RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: fencewire on September 21, 2011, 01:42:22 PM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQX1RPXznL4
-
RTK?
-
i thought running into... at least.
-
The player that hit the kicker was also blocked. Perhaps no foul at all.
-
I thought the guy that rolled under him jumped from about 5 yards away and rolled. Also a block below the waist right at the end...
-
Was the guy that charged the officials after the play a member of the chain crew? Looked like he had a "bib" in his hand.
-
I thought the guy that rolled under him jumped from about 5 yards away and rolled. Also a block below the waist right at the end...
Regarding the block below the waist. Referee should pick that up, but he was in "jail break" mode. He needs to be able to backpeddle to be able to see all the action. No different than a back judge going the other way. Referee had a big head start when the ball is punted so he should be able get get to the goalline and be watching the blocking before the runner even gets up there. It's also possible that the blocker missed.
As for the kicker getting hit, maybe he was going to get hit anyway, but the way he leaped and then got blocked, it looks as if that block helped lay him out and roll into the kicker. The kicker appears to be going down just before team B player gets to him so that can make it look worse than it actually is.
-
That would have been very strange since the game was at the winning team's field. The chain crew should have been from them. Maybe a ball "boy"
-
How many missed fouls?
1 - Roughing the kicker.
2 - Film does a bad job of showing whether the pass was forward or not.
3 - Clear low block at the end
Wow...
-
1) The red player MAY have been unbalanced by a block. May also have touched the ball? I don't know if that negates a RTK call for NHFS.
2) Lateral looks good from the angle.
3) Not convinced that's a block below the waist.
-
that last block is definitely below the waist in my book, look how the guy falls.
^flag
-
that last block is definitely below the waist in my book, look how the guy falls.
^flag
It is suspect. What we can't see in the video is the possibility that the blockers hands first contacted the blockee above the waist, which would make this a legal block.
-
One other thing that bothers me is the possible actions by the official after the game when the big guy charges out and is yelling at them.
The movement and arm motion of the official that comes in to back him off really looks like he gave a shove (0:45) - does anyone else see in that way? Gotta hope not, but...
-
The rusher may be touched by the blocker well before he reaches the kicker, but he puts his hands on the blockers head and shoulders, pushes him down, leverages himself up and over the blocker who is still on his feet, and goes over him in stride foot first. What's that?
-
I see him going to the right of the blocker, not OVER him
-
One other thing that bothers me is the possible actions by the official after the game when the big guy charges out and is yelling at them.
The movement and arm motion of the official that comes in to back him off really looks like he gave a shove (0:45) - does anyone else see in that way? Gotta hope not, but...
It looked like the H (F?) came in late and gave the guy a shove. I don't really have a problem with it, though.
-
The main question I have on this is why is the crew still on the field once the game is over?
-
FWIW
Could see where the R may rule that the rusher was blocked into kicker, he obviously had a better view. Hopefully there will be more plays like this on video that RR can offer some guidance. From the video I don't think the contact was caused by the block. There should of been a flag based on what I saw.
Pass was backwards.
No BBW, looked maybe at the waist.
Welp, I with you they sure did stay out there much longer than I would have.
What a fun play!
-
I see him going to the right of the blocker, not OVER him
Looks more like over him to me - he loses balance when his right foot catches the blocker (in the face?). Will concede the call to the R who seems to be in position to make the call, but this is the closest to a hurdling call as I have ever seen.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
1) The red player MAY have been unbalanced by a block. May also have touched the ball? I don't know if that negates a RTK call for NHFS.
UVA-Wise is a college. I suspect they play by NCAA rules.
-
IMO the force of a block should be toward the kicker if we are to determine that the contact with the kicker was "caused by an opponent's block". In this case the block did not apply any force to the defender that drove him toward the kicker. The opposite is true in this case. The blocker attempted to apply a force away from the kicker. It was the defenders action that "caused" the contact. RTK on this one. ^flag
-
IMO the force of a block should be toward the kicker if we are to determine that the contact with the kicker was "caused by an opponent's block". In this case the block did not apply any force to the defender that drove him toward the kicker. The opposite is true in this case. The blocker attempted to apply a force away from the kicker. It was the defenders action that "caused" the contact. RTK on this one. ^flag
Agree completely. And... get off the field officials!!!!
-
It looks like contact on the play with the kicker, but it is hard to tell to what extent or if the kicker flopped. I was RTK when I first saw this video on ESPN, but it is possible that the guy acted. I just cannot tell as the camera vacates the area quickly.
Peace
-
It looks like contact on the play with the kicker, but it is hard to tell to what extent or if the kicker flopped. I was RTK when I first saw this video on ESPN, but it is possible that the guy acted. I just cannot tell as the camera vacates the area quickly.
Peace
I was seeing the same thing. It looks like the kicker was already starting to fall down an instant before the defender rolled into him.
-
Here's my take on it:
1) Running into the kicker - Rule 9-1-16-5 allows that if a "player's contact ... is caused by an opponent's block, there is no foul." IMO, the block had no impact on the guy continuing to run past the blocker for three yards and roll up the kicker.
2) no BBW - I agree with those here that say a) the block was AT the waist, so no foul and b) the blocker may have actually MISSED the player completely. Camera angle doesn't make it clear that the defender was actually hit by the block.
Should have 5 yards for running into & replay the down.
-
And nobody else has a problem with an official hauling off and shoving a coach/chain crew/anyone???
If someone on the sideline did that to me htey would be ejected!
-
I've had a closer look at that James and the guy is a spectator (the coaching staff on that sideline are in black tops with beige long pants) who has run on towards the Referee being chased by two officials from the sideline.
-
The main question I have on this is why is the crew still on the field once the game is over?
From a reliable source who spoke to the crew:
They were waiting on the BJ who went back to retreive his bean bag from the end of the kick.
Deputies on duty charged with escorting the officials became caught up in the crowd rushing the field.
The fan who rushed the R was cursing and threatening violence.
The referee judged that the contact with the kicker was the result of the block by the A player.
-
From a reliable source who spoke to the crew:
They were waiting on the BJ who went back to retreive his bean bag from the end of the kick.
It's a bean bag. It's $5. Let it go!
Deputies on duty charged with escorting the officials became caught up in the crowd rushing the field.
Understandable
The fan who rushed the R was cursing and threatening violence.
Still not sure that justified the official's actions. But that's where the deputies should have been.
The referee judged that the contact with the kicker was the result of the block by the A player.
Sorry, that's just a miss! The direction of the block was not toward the kicker. The rusher contacted the kicker IN SPITE OF the block, not BECAUSE of.
Life in D3 football. In some ways, it's worse conditions than good high school football.
-
I agree on all your points.