matcar;1302231; said:The financial impact on the organization is certainly taken into context. But the keys are always intent (ethics) and pattern.
How do you decide intent?
Upvote
0
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
matcar;1302231; said:The financial impact on the organization is certainly taken into context. But the keys are always intent (ethics) and pattern.
OCBucksFan;1302208; said:I think the fact that there's been a lot of questionable refereeing in the past 2 years of LSU/uSC games has a lot of people going "what the hell?" I can't say it's fixed or if it's not, but it does leave you a little curious.
BUCKYLE;1302266; said:Funny, the SEC says "no biggie".
BUCKYLE;1302266; said:I work construction. If I drop a wheelbarrow of crete, I get chewed out. If I pop the tires of the cement truck and catch it on fire, I'm fairly certain I'd be let go. This isn't a ref "not paying attention". The guy takes two fucking steps OUT OF POSITION, then attacks the fucking guy.
BUCKYLE;1302266; said:If he can't check himself, he has no business officiating. I've watched literally hundreds of football games over the course of my life and that's the first time I've seen a ref deliver a forearm shiver to a ball carrier in a crucial situation.
The guy blows a call, didn't have the angle, out of position, discipline him. He tackles a [censored]ing player? He should be relieved of his duties, as it's obvious he's too [censored]ing stupid to be a competent official.
Funny, the SEC says "no biggie". Hmm. I wonder what they would have to gain from keeping a corrupt official around? You know, a guy that they could turn to and say "we'd like to see LSU win, wink wink".
I work construction. If I drop a wheelbarrow of crete, I get chewed out. If I pop the tires of the cement truck and catch it on fire, I'm fairly certain I'd be let go. This isn't a ref "not paying attention". The guy takes two [censored]ing steps OUT OF POSITION, then attacks the [censored]ing guy.
Despite their 'trend'?Your opinion so you can have it. I'll side with the folks who are involved in the decision.
matcar;1302317; said:Your opinion so you can have it. I'll side with the folks who are involved in the decision. If this is the beginning of a trend, then he'll be relieved of duties, otherwise, just as all the parties involved have stated, it's not worth a guy losing his job. But you obviously believe this was intentional (based on the all caps comments and then "attacks" verb), so there's no point in us discussing any further because I believe the opposite. And having made a similar mistake, I can see it happening.
BUCKYLE;1302319; said:How 'bout even if it was a mistake, it was still such a mistake that proves he isn't qualified to hold that position? How many times does a ref get to tackle the QB before he is let go?
What good comes from complaining when it's obvious they won't do anything about it anyway?Even the coach of the team who got "jobbed" on the play doesn't see it...and he's one known for making a case when there's one to be made.
Speak for yourself.I think we're all OK here.
Twice. So as long as they rotate, referees can be taking down players every week. :pHow 'bout even if it was a mistake, it was still such a mistake that proves he isn't qualified to hold that position? How many times does a ref get to tackle the QB before he is let go?
He DIRECTLY ended the play with an intentional, forward-driving hit.It simply isn't that egregious an offense...heck it has no where near the bearing on the game as other calls that definitively change the outcome of the game.
matcar;1302331; said:It simply isn't that egregious an offense...heck it has no where near the bearing on the game as other calls that definitively change the outcome of the game. So yeah, if it's a mistake, I think you're entitled to one. If it's NOT a mistake, then there's a real crime here and I'd agree he needs to be gone. But I don't believe that for a second.