• 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!

Sugar Bowl thread: Michigan vs. Virginia Tech - 8:30 p.m.

VT looked much better to me and really should have won by more than one score. I thought Robinson looked awful.
 
He definitely did it on the fake right before he grabbed a VT player's facemask to allow his holder time to scramble.
 
Idk who negrepped me, all I know is it didn't look like a catch. I say that as someone who refs, not a VPI hater
 
That's a good question. What if a DT dives across the line because the kicker started early?
 
When the UM coach says he thought it was a catch I'd say it probably wasn't clear enough to be overturned.
 
To me, when I saw the reverse angle, it looked like he had secured the ball, his elbow hit the ground, and then when he landed completely the ball hit the ground and moved around in his arms. He then slid out of bounds before completely securing it. If this is what happened, should it be a catch? I get confused with the differences between NFL and college rules, especially in the end zone.
 
Unpredeactable said:
To me, when I saw the reverse angle, it looked like he had secured the ball, his elbow hit the ground, and then when he landed completely the ball hit the ground and moved around in his arms. He then slid out of bounds before completely securing it. If this is what happened, should it be a catch? I get confused with the differences between NFL and college rules, especially in the end zone.
Click to expand...

You have to complete the catch at any point on the field, including the end zone. If the ball bobbled at all before the runner was down in bounds OR if the ball moves around through the act of completing the catch, then the ruling should be that it was incomplete. As far as I could tell the following order is what occurred:

Ball is caught
Elbow comes down inbounds around the same time as the ball begins to move around in his arms
His shoulder and rest of upper body land out of bounds after his elbow hit down on the side of the end zone.

Therefore by the rules, this should have been an incomplete catch.
 
Unpredeactable said:
To me, when I saw the reverse angle, it looked like he had secured the ball, his elbow hit the ground, and then when he landed completely the ball hit the ground and moved around in his arms. He then slid out of bounds before completely securing it. If this is what happened, should it be a catch? I get confused with the differences between NFL and college rules, especially in the end zone.
Click to expand...

How was the Hemingway catch in and the VT catch out? I really don't know a lot about football rules, but I'd like to know.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
You have to complete the catch at any point on the field, including the end zone. If the ball bobbled at all before the runner was down in bounds OR if the ball moves around through the act of completing the catch, then the ruling should be that it was incomplete. As far as I could tell the following order is what occurred:

Ball is caught
Elbow comes down inbounds around the same time as the ball begins to move around in his arms
His shoulder and rest of upper body land out of bounds after his elbow hit down on the side of the end zone.

Therefore by the rules, this should have been an incomplete catch.
Click to expand...

so i guess my question is when is a person down in the endzone? Is the play over once your elbow hits? or do you have to take the catch to the ground? what does taking it to the ground entail? for instance, if a receiver catches a ball on the sideline, gets his foot inbounds, falls out of bounds, and upon hitting the ground loses control of the ball, I'm pretty sure that is ruled as an incomplete pass, even though he had possession and got a foot down
 
Here's my take (and feel free to negrep as you see necessary):

His elbow came down inbounds (indisputably). The matter of control (even if its 99%/1% 'certainty') is not indisputable. The ruling on the field there has to stand (in my mind, at least).

I do not consider myself a big fan of VT football; but I really hate to see Danny Coale's career end that way. He's the type of athlete I found it very easy to cheer for in Blacksburg & hope VT can find more like him (and David Wilson, for that matter) to represent the school in the future.

Oh well... quite a game from a spectator's standpoint at least.
 
timthedeac said:
Should've been a penalty. I've only seen a false start called on a kicker one time before.
Click to expand...

I haven't slowed down the replay, but maybe because as long as he continues forward movement, he could technically be the "man in motion" (like a RB out of the backfield)? Not sure, just throwing it out there. Or maybe like a balk in baseball, you can even hesitate momentarily (like Robb Nen's toe tap).
 
Last edited:
But even if so, he didn't. It appeared to be a lurch forward that was stopped.
 
I don't like VPI, but it looked like a TD to me. I was also wondering about the kicker moving. Thanks for the link. That makes two big mistakes by the officiating crew in the OT.

Ultimately, this one falls on Beamer for not punting when he should have, twice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top