Game Thread: #24 Oregon Ducks (3-0) at Arizona State (1-2) | 10:00 PM ET | PAC12 Network

[TheDayMan]

Anyone know why they didn't review the spot on Herbert's 4th down run?

Cuz he was clearly short.

 

[OregonDucks]

Cuz he was clearly short.

Did you take the time to see the replay? Or just saying something to get a reaction?

 

[handicappers]

Yeah its a serious question why didn't they review the spot? He's 6'6, the spot was within inches of a first down and it looked really close to me on initial play and the brief replays.

i just did a review of the score board and yup, Ducks lost. It's been confirmed.

 

[TheDayMan]

Yeah its a serious question why didn't they review the spot? He's 6'6, the spot was within inches of a first down and it looked really close to me on initial play and the brief replays.

Reviewing spots is chickenshit.

 

[TheDayMan]

Did you take the time to see the replay? Or just saying something to get a reaction?

Reviewing spots is chickenshit.

 

[WizardHawk]

Ducks didn't lose because of some phantom ball placement. Try 468 yards of offense given up by that defense. How about Wilkins going 24/39 for 347 yards and a TD, while also rushing for two more. The best QB on that field was for sure ASU's.

Start asking your questions about why that new defense basically wasn't any better than last year on this night. That's where my questions would start.

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

Yeah its a serious question why didn't they review the spot? He's 6'6, the spot was within inches of a first down and it looked really close to me on initial play and the brief replays.

Didn't see a replay, but considering that teams tend to get special treatment during home games and that Arizona is Oregon's second home, I think it's safe to say he was indeed short.

 

[OregonDucks]

Reviewing spots is chickenshit.

Oh you don't say because after they reviews ASU's fumble, that was fumble, but they decided to say it wasn't they found the spot was short and put ASU into a 4th down situation, which they attempted to get and didn't get it. Maybe they moved the spot back in that replay because they knew it was a fumble, but couldn't overturn because of the initial call on the field.

reviews of spots ESPECIALLY if they determine an outcome of the game usually are reviewd. There is ZERO reason that spot shouldn't have been reviewed. it was damn close and I am curious as to why they didn't review it? That would have put Oregon at midfield, new set of downs and rolling into ASU territory with time and good position to win the game.

 

[TheDayMan]

Ducks didn't lose because of some phantom ball placement. Try 468 yards of offense given up by that defense. How about Wilkins going 24/39 for 347 yards and a TD, while also rushing for two more. The best QB on that field was for sure ASU's.

Start asking your questions about why that new defense basically wasn't any better than last year on this night. That's where my questions would start.

Nope, he's proud of the defense, must be something else.

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

^^^ That's more like it. He's revving up now.

 

[WizardHawk]

Nope, he's proud of the defense, must be something else.

Normally when you score 35 you win games. UW scored 37 for example and won easily.

You don't win many games giving up 37.

 

[OregonDucks]

I am beginning to think no one here watched the game. the Defense did an outstanding job. They got burned early but made awesome adjustments. Offense did well too, but I am curious as to on a huge 4th down and short play they didn't review the spot when a 6'6 QB takes off running and it is close enough to where they have to bring out the chains to measure...............

 

[handicappers]

Oh you don't say because after they reviews ASU's fumble, that was fumble, but they decided to say it wasn't they found the spot was short and put ASU into a 4th down situation, which they attempted to get and didn't get it. Maybe they moved the spot back in that replay because they knew it was a fumble, but couldn't overturn because of the initial call on the field.

reviews of spots ESPECIALLY if they determine an outcome of the game usually are reviewd. There is ZERO reason that spot shouldn't have been reviewed. it was damn close and I am curious as to why they didn't review it? That would have put Oregon at midfield, new set of downs and rolling into ASU territory with time and good position to win the game.

lol

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

I am beginning to think no one here watched the game. the Defense did an outstanding job. They got burned early but made awesome adjustments. Offense did well too, but I am curious as to on a huge 4th down and short play they didn't review the spot when a 6'6 QB takes off running and it is close enough to where they have to bring out the chains to measure...............

Tears...tears in my eyes!

 

[TheDayMan]

Oh you don't say because after they reviews ASU's fumble, that was fumble, but they decided to say it wasn't they found the spot was short and put ASU into a 4th down situation, which they attempted to get and didn't get it. Maybe they moved the spot back in that replay because they knew it was a fumble, but couldn't overturn because of the initial call on the field.

reviews of spots ESPECIALLY if they determine an outcome of the game usually are reviewd. There is ZERO reason that spot shouldn't have been reviewed. it was damn close and I am curious as to why they didn't review it? That would have put Oregon at midfield, new set of downs and rolling into ASU territory with time and good position to win the game.

I don't know the reference, I was watching a good team beat a team that isn't terrible. Only caught the end of this one. But they have to review the spot when they review any play, reviewing just for the spot is chicken shit and very rarely done.

Quit crying about one play, your team sucks.

 

[WizardHawk]

Oh you don't say because after they reviews ASU's fumble, that was fumble, but they decided to say it wasn't they found the spot was short and put ASU into a 4th down situation, which they attempted to get and didn't get it. Maybe they moved the spot back in that replay because they knew it was a fumble, but couldn't overturn because of the initial call on the field.

reviews of spots ESPECIALLY if they determine an outcome of the game usually are reviewd. There is ZERO reason that spot shouldn't have been reviewed. it was damn close and I am curious as to why they didn't review it? That would have put Oregon at midfield, new set of downs and rolling into ASU territory with time and good position to win the game.

The spot would have only been reviewed if it was challenged. Was Oregon already out of challenges? I'm asking because obviously I didn't watch the whole game closely as it was going on at the same time as UW's. There is a risk of using your challenges too early.

But I was watching at the end and it seemed pretty clear to me so maybe the staff didn't challenge it because they agreed.

 

[OregonDucks]

I don't know the reference, I was watching a good team beat a team that isn't terrible. Only caught the end of this one. But they have to review the spot when they review any play, reviewing just for the spot is chicken shit is very rarely done.

Quit crying about one play, your team sucks.

CRYING ABOUT ONE PLAY!!??!?!?!? IT BASICALLY DECIDED THE MOTHER CAST BALL GAME BRO?!!!!!

Its a pretty damn BIG PLAY IF YOU ASK ME. IT was close enough to where they had to measure the SPOT WITH THE STICKS and yet no review of the actual spot was made!?? What?? Why not? I ask why not? It's a valid question that SHOULD be asked.

 

[TheDayMan]

Normally when you score 35 you win games. UW scored 37 for example and won easily.

You don't win many games giving up 37.

WHEN YOUR OREGIN YOU DO!

 

[handicappers]

Oregon fans be like

 

[OregonDucks]

just like every score is reviewed so to are game CHANGING calls or spots. Review that and Oregon gets the first down by inches is my guess.