game should never have been this close anyways, we deserved to lose

9/9/2006 10:36:56 PM

i'm sick of hearing that.

although its dumb to sulk over the fact that we should have won, you have to get in the endzone to score and they didn't. a win is a win no matter how ugly it is, and we should be 2-0. this is probably my last post on the subject

[Edited on September 9, 2006 at 10:40 PM. Reason : fhd]

9/9/2006 10:40:22 PM

Quote :

"A team only deserves to lose if the other team scores more points than they do. and Akron clearly shouldn't have scored those last points. therefore we deserved to win."

9/9/2006 11:02:25 PM

^, ^^, ^^^^, and ^^^^^

9/9/2006 11:06:09 PM

I like how you're all so sure based on a STILL PHOTO, not to mention one from such a high angle considering the matter in question is ground clearance.

9/10/2006 12:14:45 AM

http://ncsu1.info/inornot.php

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 12:16 AM. Reason : videos & pictures above.]

9/10/2006 12:16:16 AM

the fact taht it came down to this against AKRON is ridiculous. we deserved to lose anyways who cares

/thread

9/10/2006 12:25:11 AM

sure we deserved to lose but im mad they didn't check

9/10/2006 12:28:13 AM

they did check

9/10/2006 12:57:22 AM

no, they didn't...

9/10/2006 1:01:32 AM

^^^^they gave PSU a hard time last week

troy almost beat FSU today, but FSU wasn't handed a loss by a blown call at the end. no matter how shitty you play, if you win, you win. that's it.

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:02 AM. Reason : ]

9/10/2006 1:01:53 AM

yes they did...

9/10/2006 1:05:54 AM

they ran off the field two seconds after they blew the whistle.. game over.. they did NOT check while on the field.. after they leave the field, they can check for years and it won't matter

9/10/2006 1:07:17 AM

Quote :

"yes they did..."

I was there. I heard no "the play is under review."

and if you're spouting that "every play is reviewed by someone" bullshit, save it.


i thought there woud be a review when the zips went back to there sideline, but there was none

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:10 AM. Reason : fds]

9/10/2006 1:09:41 AM

Amato said in the post-game conference on 680 that "We couldn't review it because we didn't have a timeout."

Is this a new rule that you have to have a timout in the last 2 minutes? I thought that it was up to the booth whether to review it or not.

9/10/2006 1:12:22 AM

just because no "official" "play is under review" occured doesnt mean they didn't review it. get your head out of your ass... if they had seen any conclusive evidence the outcome might have been different

^ the coach can't call a review if he doesnt have a timeout.. that doesnt mean the play isnt under review upstairs

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:15 AM. Reason : *]

9/10/2006 1:13:30 AM

^^i don't know, because when they reviewed stone's interception, the review was not in our favor and we did not lose a timeout.

and when they reviewed our looong TD, I dont think akron lost a timeout.



the whole thing confuses the hell outta me



and there you go spouting the "every play is reviewed by someone" bullshit, i saw that coming.

if it was actually seriously and professional reviewed there would have been a stoppage and a "the play on the field is under review.

I dare you to make a bigger fool of yourself and say there was less doubt on that play than on blackman's TD, which was reviewed in a heart beat.

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:16 AM. Reason : fsa]

9/10/2006 1:14:14 AM

the only time you lose a timeout is when a coach initiates the review and is wrong... if the review is initaiated upstairs no timeout is charged.

9/10/2006 1:16:59 AM

that is the dumbest shit ever, if a booth can review any play they want at any time then why even have coaches challenges? they should have to risk the timeout, make booth reviews under 2 mins like nfl. in fact make the whole instant replay system like the nfl, it works fine.


and there is no doubt whatsoever that there should have been an in-depth review of this play i dont care what anyone says. we had two of our plays reviewed without a second thought and the biggest play of the entire game comes down to centimeters and they don't give a damn?

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:20 AM. Reason : were these MAC refs?]

9/10/2006 1:18:44 AM

you're an idiot... blackman's td was conclusive... the video replay showed that...

the video replay of the akron td was not conclusive that his elbow was down... they didnt have the still shot that you are looking at. what we saw on tv was what they had available and it was not conlusive.. not like the still shot you have proves anything

9/10/2006 1:24:02 AM

you are completely missing my point.


the point is, the blackman TD and the "stone maybe crossing the line of scrimmage" play were not nearly as close as the Akron one, and the refs did not hesitate to stop everything and go review them in their little black booth or however they do that in the NCAA

the akron td came down to centimeters and they did NOT do one of the "the play is under review" numbers.

on plays that big that are that close, you do your best to get it right, and they showed absolutely no effort to make the right call.

and that is bush league

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:29 AM. Reason : fhd]

9/10/2006 1:26:35 AM

there isn't any point of arguing about if he was down or not.......the bottom line is we lost, its in the books, and nothing is gonna change that

9/10/2006 1:29:26 AM

they are trying to give the coaches a chance to correct a call, much like the NFL system. For a coaches challenge in college the team must first call a time out. then tell the ref they want the play reviewed. Once reviewed, if overturned, the team get's their time out back. If the play is not over turned, the team has lost the time out they had to call to get the refs to look at the play.

In our case, The replay official upstairs didn't see enough evidence to overturn the call. Remember the call on the field was a TD, so they'd have to have some pretty good evidence. Remember, the refs can only see what happened on video from the camera angles provided, it makes their job harder than these cool "still photos" we seem to have.....

Becuase the replay official didn't see enough to Overturn the call, chuck would need to call a time out to get the challenge, but since we didn't have a time out left, we couldn't challenge it. also, each coach only has 1 timeout/challenge, regardless of if they win the first one or not.... I'm not sure if we had used ours yet, but that's beside the point, (i don't think we did).

Also, the play very well could have been reviewed by the officials once they were off the field. There were no penalties and the clock ran out, thus game over. When being reviewed, the outcome of the play would either have been down before the goal line, or TD, but in both cases time is expired and the game is over..... So who knows, maybe the Zebras on the field didn't do it in front of us, but maybe the Zebra in the box upstairs did.....



We got upset... .That's why they play the game, and they don't just write it all out on paper.


All that being said, GO PACK..... We better beat southern miss..


^? The reason officials are quick to review plays during the game is becuase they need to get the review called before the offense runs another play. In the TD run, our FG team was already lined up ready to kick, they hit the buzzer, check it out, then play on.... With the Stone throw, it's a live ball and they have to get it called before the next play starts.



[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:34 AM. Reason : /]

9/10/2006 1:29:46 AM

no one is arguing whether he was down or not anymore

9/10/2006 1:29:48 AM

^^that's the point. the replay official was NOT doing his job. my guess is he watched the play in real time and didn't even notice the close elbow touch.

and if he was watching it in slow motion and missed it than he is even more of a moron than if he was not.

if you're a replay official and you see an elbow come that close to the ground, you don't even hesitate to initiate an in-depth review, and dont initiate it you deserve to be fired

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:32 AM. Reason : fdh]

9/10/2006 1:30:55 AM

stone was passed the line of scrimage when he threw that pass... they fucked that one up.

the rest of it... the refs have nothing to do with it... it is the people up stairs. they didnt't see anything worthy of an "official" review

9/10/2006 1:33:17 AM

Quote :

"they didnt't see anything worthy of an "official" review"

that's exactly my point, and because they "didn't see anything" they weren't doing their jobs. their job is to find anything thats even halfway controversial and tell the head official and put it in his hands.

which they did not do.

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:36 AM. Reason : hfds]

9/10/2006 1:35:51 AM

it wouldnt have mattered anyways the refs took off so quick, in addition i think it may be because there was no time on teh clock

but this is what really pisses me off

Quote :

"What I'm trying to say is, stop with all the negativity and support Chuck."

WHY SUPPORT HIM! If we dont feel that he is doing a job that we can approve of then WHY should we support him, thats like saying well my car breaks down every time i put it on the highway, but its a good car, i support my car.

ITS CALLED AN OPINION, and if you dont like something, say so, im tired of everyone gettin on ANYONES case when they say they dont like chuck, respect their opinion.

9/10/2006 1:36:12 AM

bah, nm

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:37 AM. Reason : hfds]

9/10/2006 1:36:52 AM

wolfNstein I had a feeling about that, they didn't show the replay of that in the stadium once. I think they saw it and didn't show it..



statefan24 That's part of what I'm saying... They very well may have done an indepth review, but because the outcome both ways is end of game, they did it off the field. The way college replay works this season, the "in depth" review happens in the replay booth upstairs, so it may have been an indepth review, and they dont' have to tell us becuase there is no time on the clock.


If indeed that was the case, they should at least say something in the stadium about it.... but you can't always get what you want..

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:41 AM. Reason : .]

9/10/2006 1:39:03 AM

I said as soon as the players started piling up in the endzone that we would get a penalty that would lose us the game....

We deserved this loss... but he was down. Review should have been done... but it doesn't really matter...we suck, they suck, everyone sucks.

9/10/2006 1:39:16 AM

celebration penalties were invented by pussies

9/10/2006 1:43:13 AM

Oh I agree. I am about to be the most penalized person in NCSU flag football history bc of it.

9/10/2006 1:44:37 AM

they are limited to what angles they have available... it doesn't mean they have the best angle.

the ref did NOT take off quickly... on tv (unfortunately that's all i had to go on) they did stick around.

9/10/2006 1:44:53 AM

it's the dumbest penalty ever.. They are college kids playing for their school, let them celebrate.

9/10/2006 1:45:17 AM

they ran off the field like there was rabid wolves let loose on the field

9/10/2006 1:45:52 AM

On tv they commented that items were being thrown...

No way the refs stuck around.

9/10/2006 1:47:39 AM

the celebration penalty was a good call... you can't have people running off the bench to celebrate on the field. honestly, i have no problem with that penalty. yes we deserved that penalty, but you can't fault the players for being ecstatic at that point.

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:58 AM. Reason : one more s.. maybe we could get one more win]

9/10/2006 1:50:28 AM

Quote :

"they ran off the field like there was rabid wolves let loose on the field"

oh we can only dream...

9/10/2006 1:51:31 AM

i guess people running off the bench warrants a penalty, but some of the criteria for celeb penalties are just retarded.

something about doing something with 3 or more players, no "gang signs" gimme a break

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 1:57 AM. Reason : fdsa]

9/10/2006 1:53:10 AM

Quote :

"yes we deserved that penalty, but you can't fault the players for being ectastic at that point."

We deserved it...and we can blame the players, How in the fuck would they not know better???


lol..ectastic... i like it... sorry

9/10/2006 1:55:51 AM

The shot proves nothing because it doesn't show what happened immediate before that shot.

If he were to, for example, stretch his arm out, barely cross the plane, then bring his arm back to brace his fall, it'd still be a touchdown.

Not that it matters, because in the million times they showed the play after the game, every single time he appeared to clearly break the plane.

Would you have preferred the refs wait 4 and a half hours for some random picture to get posted on the internet to decide?

9/10/2006 2:23:05 AM

^ he didn't cross the plain and pull it back out momentarily... that is obvious from the vid, or if you watched the game...

and yes... i want my 2 wins while we can get them

9/10/2006 2:28:09 AM

Whoever said the footage they showed in the stadium proved he was in wasn't looking at the same material the rest of the fans were looking at.

The SLOW-MO replay showed he was down early, the players went nuts, the fans went nuts, and even the Zips knew it because they got their players off the field as fast as they could(didn't you see them sprint to the sidelines and then into the locker room?).

I know he wasn't in, I've seen enough proof(video and pictures) to know he wasn't in. Seeing our players instant reaction, as well as all the fans along the goalline, with the video/picture evidence lead me to believe that we got hosed.

But we have to deal with it, once the game is over they aren't going to review anything and change the outcome of the game. Amato said the play WAS NOT reviewed, so don't say the people upstairs decided it wasn't close enough to review. The refs sprinted off the fields before the coaches even shook hands, which I think is a terrible policy. The refs should be forced to stay out on the field until the teams are leaving to assure the coach has a chance to talk to them about something that important.

We got hosed, it isn't anything new, as NC State fans we're use to controversial calls at the end of games. Just have to suck it up and hope to not be in this position again, which we shouldn't have let ourselves get in that possession today to begin with.

9/10/2006 2:28:58 AM

Quote :

"^ he didn't cross the plain and pull it back out momentarily... that is obvious from the vid, or if you watched the game... and yes... i want my 2 wins while we can get them "

Show me this obvious video, because it's obviously not the one they showed over and over again.

I swear to God, it's amazing how we can't just admit we lost to a team we should be better than, but have to be OMG WE WERE SCREWED.

Quote :

"(didn't you see them sprint to the sidelines and then into the locker room?)."

They waited around for a little bit. It's not like they scored and made a mad dash into the locker room. Also, what would it matter if they were on the field or not if it were reviewed? Either way the game is over.

[Edited on September 10, 2006 at 2:32 AM. Reason : .]

9/10/2006 2:31:36 AM