Author Topic: watch for the guy that runs up on the officials after the play... (Read 18896 times)

fencewire · « **on:** September 21, 2011, 01:42:22 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQX1RPXznL4

Welpe · « **Reply #1 on:** September 21, 2011, 01:50:38 PM »

fencewire · « **Reply #2 on:** September 21, 2011, 01:52:47 PM »

i thought running into... at least.

JasonTX · « **Reply #3 on:** September 21, 2011, 02:10:15 PM »

The player that hit the kicker was also blocked. Perhaps no foul at all.

fencewire · « **Reply #4 on:** September 21, 2011, 02:30:13 PM »

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...

InsideTheStripes · « **Reply #5 on:** September 21, 2011, 04:32:19 PM »

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.

JasonTX · « **Reply #6 on:** September 21, 2011, 04:33:22 PM »

Quote from: fencewire on September 21, 2011, 02:30:13 PM

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.

TXMike · « **Reply #7 on:** September 21, 2011, 04:34:03 PM »

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"

bossman72 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 21, 2011, 09:54:34 PM »

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...

110 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 21, 2011, 10:37:29 PM »

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.

BoBo · « **Reply #10 on:** September 21, 2011, 11:18:42 PM »

that last block is definitely below the waist in my book, look how the guy falls.

JasonTX · « **Reply #11 on:** September 22, 2011, 12:21:52 AM »

Quote from: BoBo on September 21, 2011, 11:18:42 PM

that last block is definitely below the waist in my book, look how the guy falls.

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.

James · « **Reply #12 on:** September 22, 2011, 04:08:04 AM »

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...

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #13 on:** September 22, 2011, 05:03:11 AM »

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?

TXMike · « **Reply #14 on:** September 22, 2011, 05:21:34 AM »

I see him going to the right of the blocker, not OVER him

InsideTheStripes · « **Reply #15 on:** September 22, 2011, 08:37:55 AM »

Quote from: James on September 22, 2011, 04:08:04 AM

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.

Welpe · « **Reply #16 on:** September 22, 2011, 08:45:46 AM »

The main question I have on this is why is the crew still on the field once the game is over?

Birddog · « **Reply #17 on:** September 22, 2011, 09:26:59 AM »

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!

NVFOA_Ump · « **Reply #18 on:** September 22, 2011, 09:27:24 AM »

Quote from: TXMike on September 22, 2011, 05:21:34 AM

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]

Diablo · « **Reply #19 on:** September 22, 2011, 10:13:46 AM »

Quote from: Livin' in the pit on September 21, 2011, 10:37:29 PM

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.

BankerRef · « **Reply #20 on:** September 22, 2011, 03:27:22 PM »

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.

boydmarq · « **Reply #21 on:** September 23, 2011, 07:58:36 AM »

Quote from: BankerRef on September 22, 2011, 03:27:22 PM

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.

Agree completely. And... get off the field officials!!!!

JRutledge · « **Reply #22 on:** September 23, 2011, 11:41:34 AM »

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

JasonTX · « **Reply #23 on:** September 23, 2011, 12:48:25 PM »

Quote from: JRutledge on September 23, 2011, 11:41:34 AM

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.

clearwall · « **Reply #24 on:** September 26, 2011, 10:00:38 AM »

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.

Author Topic: watch for the guy that runs up on the officials after the play... (Read 18896 times)

110

Diablo

boydmarq

JRutledge