Started By
Message
re: Can we talk about the 1H fumble situation in LSU-Bama?
Posted on 11/9/22 at 3:47 pm to Madking
Posted on 11/9/22 at 3:47 pm to Madking
quote:
It wasn’t a miss call, that rule doesn’t apply to the play and it isn’t even why they re
I haven't heard that anywhere before now, why didn't it apply to the play?
Posted on 11/9/22 at 4:03 pm to TFS4E
quote:
The concept of possession is probably the key point here. Knee down, two hands on the ball, ball punched from hands after
So this statement has me reminded of the incident in the LSU/A&M game in 2018 where the aggie qb throws and interception right before OT that would have sealed the win for LSU. He drops the ball, kneels down and touches it. The referees said that since his knee was down and he was touching the ball that constituted possession and the play was ruled dead as his knee was down. Shouldn't that same thing have applied last Saturday as the LSU player's knee was down and he, too, was actually touching the ball? If memory serves me right, he actually even had both hands on the ball and looked to be in possession of the ball when the Bama player touched it.
Strange rule.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 4:34 pm to stratman
2018:
Possession presnap; Aggies.
Person w/knee down: OFFENSE, BALL CARRIER.
Last Saturday:
Possession presnap: Bama
Person w/knee down: DEFENDER.
Free to debate the call but there are some significant differences. Impetus becomes a factor too.
Possession presnap; Aggies.
Person w/knee down: OFFENSE, BALL CARRIER.
Last Saturday:
Possession presnap: Bama
Person w/knee down: DEFENDER.
Free to debate the call but there are some significant differences. Impetus becomes a factor too.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 4:37 pm to stratman
quote:
Shouldn't that same thing have applied last Saturday as the LSU player's knee was down and he, too, was actually touching the ball? If memory serves me right, he actually even had both hands on the ball and looked to be in possession of the ball when the Bama player touched it.
He was ruled to have never possessed the ball. Just touching is not possession. So possession remained with the team that possessed it last before the illegal touching occurred. It is a strange rule, these circumstances don't happen very often, obviously. As far as the other game scenario you described, sounds like the QB reclaimed possession of the ball while his knee was still touching the ground, making him down at that point. If the QB had touched it while his knee was down but not possessed it, regained his feet, then possessed it again (maybe by scooping it up), I think the play would have continued. I'm not sure though, rules can be weird.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 5:47 pm to paperwasp
quote:
Packers Ty Montgomery makes a slick ST play (YouTube)
Very different situations. I get the comparisons, but in the case shown, the Packers player took uncontested control of the ball.
Show me a fumble pile where it happened.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 6:09 pm to Tupelo
quote:
and the refs called that block in the back on LSU's 2nd touchdown in overtime,
There was no block in the back on the LSU OT Touchdown. Taylor engaged his man face-to-face and backed off when he turned his back.
Pictures from SkyCam
Posted on 11/9/22 at 6:23 pm to paperwasp
Lsu guy clearly had possession even Herbstreit and Fowler said so. Nice try.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 6:25 pm to TroyTider
Please get the frick out of this convo this is for real football programs
Posted on 11/9/22 at 6:46 pm to Bushido
quote:
Lsu guy clearly had possession even Herbstreit and Fowler said so. Nice try.
They thought it was recovered with 1:20 left in half.
The ruling on the field was it was recovered with 1:17 left.
There would have to be irrefutable evidence it was recovered before 1:17. Replay official felt enough reasonable doubt to not overturn call on the field.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 7:12 pm to Thorny
Watching the game live time, it looked like he extended his arms and made contact with his hands to the back as the Bama player turned. Those skycam pictures are pretty well useless, too many frames left out. Watched it again just now, and it looks like he touched him lightly on the back then restrained himself, and drew back. Not as bad as it looked while I was watching it live, probably a good no call.
Posted on 11/9/22 at 7:35 pm to JPLSU1981
This has been a good discussion on a very weird/unique situation and rule. My opinion….Whether good or bad for my team in the future, I think *if the offense fumbles the ball in bounds and the defense recovers the fumble in bounds, the defense should get the ball*. ETA: if they just added an asterisk like this, would anyone have an issue with it?
In this particular instance of football rules and reviews, I think “rules” and the application are overriding common sense.
In this particular instance of football rules and reviews, I think “rules” and the application are overriding common sense.
This post was edited on 11/9/22 at 7:42 pm
Posted on 11/9/22 at 8:26 pm to JPLSU1981
quote:
In this particular instance of football rules and reviews, I think “rules” and the application are overriding common sense.
I think that's true about a lot of football rules. Examples: If you block an extra point that would have given the other team 1 point, and return it, you get 2 points, why not 1 point? You're not allowed to horse collar someone (which I believe they now have expanded beyond the old definition of putting your hand inside the collar to make the tackle), but you can clothesline them and break their neck.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News