• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Rules questions vs. Indiana

HONDO2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Messages
1,923
Reaction score
58
Just 2 from me....and I guess I don't know the rules....

On Wade's TD catch-run - The only thing that touched the ground was his elbow....not knee or ball. Since when is an elbow touching being 'down' ?

On the on-side kick - Weaver was clearly standing over the yard-line at address. Why was he not off-side ?

thanks
 
Elbow on the turf = being down. Hand does not.

Kicker may cross the line as part of the process of kicking the ball. No other member of the kicking team can. BTW, ridiculous execution on the on-sides. WF had two different players that got to the ball before IU.
 
Just 2 from me....and I guess I don't know the rules....

On Wade's TD catch-run - The only thing that touched the ground was his elbow....not knee or ball. Since when is an elbow touching being 'down' ?

On the on-side kick - Weaver was clearly standing over the yard-line at address. Why was he not off-side ?

thanks

In college football, if any part of a player's body other than his hands or feet touches the grown he is ruled down.

A kicker's plant foot can be over the line without him being ruled offsides.
 
Wade was down; but I liked the fight. Frankly we haven't seen much fight from offensive guys in recent years. Broken tackles and 2nd effort have been almost as rare as wins. The two go together. Our freshman haven't learned to quit, yet. Hopefully they won't.

That said, I am disappointed that our defense isn't playing a more physical brand of football. We need to hit harder and more often.
 
I might be a little hazy on the rules of intentional grounding, but what wasn't IU's QB's throw to the sideline the play before they kicked the field goal to end the first half not called intentional grounding. My understanding is you had to either have a receiver in the vicinity (which there absolutely wasn't) or if you were going to throw to the sideline you had to be outside the pocket (he wasn't) and get it at least to the LOS (which he did)
 
Clearly down with the elbow. The bad part was the awful delay with replay taking so long to make that review on the elbow being down and bringing back the TD. The first review shown told the tale.
 
I might be a little hazy on the rules of intentional grounding, but what wasn't IU's QB's throw to the sideline the play before they kicked the field goal to end the first half not called intentional grounding. My understanding is you had to either have a receiver in the vicinity (which there absolutely wasn't) or if you were going to throw to the sideline you had to be outside the pocket (he wasn't) and get it at least to the LOS (which he did)

I was pretty mad about this one. One of the refs seemed to indicate he considered a receiver to be in the vicinity of the pass when they discussed it, when he was clearly not even close.
 
I might be a little hazy on the rules of intentional grounding, but what wasn't IU's QB's throw to the sideline the play before they kicked the field goal to end the first half not called intentional grounding. My understanding is you had to either have a receiver in the vicinity (which there absolutely wasn't) or if you were going to throw to the sideline you had to be outside the pocket (he wasn't) and get it at least to the LOS (which he did)

Looked like a textbook case of intentional grounding.

Does Clawson send film to conference officials for review of questionable calls? There were more than a few in this game. Poorly officiated, not because Wake lost but because that is the truth.
 
I was pretty mad about this one. One of the refs seemed to indicate he considered a receiver to be in the vicinity of the pass when they discussed it, when he was clearly not even close.

Apparently "in the vicinity" to that official meant anywhere on the field, because there was no receiver even close.
 
I was pretty mad about this one. One of the refs seemed to indicate he considered a receiver to be in the vicinity of the pass when they discussed it, when he was clearly not even close.

I remember watching the play 3 or 4 times and there wasn't anyone within 15 yards of the ball. Don't know if there would've been a run off there (I think there would've been), but that was a game changing no call...we would've been in the position to go for two on our last touchdown and kick a field goal to go into overtime (instead of needing that last TD)
 
Looked like a textbook case of intentional grounding.

Does Clawson send film to conference officials for review of questionable calls? There were more than a few in this game. Poorly officiated, not because Wake lost but because that is the truth.

Sure, they all send film to the conference office. And just for reference, each game film is reviewed and graded, position by position for the entire game and the entire game by the replay official for that game. He then sends his grades and notes to the conference office and ACC head of officiating by Monday afternoon where they are reviewed. They then have a conference call with all the officials on Tuesday morning and the most egregious of missed calls plus the most outstanding calls are sent out to all the officials for review. Plus their positions on the field for each and every play. They also take a rules quiz every week. So these guys probably spend about 20+ hours per week studying & reviewing what they are doing right & wrong in games to try & improve. Then only the best move on to the ACC title game, the Army-Navy game & bowl games.
 
It seems like removing some officials from the field and put them in the booth make sense. It is so much easier to see some of this stuff from the box. Grounding, too many men on the field, illegal formation, these are just some examples where one guy upstairs has much better visibility/information to make the call.
 
It seems like removing some officials from the field and put them in the booth make sense. It is so much easier to see some of this stuff from the box. Grounding, too many men on the field, illegal formation, these are just some examples where one guy upstairs has much better visibility/information to make the call.

I get your point. But, you could also end up with games lasting all day because someone in that position could probably find something on literally every play. Have to be careful with trying to make the game too precise.
 
It seems like removing some officials from the field and put them in the booth make sense. It is so much easier to see some of this stuff from the box. Grounding, too many men on the field, illegal formation, these are just some examples where one guy upstairs has much better visibility/information to make the call.

They are never going to do that with any of the games--football--basketball--baseball. Takes the human element out of the game. Players drop passes & fumbles, coaches make errors in calling plays [just ask Tennessee fans about Butch Jones going for 1 instead of 2 with a 12 point lead in the 4th quarter Saturday night against Florida, then losing 28-27]. Football officials miss calls and sometimes when we think they miss calls, they don't and even replay can't tell what happened because of the angles. Just look at a couple of those calls on Sunday & Sunday night where they had 2 different calls on QB's arms going forward or not going forward and being a fumble or not? According to Collingsworth, they were exactly the same but called opposite? And who wants baseball to have the strike zone called by a radar and K-Zone?
 
They are never going to do that with any of the games--football--basketball--baseball. Takes the human element out of the game. Players drop passes & fumbles, coaches make errors in calling plays [just ask Tennessee fans about Butch Jones going for 1 instead of 2 with a 12 point lead in the 4th quarter Saturday night against Florida, then losing 28-27]. Football officials miss calls and sometimes when we think they miss calls, they don't and even replay can't tell what happened because of the angles. Just look at a couple of those calls on Sunday & Sunday night where they had 2 different calls on QB's arms going forward or not going forward and being a fumble or not? According to Collingsworth, they were exactly the same but called opposite? And who wants baseball to have the strike zone called by a radar and K-Zone?

Every single person that isn't a professional referee?
 
Baconwfu, all I could think when that happened was when Colt McCoy threw the ball out of bounds as time expired in the Big 12 championship game, and the refs putting time on the clock so that the Longhorns could kick the winning field goal. We could have used a few breaks like that to go our way.
 
And who wants baseball to have the strike zone called by a radar and K-Zone?

Every single person that isn't a professional referee?

Lol. Yes. Refs are a necessary evil until Skynet develops a better system.

Every electronic implementation into sports so far has been good. Be it replay, goal line technology, tennis line system, etc. Do away with the human element as much as humanly possible, please.
 
Back
Top