Big 10 Refs

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,473
iceeater1969 said:
A 25 mph wind at top of stadium.
A long er than usual time before punt landed. Was the returner supposed to have a clock in his head and signal fair catch.

At stadium i thought he did signal fair catch as the ball and the gunner arrived at same time. I was at other end of stadium but was the ref watching the push in back and not the fair catch . The after action report should clarify that one ref saw no fair catch.

On the prevois punt the low punt took a bounce right to punt returner who made an aggressive move and got ball out to 40 plus. When he got to sideline it was all high 5s and player makes plays. Perhaps pr was over confident on high punt.

Does key think punt returner have gone for fair catch on high punt?

Do your job ?.
Click to expand...
A Fair Catch signal is not required for kick interference. The defender cannot contact a punt returner prior to the punt returner having an unobstructed opportunity to field the punt.
 

Richland County

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
454
forensicbuzz said:
Apparently, your question wasn’t clear. Are you referring to the discussion of Objectivism versus Subjectivism from a different thread? If so, you clearly didn’t understand the philosophic discussion well enough to enter a cogent argument. Your question was akin to “what if cat really spelled dog.” Not really a question worthy of an answer.

I’d venture to posit I’m more knowledgeable that you on most topics based on your posts here. I don’t know you, so that may not be true, but your posts represent you…so there is that.

You seem to rant and rail more than enter into discourse, which is telling. Your attempt to win the point by mockery is a bully’s technique and most, if not all, fonts on this forum see straight through you. Enjoy your Sunday. I hope you have a peaceful day.
Click to expand...
No
 
stinger78

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,113
forensicbuzz said:
Apparently, your question wasn’t clear. Are you referring to the discussion of Objectivism versus Subjectivism from a different thread? If so, you clearly didn’t understand the philosophic discussion well enough to enter a cogent argument. Your question was akin to “what if cat really spelled dog.” Not really a question worthy of an answer.

I’d venture to posit I’m more knowledgeable that you on most topics based on your posts here. I don’t know you, so that may not be true, but your posts represent you…so there is that.

You seem to rant and rail more than enter into discourse, which is telling. Your attempt to win the point by mockery is a bully’s technique and most, if not all, fonts on this forum see straight through you. Enjoy your Sunday. I hope you have a peaceful day.
Click to expand...
I posit that you are more knowledgeable about everything than anyone. There, does that do it? 😛
 

Richland County

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
454
forensicbuzz said:
Apparently, your question wasn’t clear. Are you referring to the discussion of Objectivism versus Subjectivism from a different thread? If so, you clearly didn’t understand the philosophic discussion well enough to enter a cogent argument. Your question was akin to “what if cat really spelled dog.” Not really a question worthy of an answer.

I’d venture to posit I’m more knowledgeable that you on most topics based on your posts here. I don’t know you, so that may not be true, but your posts represent you…so there is that.

You seem to rant and rail more than enter into discourse, which is telling. Your attempt to win the point by mockery is a bully’s technique and most, if not all, fonts on this forum see straight through you. Enjoy your Sunday. I hope you have a peaceful day.
Click to expand...
So who do ypu share fingerprint with?
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
9,176
Location
North Shore, Chicago
stinger78 said:
I posit that you are more knowledgeable about everything than anyone. There, does that do it? 😛
Click to expand...
Nah, there's a bunch of stuff I don't comment on. There are things I have my opinions on, but I'm generally open-minded enough to listen to a cogent argument and assess whether I agree or disagree. If you convince me, I'll change my mind. If you don't, I'll argue my point until it's clear no one will be convinced otherwise. Note how both you and stopped discussing the play in question. If others ask a question, I might respond to them, but I'm clear between you and me.

Now, if someone shows they're an ***, I might push back a little harder.
 
jojatk

jojatk

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,642
I have yet to find a rule in the NCAA rule book that states that if a player from the punt returning team makes any contact with a punt coverage player that that automatically nullifies any kick-catch interference call. Combined with the fact that they did not call a block in the back tells me it's a judgment call as to whether the officials waive off a flag for kick-catch interference. So in the judgment of the official on the scene, brushing into the gunner by Will Kiker (#39) forced the gunner to run at full speed and make a brilliant form tackle on Bailey Stockton prior to the ball arriving. I'm saying it that way to point out how absolutely ridiculous it is for the official to have seen what Will did and equate that to having ANY affect on what the gunner was doing which was running at full speed with the intent of tackling Bailey (I'm sure he was hoping to do so right after Bailey had caught the ball).

Unless there is a rule and someone can show it to me. I've searched quite a bit and found no such rule that says "contact by a player from the receiving team will nullify kick-catch interference" and they cover quite a few "if this happens here's the ruling" situations. I'm not blaming the loss on the officials. Vandy played well, specifically Pavia, and we did not play well. Two turnovers were more responsible for the loss than anything the officials did. But to me those officials just weren't competent at their jobs.
 

TechPhi97

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
855
Location
Davidson, NC
Towaliga said:
I think it is telling that at one point in the fourth quarter, there was a time out. During that period, the on-field announcer gave away a prize package from Konecuh sausage. The winner was a Georgia Tech fan. The announcer said over the loudspeaker “well at least that’s one thing the refs can’t take away from you.” Evidently even the Birmingham Bowl people were aware of how poorly the game was officiated.
Click to expand...
He started that giveaway by saying “Georgia Tech fans, here’s one you can’t boo at.” They were giving it to the driver of the Ramblin’ Wreck.
 

TechPhi97

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
855
Location
Davidson, NC
awbuzz said:
They certainly pushed the Conecuh Sausage during the game. But, we should not have been booing the folks during the presentations during the game.
Did love the “well at least that’s one thing the refs can’t take away from you.” 😁
Click to expand...
To our credit, the booing stopped when it was a teacher or military recognition thing. But the sausage selling and Christmas village stuff got continuous boos.
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,473
jojatk said:
I have yet to find a rule in the NCAA rule book that states that if a player from the punt returning team makes any contact with a punt coverage player that that automatically nullifies any kick-catch interference call. Combined with the fact that they did not call a block in the back tells me it's a judgment call as to whether the officials waive off a flag for kick-catch interference. So in the judgment of the official on the scene, brushing into the gunner by Will Kiker (#39) forced the gunner to run at full speed and make a brilliant form tackle on Bailey Stockton prior to the ball arriving. I'm saying it that way to point out how absolutely ridiculous it is for the official to have seen what Will did and equate that to having ANY affect on what the gunner was doing which was running at full speed with the intent of tackling Bailey (I'm sure he was hoping to do so right after Bailey had caught the ball).

Unless there is a rule and someone can show it to me. I've searched quite a bit and found no such rule that says "contact by a player from the receiving team will nullify kick-catch interference" and they cover quite a few "if this happens here's the ruling" situations. I'm not blaming the loss on the officials. Vandy played well, specifically Pavia, and we did not play well. Two turnovers were more responsible for the loss than anything the officials did. But to me those officials just weren't competent at their jobs.
Click to expand...
I believe it's 100% judgement (opinion) by the officials on a player being pushed into the punt returner. I have seen that call made a fair number of times over the years. Never tried to find the rule but logically it makes sense if a receiving team player pushes a defender into the punt returner there should not be a penalty for running into the return man.

Now none of that seemed to be fully accurate on the play in question. Yes there was a slight push on the Vandy player. The opinion is did that cause the contact with our return man. Well at least one official convinced the Head Official that is did cause the impact.
 

MWBATL

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,614
jojatk said:
Two turnovers were more responsible for the loss than anything the officials did. But to me those officials just weren't competent at their jobs.
Click to expand...
First, I COMPLETELY agree with your primary point about the refs mugging the punt interference call. That, plus the egregious PI on the ending Vandycseries turned the momentum of the entire game.

We’ll never know,of course, but would King have tried to hit that small window and throw an interception on the next series! And maybe we don’t fumble trying to ‘make a play’ on the next series. If we’re still in a 14-13 game, or we have a small lead…the TOs might never have happened. Point is…we’ll never know…because the refs….
 

Root4GT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,473
Fatmike91 said:
So you think ACC refs have been fair when officiating basketball games involving Duke and UNC? No bias at all?

/
Click to expand...
Mostly. Generally Duke and UNC have had better players than GT. It’s been a long time since we had better players overall. Better players get fewer fouls called against them because they are simply better all around players.
 
AugustaSwarm

AugustaSwarm

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
940
AugustaSwarm

AugustaSwarm

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
940
MWBATL said:
Eh, you’re wrong. I’ve watched that replay numerous times, and you’d have to be Godzilla to be strong enough for the slight push 10 yards downfield from the punt receiver to “propel” the tackler into Stockton. The tackler used that push as his excuse and was seen laughing after the play with teammates about how he got away with something so blatant. Looks like he fooled you too. He also CLEARLY made NO EFFORT to miss Stockton, which would have been visible had he twisted to try to avoid the collision.

You’re wrong. ESPN called it the other way. Their former official who as on the call with them called it the other way. Pretty much everyone who looked at it seriously called it the other way. BUT, don’t let that stop you from claiming victory!
Click to expand...
Not to mention the fact that the Vandy player literally wrapped up and drove through the would be ball carrier. Not only was he not pushed, but took multiple steps and hit Stockton like he was a tackling dummy.
 
Top