Can Levi Haines realistically win NCAAs this year?

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

He is quite good as a true freshman, but even as a Penn State fan, I can admit Robb got absolutely jobbed in the Big 10 finals.  He clearly had a takedown and was not given it after review, somehow.  Granted, maybe Haines still ties up the match and wins in regulation, or it goes to OT and the same thing happens.   But Robb, AOC, Franek, Humphries, Andonian and more could take him out.  I think he will place high (top 4) but not sure if he's actually got a real shot to beat someone as good as AOC.

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

[1032004]

Yes he can

[Le duke]

A screenshot of his feet after he rocks back in bounds is NOT evidence of a takedown. If he left the cylinder and then came back in, they are OOB, Jimmy. 

Now, am I saying the refs got it right? No. But that's a pretty piss poor attempt on your part.

[BaldAt23]

2 minutes ago, Le duke said:

A screenshot of his feet after he rocks back in bounds is NOT evidence of a takedown. If he left the cylinder and then came back in, they are OOB, Jimmy. 

Now, am I saying the refs got it right? No. But that's a pretty piss poor attempt on your part.

It was clear as a day a takedown. Not even a question 

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

2 minutes ago, Le duke said:

A screenshot of his feet after he rocks back in bounds is NOT evidence of a takedown. If he left the cylinder and then came back in, they are OOB, Jimmy. 

Now, am I saying the refs got it right? No. But that's a pretty piss poor attempt on your part.

You are claiming Robb's body went totally out of bounds and then he stuck his feet back in after?

[Le duke]

Just now, BaldAt23 said:

It was clear as a day a takedown. Not even a question 

Great. I'm addressing Jimmy's screenshot, which itself is not evidence of anything at all.

[Le duke]

Just now, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

You are claiming Robb's body went totally out of bounds and then he stuck his feet back in after?

It happens all the time. Surely you are aware of this.

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

Other angle:

 

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

2 minutes ago, Le duke said:

It happens all the time. Surely you are aware of this.

Watch the clip.  That does not happen.  Robb's feet literally are dragging on the mat the entire time from the beginning.

 

Edited March 6, 2023 by Jimmy Cinnabon

[82bordeaux]

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

Yes that clip happens a second after the screenshots I posted.  Robb already had control and in bounds.

[82bordeaux]

4 minutes ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

Yes that clip happens a second after the screenshots I posted.  Robb already had control and in bounds.

You are absolutely incorrect in your interpretation. Look at the times. They are both at 2 seconds. There was no control gained beyond reaction time before they were out of bounds. It is cut and dried. Sorry.

[LIV4GOD]

Jimmy is absolutely right.  Robb never left the cylinder.   

Terrible call.  

[LIV4GOD]

4 minutes ago, 82bordeaux said:

You are absolutely incorrect in your interpretation. Look at the times. They are both at 2 seconds. There was no control gained beyond reaction time before they were out of bounds. It is cut and dried. Sorry.

He never lost control.  Threw him to his back and never let go. 

[82bordeaux]

2 minutes ago, LIV4GOD said:

He never lost control.  Threw him to his back and never let go. 

You have to establish control before you lose control. There has to be control beyond reaction time to establish control. That sequence all happened in less than one second which is proven by the clock. No reaction time before being out of bounds...no control, therefore no TD.

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

7 minutes ago, 82bordeaux said:

You are absolutely incorrect in your interpretation. Look at the times. They are both at 2 seconds. There was no control gained beyond reaction time before they were out of bounds. It is cut and dried. Sorry.

Did you watch the match again including the 2 slow motion replays at different angles?  I am a Penn State fan but even I can admit that was a clear 2 for Robb.

[82bordeaux]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

Did you watch the match again including the 2 slow motion replays at different angles?  I am a Penn State fan but even I can admit that was a clear 2 for Robb.

Did you look at the screenshot I posted and the time on the scoreboard? You can't get a better angle of where Robb's feet are. You can't use slow motion of lesser angles as proof of something that has already been disproved by better evidence.

[Jimmy Cinnabon]

Just now, 82bordeaux said:

Did you look at the screenshot I posted and the time on the scoreboard? You can't get a better angle of where Robb's feet are. You can't use slow motion of lesser angles as proof of something that has already been disproved by better evidence.

Video / slow motion >>> screenshots

 

Your screenshot is like posting a screenshot of a NFL receiver out of bounds after he dragged his toes in bounds.  It doesn't disprove it was a catch because it shows what happens after the crucial point in the play.

Edited March 6, 2023 by Jimmy Cinnabon

[82bordeaux]

11 minutes ago, Jimmy Cinnabon said:

Video / slow motion >>> screenshots

Your screenshot is like posting a screenshot of a NFL receiver out of bounds after he dragged his toes in bounds.  It doesn't disprove it was a catch because it shows what happens after the crucial point in the play.

The slow motion confirms what I was saying all along. Your issue is that you don't understand the rules.

And to use your analogy from the NFL, you still have to establish control before dragging your toes. Otherwise it is not a catch.

The rules state that you must establish control beyond reaction time. You would have to sell that reaction time is measured in tenths of a second.

Edited March 6, 2023 by 82bordeaux
update

[LIV4GOD]

8 minutes ago, 82bordeaux said:

The slow motion confirms what I was saying all along. Your issue is that you don't understand the rules.

And to use your analogy from the NFL, you still have to establish control before dragging your toes. Otherwise it is not a catch.

The rules state that you must establish control beyond reaction time. You would have to sell that reaction time is measured in tenths of a second.

He had control and never lost it. 

[82bordeaux]

5 minutes ago, LIV4GOD said:

He had control and never lost it. 

How would you define "reaction time" in measured seconds? Just curious.

Edited March 6, 2023 by 82bordeaux
sp

[gimpeltf]

First, the ref (or is it the assistant?) moves such that his left leg blocks the view of the sideline so it's hard to tell exactly when the feet leave the cylinder.

Second, watch how Haines is physically reacting. He somehow kept most of his body off the mat through a lot of this. He's using his hands and feet to push up and often turning into Robb. The screenshot is clearly OB as Robb's feet are clear of the refs leg. If this had been in the center - control isn't clear until right around the screen shot (maybe a few frames earlier) but that would have to be pretty short time allowed for reaction given how Haines was turning in.

[HuskerMac]

To answer the Questiion. 

Yes he could win. WIll he? 

No. I realistically think its gonne be Robb. Now that he has lost and doesnt have the monkey on his back of "remaining undefeated"  and that noise hes going to get back to what he does best. WIn. 

[LIV4GOD]

Just now, 82bordeaux said:

How would you define "reaction time" in measured seconds? Just curious.

He never lost control.  If you get behind someone and one of their hands just touches, it's a TD. If he had the legs and the guy landed on his butt, it's instantly a TD. He actually threw him in a more control positioned (the waist) and he landed on his butt/back.  He never lost control as they continued out of bounds. If that's not two, then it's bad for the sport.