An observation
- Thread starter largemouth
- Start date
You'd think a jersey fabric could be invented that would be too slippery to hold.
Football would be a lot better.
Football would be a lot better.
What in the hell does one have to do with the other? Go back to your d-bag forum.
Last edited:
I was at the Insight bowl...and as we were leaving the city...we were talking with some Oklahoma fans...who lamented having B1G officials for their game (can't remember which bowl it was)...so other conference's fans even lament the quality of our officiating.
Having said that...it didn't look like a factor in the bucket game...
We're talking about PU, not IU. IU has nothing to do with this.
I watched every second as well and while I didn't think it was overly bad, I thought the officals missed a couple offensive holding calls, a horse collar tackle, and an egregious PI that changed the game in the end zone on Westbrook. That's poor officiating, imo. PU played nearly 170 plays and committed one...ONE accepted penalty when they averaged five per game coming in.
And a Purdue fan would point to calls that were missed against IU.
If IU had accepted the two they declined, Purdue would’ve finished finished with three, and they averaged 4.6/game during the season.
It’s clear something needs to be done about this egregious outcome. The officials went out of their way to ensure Purdue won that game. It’s truly an outrage.
Not sure I would diagnose it as home cooking, but just from a purely human performance standpoint to only have 1 mistake in what probably amounted to over 100 plays just isn’t feasible.
What? IU didn't accept the penalties despite being fouled because they play they made resulted in a better outcome than the infraction. PU declined multiple penalties on us.
You can spew sarcastic nonsense all you want, but you're acting like we can't point out the egregious discrepancy in penalties when talking about this game. Hell, if they just call the blatant PI in the end zone, the game likely never goes to OT and we win going away. That's how one blown call can effect a game.
And that was Exactly what that no-call was intended to do.
The one thing I'm most proud of (for this TEAM) is that they've overcome both adversity and the Big Ten Refs to win 8 games...,
Might have been 9..., without 2..., count-em, 2 no-calls on (key) blocks in the back (same play, and those blocks were what sprung him) on Lewerkes game winning run up at m$u...
The egregious discrepancy in penalties is borne out by the results during the season - Purdue 2nd in the B1G in penalties committed, IU last in the B1G in penalties committed. IU was pretty undisciplined much of the time during the season, including on Saturday. Fortunately, they overcame their lack of discipline to win.
How many penalties did Purdue decline? Given how closely you watched the game, that should be easy data for you to provide.
I'm citing statistical data. You're whining, and whining some more, and whining some more - after a game IU won.
That's beyond embarrassing.
So it's your position that B1G officials are conspiring to harm IU's football program. Am I interpreting your post correctly?
If those 2 no-calls were so egregious, did you go through the tape to discern any other missed calls during that game - both ways? I'd love to see your analysis.
Seems you are both right in that’s it’s your “opinion”
O thinks who cares, IU won let it go
Boston J thinks it’s BS the penalties were one sided, etc
I’d say agree to disagree. But hey that’s the point of a message board.
On two, and maybe three of the roughing the QB Penalties they also called pass interference or holding a nd thus additional penalties were automatically declined.
Given your tone I have no desire to break anything down for you...
I will tell you that the no calls I mentioned had been "called" against us earlier...
The two I'm talking about were "key", game changing, no-calls and in my opinion that sort of thing happens far too regularly to be random occurances...
In this specific game (m$u) the "made
calls" were seemingly fair, but..., as in all these instances..., the refs "picked their spots" where it would damage our chances most...
2 years prior, on the same field, it was as if a switch had been thrown..., things went from a nearly text book perfectly called game to a completely one sided shaft job...
If you think this isn't a common occurrence I guess you missed the Nebraska game (no call for Targeting towards Ramsey (he's still got a bruised sternum from that shot) or the P$U game (no call, Targeting towards Philyor [he spent Michigan week in concussion protocol], or the purdue game: no-call for pass interference in the end zone (that literally everyone saw but the ref)...
Last edited:
Fiesta Bowl...Oklahoma v West Virginia. We played 12/31, they played 1/2 over at the new U of Phoenix dome.
Who cares? They were called for 80% less penalties than they average per game...That's a big difference. I'm not whining. I'm simply stating that I thought IU got the short end of the stick on a couple of missed crucial calls that should have gone AGAINST PU and kept them in the game despite our kicking woes and inability to finish in the red zone late. I just don't get why it's so bad to criticize an obvious difference.
So you do believe that the officials are targeting IU specifically.
Seriously, you believe that.
That, before a play, the entire group of officials decides, “This is a big play, we need to make a call against IU” (they would have to do it as a group, because they don’t know what the play will be - unless you’re also saying the officials are monitoring IU’s comms system).
That’s what you’re saying is taking place. That the officials have decided IU will lose certain games (although they were allowed to win 8 this year), and the officials are manipulating calls in an organized manner to ensure IU loses (though they did manage to overcome the stripes vs Purdue).
Sweet Jeebus.
And it’s your considered position that no calls were missed that should have gone against IU, correct?
Seriously, this place is like Loony Tunes.
