Replay Question

[bama_stripes]

With the exception of targeting, is replay allowed to “create” an uncalled obvious penalty when reviewing a play?

The play in question happened at the 7:47 mark in the 3rd Q of the Alabama/Tennessee game. A’s QB was hit as he attempted to pass, and the ball came out.  The crew left the play live, and B eventually recovered.  The play was reviewed for fumble or incomplete pass, with replay upholding the on-field ruling.

However, while the ball was loose, a B player nonchalantly batted the ball, which (if called) would have given the ball back to A.

(If someone could link the play, I’d appreciate it.)

[Legacy Zebra]

Replay can create other fouls, but not illegal batting. Replay can create illegal forward pass, illegal forward handing, illegal scrimmage kick, illegal substitution, illegal touching of a pass, early blocking on a free kick, and a kicking team player returning inbounds on a kick play (only if he subsequently touches the ball).

[Kalle]

Am I correct in saying that apart from targeting, replay can only create fouls which do not have any subjective component to them? Ie. a forward pass is objectively forward or backward, but eg. holding has a subjective component.

[dammitbobby]

Am I correct in saying that apart from targeting, replay can only create fouls which do not have any subjective component to them? Ie. a forward pass is objectively forward or backward, but eg. holding has a subjective component.

I don't think that's entirely accurate - DOF, DOG, FST, etc. would fall into the non-subjective category as well.

'The only fouls that replay can create are non-subjective fouls, but not all non-subjective fouls can be created by replay' might be more accurate.

[Kalle]

I don't think that's entirely accurate - DOF, DOG, FST, etc. would fall into the non-subjective category as well.

'The only fouls that replay can create are non-subjective fouls, but not all non-subjective fouls can be created by replay' might be more accurate.

Yes, I did not mean to imply that all "objective" fouls are included in the list (FST was the foremost in my mind) - although you could argue that including fouls that should have caused the ball to remain dead would not be good (this would leave fouls eg. defense lining up in the NZ, though).

Sorry to highjack a simple question into silly hypotheticals

[Quote fixed to avoid confusion]

[dammitbobby]

I fixed my post, to reflect non-subjective, to minimize confusion for anyone else reading later.

[bossman72]

I don't think that's entirely accurate - DOF, DOG, FST, etc. would fall into the non-subjective category as well.

'The only fouls that replay can create are non-subjective fouls, but not all non-subjective fouls can be created by replay' might be more accurate.

Actually, I disagree. All 3 of those have subjective aspects to it.  Hence, replay can't touch it.

Have you ever asked someone "Would you call this play DOF or FST?"  Of course.
Have you ever asked "Would you call this guy out of bounds?"  No, because that's not subjective.  He either is or he isn't.

The only other one that's somewhat subjective that they can put on is blocking by A on onside kicks.

So, Kalle, I agree with your assertion.

[dammitbobby]

I think that's splitting a pretty fine hair on what is objective/subjective. At the NCAA level, there is rarely discussion as to whether or not a FST or DOF should be called, or a DOG (offense). Especially when compared to OH/DH/DPI/OPI.

By your logic, replay shouldn't be able to look at targeting since it most definitely has subjective components.

[bossman72]

I think that's splitting a pretty fine hair on what is objective/subjective. At the NCAA level, there is rarely discussion as to whether or not a FST or DOF should be called, or a DOG (offense). Especially when compared to OH/DH/DPI/OPI.

By your logic, replay shouldn't be able to look at targeting since it most definitely has subjective components.

We said Targeting was an exception.