(10-24-2016 03:53 PM)Tygrys Wrote: (10-24-2016 03:10 PM)Penny Lane Wrote: (10-24-2016 02:41 PM)Halfcourt Wrote: (10-24-2016 08:38 AM)tmoneyinmphs Wrote: The only thing i don't like about playing navy is all the blocks on both sides of the ball being thrown directly at the knees. I think they had a false start not called in the first period and a couple good spots, but that is not really that unusual for a football game, and i've seen much worse. I don't think any of the calls really made that big of a difference.
The goal line stand by navy and getting the ball back and then not scoring was the difference in winning and losing, imo. Btw, that 4th down you run directly at them.
I think the better team won. I still think we got better talent but just not good enough as a team to show it. With us having so many young and inexperienced players out there, we did very well on the road. Just came up a little short.
It will be interesting to watch how this team responds in the next game.
I didn't know if it was just my vantage point in the stadium, but it looked like every spot was generous to their forward progress. Was curious to hear from others.
Looked that way to me too. Think there is subconscious bias towards Navy by officials.
I was listening on the radio when we stuffed Navy on a 3rd and short and then they subsequently went for it and barely picked up the first down on 4th and short. Again, I could not see it but the Navy radio guys were harping on what a generous spot the Navy runner got. They thought he was stopped short but given a first down spot. It could not really be challenged due to not having a camera right down the first down line.
Below is my "spot analysis" I previously posted in another thread. By the way, I remember the ESPN announcer saying one time on a Navy first down, "I am surprised that the chains moved so fluidly after that last play". I also thought it was strange that you never say one of those red markers laying on the ground on the Navy side to mark what was needed for a first down. The official markers were on the Memphis side where they were hard to see.
-----------------------
I am also not blaming the refs for the loss but some of those marks were either a result of blatant cheating or complete ineptitude. I went back and watched the first 3Qs looking for bad marks. I didnt find as many as I thought I would, finding 8 where the mark was wrong by a foot or more, one of which was in Memphis' favor (by a foot). The worst ones were:
1) Navy's first drive, 10:30 left in 1Q. HUGE CALL! Navy went for it on 4th&1 from their own 44. Tiger defender made a great hit right at the 45 and drove the Navy runner straight back. Tiger D celebrated, thinking they'd made the stop. But the line-judge, standing right in front of the hit and right in front of Navy coach, steps to his right and puts his foot down TWO FEET beyond the 45. The ball ends up placed with its tip on the 46, a full yard beyond the farthest possible point that the ball got to. Watching the replay, it was very difficult to tell whether the ball made the front edge of the 45 for the 1st down. Maybe, if they'd shown a replay from the other side you could have actually seen the ball. Anyway, the mark was completely ludicrous...a real WTF moment!
2) Memphis' last drive of the first half. 2Q, 0:57 left. 2nd & 10 from the M18. Pass to Miller near the left sideline. Miller makes the catch about a foot past the 28 and as he's turning up-field, he is hit and driven back. The ref comes up and marks the ball at the 27, a full 4 feet behind where the ball should have been marked. So, instead of a first down and the clock stopping while the chains moved, the clock keeps churning and we ran the ball to ensure we got the 1st down. It cost us about 0:20 and really got us to where we just didn't have time. To me, this wasn't as aggregious as 1) because the ref was not "right there" with a great view, but still a horrible mark.
Go check out these 2 marks and shake your head.
---------------------------------