Author Topic: Fla/Aub opportunity to catch kick (Read 14007 times)

golfingref · « **on:** October 15, 2011, 07:04:48 PM »

In 1st quarter, Auburn punting. K seems to be right next to, possibly having the ball hit his jersey, as R is making an attempt at a fair catch. Ball muffed, recovered by K. I know there is no halo rule anymore, but how do you judge if R has a legitimate opportunity to make the catch?

TXMike · « **Reply #1 on:** October 15, 2011, 07:56:55 PM »

Apparently the Fla coach thinks it was KCI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBu1fJhm30I

blindref757 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 15, 2011, 08:02:07 PM »

Invalid Fair Catch signal...I have nothing. It wasn't a PF...the signal was WAY late and not above the head.

TXMike · « **Reply #3 on:** October 15, 2011, 08:08:04 PM »

Hard to tell from that angle but appears the gunner's right leg hit the returner's left before ball got there. That is enough for KCI for me. But if it did not, probably not KCI. I hope to have better views later.

Atlanta Blue · « **Reply #4 on:** October 15, 2011, 09:46:11 PM »

Quote from: blindref757 on October 15, 2011, 08:02:07 PM

Invalid Fair Catch signal...I have nothing. It wasn't a PF...the signal was WAY late and not above the head.

Signal has nothing to do with it, unless you want two fouls.

Receiver must have an UNIMPEDED opportunity to catch the ball. That receiver sure looked impeded to me. 6-4-1-c also says when there is a question, it's a foul.

Mike: was that the over the air audio? Not only did it get all of Muschamp's comments, there were no announcers telling us what they thought.

TxSkyBolt · « **Reply #5 on:** October 15, 2011, 10:04:25 PM »

You need to have a rating on your vids mike....my sensitive ears.

blindref757 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 16, 2011, 09:22:40 AM »

Quote from: TXMike on October 15, 2011, 08:08:04 PM

Hard to tell from that angle but appears the gunner's right leg hit the returner's left before ball got there. That is enough for KCI for me. But if it did not, probably not KCI. I hope to have better views later.

I see that now...didn't see it the first time I looked at it.

Speaking of KCI...in the OSU vs Texas game there was a good example of potential verbal interference on a fair catch on a punt. Two gunners come closing in on the return man who has signaled for FC, they are screaming at him. No harm no foul...but I've always heard that verbal interference is possible.

boydmarq · « **Reply #7 on:** October 16, 2011, 10:40:11 AM »

If I'm B on that one, I've got KCI.

TXMike · « **Reply #8 on:** October 16, 2011, 11:00:13 AM »

I have seen the other replays It appears there was no contact of the legs but still seems close enough for KCI I know if I got as close to another woman as he did to the returner my wife would be crying foul!

fbrefga · « **Reply #9 on:** October 16, 2011, 07:00:20 PM »

This is KCI. The receiver was not given an unimpeded chance to make the catch.

copedaddy · « **Reply #10 on:** October 16, 2011, 07:42:07 PM »

I see KCI, but what about the signal? Not valid but that doesn't seem to matter in D-1. I think it was the Texas game that there was a call for KCI against Texas and the signal was weak at best, just a single wave. Thanks guys, now when I call that an invalid signal on Friday night how much grief am I going to catch? "thats how they do it on Saturday" is what I will hear.

TXMike · « **Reply #11 on:** October 16, 2011, 08:34:26 PM »

More video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdZUWabxEIw

Welpe · « **Reply #12 on:** October 16, 2011, 10:09:49 PM »

Quote from: copedaddy on October 16, 2011, 07:42:07 PM

I see KCI, but what about the signal? Not valid but that doesn't seem to matter in D-1. I think it was the Texas game that there was a call for KCI against Texas and the signal was weak at best, just a single wave. Thanks guys, now when I call that an invalid signal on Friday night how much grief am I going to catch? "thats how they do it on Saturday" is what I will hear.

I do not believe an invalid signal absolves the kicking team of their responsibility to allow B the opportunity to catch the kick.

JasonTX · « **Reply #13 on:** October 16, 2011, 10:48:39 PM »

Quote from: Welpe on October 16, 2011, 10:09:49 PM

I do not believe an invalid signal absolves the kicking team of their responsibility to allow B the opportunity to catch the kick.

You are correct. Team B must be given an unimpeded oppurtunity to catch the kick regardless of if he signals or does not signal. All the signal does is protect him after the catch.

chymechowder · « **Reply #14 on:** October 16, 2011, 11:11:57 PM »

agreed. I think this is KCI. I think the BJ might've been screened out a bit by the returner's body, in that the gunner was on the return man's left side and the BJ was on the return man's right. maybe the S could've helped out with this? I don't think Team B was given an unimpeded opportunity here.

also technically the signal was invalid since it was a single (last second) wave. I know timing doens't really have anything to do with it. but even if he had wanted to make valid signal, he started his signal so late that it was unlikely he'd have had time to make a legit, double wave signal before the ball got there. but an invalid signal doesn't take team A off the hook for impeding the catch.

TXMike · « **Reply #15 on:** October 17, 2011, 05:11:08 AM »

The way I understand it, with regard to KCI, all the VALID signal does is give the returner possibly some extra time to complete the catch without being interfered with (i.e after he muffs if he still can complete the catch). The Team A players get no more leeway as to how close they get just because the signal was invalid (or there was no signal).

bama_stripes · « **Reply #16 on:** October 17, 2011, 05:15:39 PM »

Without getting into the technical aspects, does anybody think A's coach would have complained too much if KCI had been called?

All of my Auburn friends feel like they got away with one on this play.

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #17 on:** October 17, 2011, 05:25:44 PM »

Quote from: TXMike on October 17, 2011, 05:11:08 AM

The way I understand it, with regard to KCI, all the VALID signal does is give the returner possibly some extra time to complete the catch without being interfered with (i.e after he muffs if he still can complete the catch). The Team A players get no more leeway as to how close they get just because the signal was invalid (or there was no signal).

I agree with Mike here. The fair catch signal (valid) only gives the signaller two additional advantages:

1. A cannot contact the B receiver during or after the catch and
2. B has an "expanded" protection during a muff to still complete the catch unimpeded by A.

The original basic requirement that A give B an unimpeded opportunity to catch the kick is not changed in any way. Based on the video, IMO this should have been KCI.

golfingref · « **Reply #18 on:** October 17, 2011, 09:46:10 PM »

On Mike's 2nd video clip at about 2:05, you can see the jersey of the K player move as the ball actually grazes him. Would that part of the play be reviewable, whether or not K contacted the kick before R had the opportunity to catch it?

NorCalMike · « **Reply #19 on:** October 18, 2011, 02:00:48 AM »

I know the conversation here is about KCI but if I were the coach I would be pretty upset with the two K players who instead of going after the muff, turned to B looking for the flag.

GameWillTravel · « **Reply #20 on:** October 18, 2011, 07:57:47 AM »

Maybe they (the players) knew the rule bett

^flager than the BJ Ha Ha Just kidding

busman · « **Reply #21 on:** October 18, 2011, 03:15:27 PM »

"I know if I got as close to another woman as he did to the returner my wife would be crying foul!"

Maybe that's a good rule of thumb!

Author Topic: Fla/Aub opportunity to catch kick (Read 14007 times)

boydmarq

fbrefga

chymechowder

GameWillTravel

busman