Started By
Message
was SC's onside kick legal?
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:24 pm
according to the NCAA rule book:
NCAA Rule 6, Article 12: No kicking team player may block until the ball is eligible to be touched by the kicking team.
weren't SC's players blocking before the kick went 10 yards? i know i'm just picking nits, but living where i do, the SC homers won't let go of the "two #1s" no-call at the end of the game, lol... if the onside kick got flagged, chances are that situation at the end of the game never exists....
NCAA Rule 6, Article 12: No kicking team player may block until the ball is eligible to be touched by the kicking team.
weren't SC's players blocking before the kick went 10 yards? i know i'm just picking nits, but living where i do, the SC homers won't let go of the "two #1s" no-call at the end of the game, lol... if the onside kick got flagged, chances are that situation at the end of the game never exists....
5
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:25 pm to vandelay industries
It was allowed to stand, so it was legal.
Not enough evidence to overturn.
Not enough evidence to overturn.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:27 pm to vandelay industries
If Dylan Thompson doesn't throw two redzone interceptions, SC wins that game.
The thing at the end doesn't make any difference.
The thing at the end doesn't make any difference.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:27 pm to weagle99
right....but i thought they were reviewing if a player touched the ball, not if anyone was blocking?
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:28 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
If Dylan Thompson doesn't throw two redzone interceptions, SC wins that game.
You could pinpoint any number of things to say either team would have won. Auburn won. Move on.
OP - Quit bitching about a win FFS.
This post was edited on 10/26/14 at 9:28 pm
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:28 pm to CNB
Auburn went in lubed
Be thankful
Be thankful
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:29 pm to CNB
quote:
You could pinpoint any number of things to say either team would have won. Auburn won. Move on.
Kind of a heavy handed response there.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:29 pm to vandelay industries
This thread sucks
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:30 pm to HailToTheChiz
Be thankful you escaped and sit down.
Both of our defenses are terrible and if either of them played half a stat better, the game could be much different either way.
Both of our defenses are terrible and if either of them played half a stat better, the game could be much different either way.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:30 pm to vandelay industries
Who cares? Auburn won the game. If I remember correctly, South Carolina ended up throwing an interception on that possession anyway
This post was edited on 10/26/14 at 9:35 pm
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:31 pm to CNB
We played like that because gus respects spurrier
Didn't want to embarrass him
Didn't want to embarrass him
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:32 pm to vandelay industries
quote:
weren't SC's players blocking before the kick went 10 yards?
I haven't seen the video, but the kicking team can block after:
1. Receiving team touches the ball before it goes 10 yds
or
2. Ball goes 10 yds w/o anyone touching the ball
This post was edited on 10/26/14 at 9:33 pm
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:32 pm to HailToTheChiz
You aren't going to get me to bite anymore than I already have, friend.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:33 pm to CNB
lighten up. i already prefaced my OP by admitting it was nitpicking....but over here, there are a few folks that are convinced AU's no-call was some kind of game-changer, and i'm just balancing the scales a little bit. relax, i'm not gloating, in fact i'm still cleaning all the bricks off my living room floor 
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:35 pm to vandelay industries
quote:
there are a few folks that are convinced AU's no-call was some kind of game-changer
They're idiots. It didn't affect the play at all and it would have been another hail mary anyways.
Not to mention last week during a punt, we had two #3's on the field at the same time and it didn't get called.
I'll admit I'm a bit high strung right now. Too sober for this shite.
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:35 pm to arrakis
it looked like SC was already blocking & boxing out AU before it went 10 yards, hence the question....
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:36 pm to CNB
quote:
I'll admit I'm a bit high strung right now. Too sober for this shite.
No kidding, hahaha
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:36 pm to vandelay industries
I haven't seen anybody arguing the point in a few hours. Why get that discussion started again
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:37 pm to CNB
Posted on 10/26/14 at 9:38 pm to CNB
Auburn cheats.
Water is wet.
Auburn wins a lot of football games at home. USC played lights out football and almost pulled it off.
You need an additional 10-13 points playing AU on the road to counter their bag man corruption process.
Seriously, they could teach the mafioso a few lessons on corruption.
Water is wet.
Auburn wins a lot of football games at home. USC played lights out football and almost pulled it off.
You need an additional 10-13 points playing AU on the road to counter their bag man corruption process.
Seriously, they could teach the mafioso a few lessons on corruption.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News