(10-31-2020 12:23 PM)TU 1978 Wrote:  ECU has a good QB who battled until the end. Eventually they’ll turn the corner.

I believe we already have. Take that covid false positive on our starting qb against Navy and the bad officiating last night out and we are 3-2.

(10-31-2020 09:57 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  A lot of you Tulsa fans are getting upset for no reason. Everybody is ragging on the refs not Tulsa. That drive was basically stopped three times. It wasn't one bad break or bad call it was repeated calls. That is what is so astonishing.

The problem is out of the three calls there’s only one that’s definitively wrong and it wasn’t the fumble. The fumble is a matter of interpretation of what it means to regain possession. The league can say what it wants but to me he red secured the ball on his groin and it only came loose again after he was down and somebody hit him again.

The play that was egregious was the 4th down catch. One angle clearly showed the ball dragging the ground. The PI was right although I’m a bit upset that it had to be an official all the way at the other end of the play who called it.

for the record im only here to giggle and watch my ecu internet friends melt

(10-31-2020 12:44 PM)ecupittfan Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 12:11 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 11:36 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  Just re-watched the last 30 min of the game, here's my thoughts:

ECU ran a pick-play on that 4th and 5 to get the TD, it wasn't called.

PI was the right call on 4th down, clearly grabbed Stokes arm before the ball arrived to get on his "top side" to bat down the pass.

Reversing the fumble was the wrong call, should have been stands or confirmed, bad call.

The catch on 4th down could have gone either way. The ball can touch the ground so long as the ground doesn't aid the catch and the receiver maintains control. It seemed like he secured the ball against his hip before the ball hit the ground and I didn't see an angle where the ball moved after. I think it should have been stands, but I don't know how they could say confirmed.

Fair assessment I'd say. Glad you mentioned the pick play cuz no one was talking about that .

Honestly if I was ECU I'd be mad too because as a Tulsa fan I've been in their shoes. Every Tulsa fan has been since we joined the AAC. For some reason all the calls went our way last night. As Tulsa fans we just expect it to be the other way around. I was surprised last night.

Considering our team got little practice this week due to inclement weather I'll take the officiating bail out.

Did they legalize weed in Oklahoma? I want some of what you guys are smoking.

I'm clean. We've just been through this stuff multiple times in the AAC and know how to make sense of it.

I want to apologize in advance to Tulane for what takes place next weekend. Nothing against the wave, but lives will be destroyed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(10-31-2020 02:19 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  I want to apologize in advance to Tulane for what takes place next weekend. Nothing against the wave, but lives will be destroyed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, Tulane looks like world beaters today.

(10-31-2020 02:25 PM)B easy Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 02:19 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  I want to apologize in advance to Tulane for what takes place next weekend. Nothing against the wave, but lives will be destroyed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, Tulane looks like world beaters today.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(10-31-2020 12:08 PM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 11:46 AM)B easy Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 11:36 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  Just re-watched the last 30 min of the game, here's my thoughts:

ECU ran a pick-play on that 4th and 5 to get the TD, it wasn't called.

PI was the right call on 4th down, clearly grabbed Stokes arm before the ball arrived to get on his "top side" to bat down the pass.

Reversing the fumble was the wrong call, should have been stands or confirmed, bad call.

The catch on 4th down could have gone either way. The ball can touch the ground so long as the ground doesn't aid the catch and the receiver maintains control. It seemed like he secured the ball against his hip before the ball hit the ground and I didn't see an angle where the ball moved after. I think it should have been stands, but I don't know how they could say confirmed.

Ball drags on the ground and does in fact 'moves', clearly it assisted him in securing the ball. When do you see a PI call like that made in a critical situation? It's a unwritten rule.

I've watched the replay about 20 times and I can't say that the ball for sure moved. He has the ball against his hip and the tip of the ball barely drags the ground. Do I think it's more likely that it wasn't a catch? sure. But it has to be indisputable evidence that it wasn't a catch. It should not have been confirmed though.

As for the PI, the ECU defender wouldn't have gotten to the ball had he not grabbed stokes to get himself around to bat the ball down. I think people are just mad because the flag came late, but it was the right call.

The overturned fumble you have every right to be pissed about, that was a terrible call.

He trapped the ball against the ground, he never had a hand under it or a hand on the ball to have possession when it hit the ground. No catch.

(10-31-2020 01:29 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 12:44 PM)ecupittfan Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 12:11 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 11:36 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  Just re-watched the last 30 min of the game, here's my thoughts:

ECU ran a pick-play on that 4th and 5 to get the TD, it wasn't called.

PI was the right call on 4th down, clearly grabbed Stokes arm before the ball arrived to get on his "top side" to bat down the pass.

Reversing the fumble was the wrong call, should have been stands or confirmed, bad call.

The catch on 4th down could have gone either way. The ball can touch the ground so long as the ground doesn't aid the catch and the receiver maintains control. It seemed like he secured the ball against his hip before the ball hit the ground and I didn't see an angle where the ball moved after. I think it should have been stands, but I don't know how they could say confirmed.

Fair assessment I'd say. Glad you mentioned the pick play cuz no one was talking about that .

Honestly if I was ECU I'd be mad too because as a Tulsa fan I've been in their shoes. Every Tulsa fan has been since we joined the AAC. For some reason all the calls went our way last night. As Tulsa fans we just expect it to be the other way around. I was surprised last night.

Considering our team got little practice this week due to inclement weather I'll take the officiating bail out.

Did they legalize weed in Oklahoma? I want some of what you guys are smoking.

I'm clean. We've just been through this stuff multiple times in the AAC and know how to make sense of it.

You think ECU hasn’t since Ruff got fired? Or even before that, or back in C-USA? Heck even before that, see the 1991 ECU - Illinois game and the onside kick recovery. Excessive celebration call with an improperly assessed penalty making it 1st and 25 instead of marking off 15 and 1st and 10 which is what should have happened with the call, not to mention the call was bs to start with.

Hell, I can go back to the 1983 season and the FSU “fumble” and the Florida phantom PI on the opposite side of the field.

(10-31-2020 12:13 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 12:08 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 10:59 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 10:55 AM)Pony94 Wrote:  http://theamerican.org/news/2020/10/31/a...-game.aspx


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yikes to have the conference publicly acknowledge it and to do so in only a few hours... first time ive ever seen that

I'll put the quote here:

Quote:With 1:52 remaining in the fourth quarter, a Tulsa ball carrier was ruled by the on-field officials to have fumbled, with the ensuing recovery by East Carolina. After further review of the play by the replay official, the ruling on the field was reversed; the replay official determined that the ball carrier had regained possession and was down, prior to East Carolina’s ultimately recovering the ball.

After reviewing the video of the play, the Conference has determined that the judgment of the replay official was incorrect. The ball carrier did not regain possession of the ball, and the ruling on the field awarding the ball to East Carolina should not have been reversed.

The American Athletic Conference has conducted a review of the game and has communicated its findings to East Carolina and Tulsa.

That would have iced the game for ECU.

We still had 3 tineouts I believe. It wouldn't have quite iced the game.

You weren’t exactly stopping our running game with much consistency. Picking a first down and it’s over or we could have left you with less than a minute and pinned you deep.

(10-31-2020 11:36 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  Just re-watched the last 30 min of the game, here's my thoughts:

ECU ran a pick-play on that 4th and 5 to get the TD, it wasn't called.

PI was the right call on 4th down, clearly grabbed Stokes arm before the ball arrived to get on his "top side" to bat down the pass.

Reversing the fumble was the wrong call, should have been stands or confirmed, bad call.

The catch on 4th down could have gone either way. The ball can touch the ground so long as the ground doesn't aid the catch and the receiver maintains control. It seemed like he secured the ball against his hip before the ball hit the ground and I didn't see an angle where the ball moved after. I think it should have been stands, but I don't know how they could say confirmed.

And Stokes’ push off on the break on his route? If you are going to call it that tight, you gotta call the push off.

(10-31-2020 05:42 PM)ecumbh1999 Wrote:  

(10-31-2020 11:36 AM)T-Town Cane Wrote:  Just re-watched the last 30 min of the game, here's my thoughts:

ECU ran a pick-play on that 4th and 5 to get the TD, it wasn't called.

PI was the right call on 4th down, clearly grabbed Stokes arm before the ball arrived to get on his "top side" to bat down the pass.

Reversing the fumble was the wrong call, should have been stands or confirmed, bad call.

The catch on 4th down could have gone either way. The ball can touch the ground so long as the ground doesn't aid the catch and the receiver maintains control. It seemed like he secured the ball against his hip before the ball hit the ground and I didn't see an angle where the ball moved after. I think it should have been stands, but I don't know how they could say confirmed.

And Stokes’ push off on the break on his route? If you are going to call it that tight, you gotta call the push off.

If you want to get ticket tacky the ECU tackles and Tight Ends were holding on every swing pass to your RB’s in the flat. Just long enough to put our linebackers out of contention to make the tackle.