Started By
Message
re: The 4th down overturn for Bowers. Right call?
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:14 pm to VABuckeye
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:14 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
That's not correct. Here is the full interpretation of the rule with examples and the exception that seems to apply in this case. Forward progress is all about where the ball crosses the line, not the player. It's a link due to the formatting not transferring correctly.
Forward progress for ball carrier going out of bounds.
When a player in possession of the ball goes out of bounds, the ball is spotted at the point it crosses the sideline only when the player is airborne or in stride. It's in your link.
The most forward point of the ball when declared out of bounds between the goal lines is the point of forward progress. Exception: When a ball carrier is airborne as he crosses the sideline, forward progress is determined by the position of the ball as it crosses the sideline.
So think about it. Why does an exception exist? Could it be because not every play who goes out of bounds is airborne? What happens when those non-airborne players go out of bounds? Fortunately, the NCAA defined most of the important words in their rules. Here's the definition for airborne.
An airborne player is a player not in contact with the ground because they have leapt, jumped, dove, launched, etc., in other than normal running action.
Note my bolding.
Bowers was in contact with the ground throughout his crossing of the sideline, thus he was never airborne. So where does the ball get spotted? The answer is in your link and the first sentence of the paragraph with the airborne exception.
The most forward point of the ball when declared out of bounds between the goal lines is the point of forward progress.
Now the last question to ask is, well, when was Bowers considered out-of-bounds? Here is that rule:
A ball in player possession is out of bounds when either the ball or any part of the ball carrier touches the ground or anything else that is out of bounds, or that is on or outside a boundary line, except another player or game official.
Now put it all together. Bowers was never airborne because his hand was never not in contact with the ground. He was not ruled out of bounds until his left knee touched the ground out-of-bounds, and again because he was not airborne, the ball gets spotted at its point of forward progress when his knee touched the ground out of bounds. Replay clearly showed the ball past the line to gain before his knee touched the ground.
1
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:17 pm to Eli Goldfinger
Officials from all over the country agree that it was the right call.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:18 pm to BlueTrue
quote:
Now put it all together.
That actually makes quite a bit of sense. And I was wrong about part of it when talking to the guy from Baylor.
It fits with how I've seen it done - and fills in the blanks on the rare exceptions people keep talking about. Looking at the actual play in question ... he's in bounds. So that makes sense.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:19 pm to the808bass
quote:I thought he got it too, on an amazing play.quote:
Right call but never seen angle like that on first down line.
Camera in the 1st down pylon.
Was in the CFP playoff game last year, too.
Regarding the camera angle- it's a fricking travesty that isn't employed in EVERY college and NFL game. That, and on the pylons at the endzone. I mean, shite, you can get a Blink or Wyze camera for about $30 (individually, for private use) nowadays. No reason to think you can't have a slightly more specialized product like the pylon cam, made in bulk as a special order. Each conference could order 50 or so, and have a few in reserve at every game. You can set it up to take Dewalt or Ryobi batteries if you want, whatever the grounds crew has available.
Seriously- I could go to Home Depot today, get the Wyze cam on a 2-for-$33 special, a roll of duct tape for $5 to attach it on the yard sticks, and probably another $50 or $100 AT MOST for a Ryobi battery pack, and a Ryobi USB power source. You're telling me the NCAA and NFL can't cut a deal to have some made in a professional, dedicated manner, at a cost that they wouldn't even notice? Hell, they could simply use the name as a sponsor (the Ryobi-Wyze 1st Down Camera) and get them free.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:21 pm to bgill0
quote:
It was definitely an impressive play. However the forward progress stops when the ball leaves the field of play. It is next to impossible to determine exactly at what point that happened. Definitely not enough to overturn the call on the field.
But the call on the field was overturned.
If you look at the second picture from the first page link, the ball clearly had not left the field of play until after he crossed the line to gain. So, what you are saying clearly gives the referees reason to over rule the call on the field...which was that he did not make the first down.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:41 pm to DawgsLife
quote:
If you look at the second picture from the first page link, the ball clearly had not left the field of play
This is the only problem I have with the entire play. It does not clearly show that because it is a view from the side. We know his left hand was on the ground and his momentum was taking him out of bounds. But the ball was in his right arm. I see no definitve way to see exactly where the point of the ball crossed the line which is the determining factor in the rule cited with examples.
It was an outstanding effort no doubt.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:43 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
But the ball was in his right arm. I see no definitve way to see exactly where the point of the ball crossed the line which is the determining factor in the rule cited with examples.
Your'e right we don't know where the ball actaully crossed the OOB plane. But as others have pointed out that is irrelevant here, what matters is where the ball is when Brock goes out of bounds. You can see in that sideline pylon cam taht the ball is beyond the first down while Brock's hand is still in bounds and on the ground.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:47 pm to WG_Dawg
That's not the rule. The rule is where the point of the ball crosses the line. Apologies if I'm being obtuse and great game by your team.
I believe we hosted you at our tailgate when you came to an Ohio State game.
I believe we hosted you at our tailgate when you came to an Ohio State game.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:51 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
I believe we hosted you at our tailgate when you came to an Ohio State game
You remember correct! 2015 MSU game in the cold and rain, I'll always remember that as a great experience (despite the weather) and you being incredibly hospitable and a terrific host.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 1:56 pm to WG_Dawg
I enjoyed it as well. Hated that game and the weather.
I've hosted people from VA Tech, Oklahoma and Georgia. All teams we lost to then or, as with Georgia< eventually. Maybe I need to stop doing that.
I've hosted people from VA Tech, Oklahoma and Georgia. All teams we lost to then or, as with Georgia< eventually. Maybe I need to stop doing that.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:14 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
That's not the rule. The rule is where the point of the ball crosses the line.
Only for airborne players. That's why it is listed as an exception in the rule (and your own link). Bowers wasn't airborne. For non-airborne players, the ball is spotted when the player touches down out-of-bounds.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:35 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
This is the only problem I have with the entire play. It does not clearly show that because it is a view from the side.
But the side would be the only correct way to tell where the ball was. It does nto matter if his body was hovering out of bounds. Only where the ball was when it went out of bounds, and that no other part of his body touched out of bounds before the ball reached the yard to make.
quote:Did you look at the picture? It clearly shows the point of the ball across the line to gain.
I see no definitve way to see exactly where the point of the ball crossed the line which is the determining factor in the rule cited with examples.
I understand why you might see it differently...and I also understand that we are seeing it with red/black colored glasses...but it looks pretty cut and dried to me.
quote:
It was an outstanding effort no doubt.
There were some outstanding efforts by both teams. it was an incredible game, and i know a heartbreaking outcome for Buckeye fans. It's one that will be debated and talked about for years to come, no doubt.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:38 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
I enjoyed it as well. Hated that game and the weather.
I've hosted people from VA Tech, Oklahoma and Georgia. All teams we lost to then or, as with Georgia< eventually. Maybe I need to stop doing that.
Just from what I have seen from you on this board, and what WG just said about your hosting him at your tailgate, you are obviously a class act. I am glad we won the game and will go on, but your team played out of their heads and looked great. I hope you all have success in the future unless we meet again.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:39 pm to Eli Goldfinger
And the world made fun of Kirby for showing the team doing yoga
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:45 pm to DawgsLife
Thank you for the compliment. I hope the expanded playoffs will have the effect of MOR big time games as a loss or two to a great opponent won’t be the kiss of death.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:45 pm to BlueTrue
So I keep going back to the biggest factor is was he airborne. When I watched the play in real time, I forgot how airborne he actually was. His hand was only down for a short period of time to try to keep him airborne longer, as he successfully did. I know that their is no chance of us agreeing here. I just want to hear it debated by professionals, which I'm sure we won't.. They will do it behind closed doors and do clarifications next year, but never admit a mistake that bid an consequential. Like I said before both sides (airborne and not airborne) have a valid argument.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 2:58 pm to VABuckeye
You have a rule stating that a body part in bounds is dead ball out of bounds?
So what rules have we been following for receptions and fumble recoveries all of these years?
I'd love to see this rule which states specifically that a body part in bounds is dead ball out of bounds.
So what rules have we been following for receptions and fumble recoveries all of these years?
I'd love to see this rule which states specifically that a body part in bounds is dead ball out of bounds.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 3:07 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
Thank you for the compliment. I hope the expanded playoffs will have the effect of MOR big time games as a loss or two to a great opponent won’t be the kiss of death.
Well, you guys were legit this year. I know it was a heartbreak to go out this way. I know we would be livid had it been reversed. I still don't understand how Michigan beat you. I know this year is different than last year, but OSU this year is head and shoulders better than Michigan last year. Matchups, I guess? I have a feeling Ohio State will be back next year with a vengeance.
Posted on 1/3/23 at 3:14 pm to meansonny
I posted it above.. is 4-2-4-nd you have to remember, it isn't about the ball being dead, it is about establishing forward progress. It cuts both ways, when you get tackled backwards a yard before you go out of bounds, you don't lose that yard.
This post was edited on 1/3/23 at 3:19 pm
Posted on 1/3/23 at 3:27 pm to bgill0
I will add that I have been hung up on not enough to overturn a call. The more I think about it, it wasn't an overturned call, just a re-spot. That does make more sense. But should they have considered the weight of re-spot and analyzed it longer? I don't think there was any way to know from the angles where the ball actually went out, so they took the easy out and used single perspective with marker camera without really considering that there was more to, well, consider.. But the bar was much lower for them to do it than I was originally thinking.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News