JT's Fumble late in 4th Qtr vs. UGA

[Chan15A]

Just looking for insight on the call, but how was JT's "fumble" any different than a spike? Because he over-exxagerates the release point aiming it at the ground as he would in a spike, just later on during the play... thoughts???

 

[RLR]

A spike is an exemption from the intentional grounding penalty. The QB must be under center, and he must spike the ball immediately after the snap. I've only seen a spike called intentional ground once in my entire life, and it was during a middle school football game. (wrong call).

JT's fumble was definitely not a spike since he ran out of the pocket & attempted to throw it. But I agree that it should been ruled an incomplete pass + flagged for intentional grounding, since it didn't cross the LOS.

The ball landed in front of JT, so the only way it could have been "confirmed" as a fumble after the challenge is if the reply offical clearly saw JT begin the process of bringing the ball back towards his body before the ball was released from his hand.

IMO, this play is close enough to a fumble that I may agree the call on the field should "stand". But, I think it's technically an incomplete pass.

Here's the play @3:07 (warning: it's a pro U(sic)GA announcer). Thoughts?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

A spike is an exemption from the intentional grounding penalty. The QB must be under center, and he must spike the ball immediately after the snap. I've only seen a spike called intentional ground once in my entire life, and it was during a middle school football game. (wrong call).

JT's fumble was definitely not a spike since he ran out of the pocket & attempted to throw it. But I agree that it should been ruled an incomplete pass + flagged for intentional grounding, since it didn't cross the LOS.

The ball landed in front of JT, so the only way it could have been "confirmed" as a fumble after the challenge is if the reply offical clearly saw JT begin the process of bringing the ball back towards his body before the ball was released from his hand.

IMO, this play is close enough to a fumble that I may agree the call on the field should "stand". But, I think it's technically an incomplete pass.

Here's the play @3:07 (warning: it's a pro U(sic)GA announcer). Thoughts?

IIRC the call did not "stand" by the replay official but both Thomas's so-called fumbles were reviewed and very quickly confirmed by the replay official. Can anyone verify my recollection?

Be that as it may, I think the obvious call is intentional grounding because my understanding of the rule is that the officials are supposed to default to calling a pass if the ball comes out from the QB's forward throwing motion. I do not believe they are allowed to consider if the intent was to pump fake (versus make a pass or throw it away). All that matters is whether arm is going forward in the throwing motion when the ball comes out. He has not tucked the ball here either as the ball is already out on the throwing motion.

Imo Thomas could just as easily have intended to throw it away as to tuck since he didn't really have anywhere to run to anyway and he is jumping into the air at the time he made the arm motion.

 

[RLR]

IIRC the call did not "stand" by the replay official but both Thomas's so-called fumbles were reviewed and very quickly confirmed by the replay official. Can anyone verify my recollection?

I believe the goal line fumble call stood and the incomplete pass fumble was confirmed hastily. I agree with the goal line fumble review, but the call on the field was blatantly wrong. There wasn't indisputable evidence he crossed the goalline, and I assume you have to call forward progress on the field. I agree with you about the pass-fumble. In my third paragraph, I was only trying to explain the rule that would justify the confirmation. Still, I can see how the refs called it a fumble during the game. Even on replay. it's a close call. He seems to lose the ball in that tiny gap of time between the end of his throwing motion and the start of a new motion.

Put yourself in the ref's shoes. To make the right call here, you would have had to have been focused on JT's throwing motion & have had the correct viewing angle. As the ref, you don't know where/when/if the infraction will occur. Even if each ref focuses on a specific area of the field or player, there's still a lot going on. JT was being chased by multiple defenders as he approaches the sideline. Laskey makes a cut block, falls, and makes another. The ref probably isn't concerned with watching JT's throwing motion in this scenario. I don't think JET intended to throw the ball. I don't think anyone expected that to happen. And when it did, it caught everyone by surprise. It's analogous to trying to hit a pitch in baseball. When the ball is traveling that fast and you don't know where the ball will cross the plate, you're mind has to compensate for the delay in reaction time by projecting where the ball will be. If you're looking for a fastball, but the ball unexpectedly curves, you probably wiff.

Here, if you're looking for a late hit, or hold, or moving out of the way to not interfere with the play, you're probably missing the part where JT throws the ball directly into the ground... On a 3rd down, when his team is up & trying to run time off the clock. & if you look at JET & the UGA player's immediate reaction, it sure does look like a fumble. So although I agree intent is probably not a factor in the correct application of this rule, if I'm the ref, intent is probably filling in that split second gap that I missed where JT dropped/threw the ball. Unless I was looking at the right place at the right time, there's no way I'm whistling that play dead and calling it an incomplete pass. & since it was a close call & JT clearly did not intend for that outcome, I'd let the call stand on replay. Definitely would not confirm the call, but I also don't think it was indisputably a pass. The outcome is the same. Bottom line, you can't make mistakes on the road late in the a game.

On the bright side, if JT is good enough to *fumble* once or twice en route to beating those god forsaken rednecks, then he has my blessings.

 

[DTGT]

if you look at JET & the UGA player's immediate reaction, it sure does look like a fumble.

Anytime a ball is on the ground, players are diving after it. Even after obvious incompletions. Why? The refs occasionally screw up and call them fumbles. The players are doing what they were coached to do because the refs sometimes call it wrong. I wouldn't base the ruling/call on the players' reactions.

 

[slugboy]

IIRC the call did not "stand" by the replay official but both Thomas's so-called fumbles were reviewed and very quickly confirmed by the replay official. Can anyone verify my recollection?

Be that as it may, I think the obvious call is intentional grounding because my understanding of the rule is that the officials are supposed to default to calling a pass if the ball comes out from the QB's forward throwing motion. I do not believe they are allowed to consider if the intent was to pump fake (versus make a pass or throw it away). All that matters is whether arm is going forward in the throwing motion when the ball comes out. He has not tucked the ball here either as the ball is already out on the throwing motion.

Imo Thomas could just as easily have intended to throw it away as to tuck since he didn't really have anywhere to run to anyway and he is jumping into the air at the time he made the arm motion.

As I recall, neither were "confirmed"--both "stand as called". If one was confirmed, it would have been the second (4th quarter fumble).

The first couldn't be confirmed because the replay official couldn't tell if the ball crossed the goal line.

From what I've heard, most officials would call JT's fumble a "fumble", since they thought he'd gone past the release point and just dropped it.

 

[eetech]

The first call was "stands" but the second was definitely confirmed. What was remarkable was the speed of the confirmation.

Personally, I think the 1st call was poorly called on the field (the whistle should have been blown dead a long time before and in fact a ref was running in) and called correctly in the replay booth, while the second was called correctly on the field but called incorrectly in the replay booth.

 

[IEEEWreck]

We're all looking at the same video, right? The ball has indisputably left JT's hand at the fullest extent of forward motion of his arm. He drops the arm, leading to the downward motion of the ball and direction of the fumble, but if that's the rule it's because that's the super secret ref reading, not because of what the rulebook says.

Of course, the central issue here could well be that decomposing vectors is just beyond the officials.

 

[33jacket]

officials have to protect the shiny SEC ring. We all know who they work for

just like ESPN has to protect it.

BTW, funny though...i think ESPN has gotten so much SEC Bias blame that this morning and recently listening to them they are starting to state not so much SEC love....perhaps 4-0 last saturday went a longer way to point that out, and miss st losing to a realing and struggling ole miss team bad....Bama did not look great AT HOME vs Auburn who also had been struggling of late.

Bottom line...they were a preseason hype machine....

 

[Yoda]

If anything, I thought it should have been intentional grounding at worst.

 

[GTRX7]

FWIW, on his call-in show, CPJ said he talked to the head of ACC officials, and that guy said the rule is that, if the arm is going forward, it should be an incomplete pass, and that if there is any doubt, that should be resolved in favor of an incomplete pass instead of a fumble.

 

[Mr. Keen]

The problem with football is that even though I have been watching the game my whole life (I am 54) - I still don't understand the rules. In fact, no one understands the rules all that well. This is a huge problem with the game of football. Try explaining what happened on that JT Pass-Fumble in the 4th quarter to your 11-year old son. It will take you 20 minutes and he will still be completely confused.
Bottom Line: The referees chiefly dictate the outcomes or all close games. If you can't accept this - then, I guess, stop watching football.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

officials have to protect the shiny SEC ring. We all know who they work for

just like ESPN has to protect it.

BTW, funny though...i think ESPN has gotten so much SEC Bias blame that this morning and recently listening to them they are starting to state not so much SEC love....perhaps 4-0 last saturday went a longer way to point that out, and miss st losing to a realing and struggling ole miss team bad....Bama did not look great AT HOME vs Auburn who also had been struggling of late.

Bottom line...they were a preseason hype machine....

But, on the other hand, every time I watch the replay of JT's ill fated pass attempt the ESPN announcer refers to it as "a stripped ball." That is a pretty generous voice over interpretation. Not simply the ball comes loose and the refs rule it a fumble, but the ball was "stripped."

 

[UgaBlows]

did the ugag player touch his arm? to me its an obvious incomplete pass...

 

[takethepoints]

FWIW, on his call-in show, CPJ said he talked to the head of ACC officials, and that guy said the rule is that, if the arm is going forward, it should be an incomplete pass, and that if there is any doubt, that should be resolved in favor of an incomplete pass instead of a fumble.

That's what I thought! Glad Coach confirmed it. This was a clean miss by the officials. I think what the replay guy was thinking was that he was going to tuck hit in if he hadn't dropped it. No doubt that's true; I don't think anyone would deny it. But … he didn't tuck it in; the ball came out at the end of a forward motion of his arm. Unless the replay guy is telepathic - you never know - he should have reversed the call on the field by rule.

 

[BabyJacket1990]

I'm going off subject a red here but I'm watching the replay for the 2 time. Has anyone mentioned why CPJ didn't put byrely in for QB ISO that thomas was stripped on that bs call?

 

[MWBATL]

On the incomplete pass/fumble call, my understanding was that the ruling was that JT had completed the passing motion, and was bringing the ball back towards his body when he lost control. If the UGa QB had done that, we'd all be screaming it was a fumble because the passing motion had already completed.

Haven't looked at a replay though (don't care that much). This was how I saw it at the time.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

On the incomplete pass/fumble call, my understanding was that the ruling was that JT had completed the passing motion, and was bringing the ball back towards his body when he lost control. If the UGa QB had done that, we'd all be screaming it was a fumble because the passing motion had already completed.

Haven't looked at a replay though (don't care that much). This was how I saw it at the time.

I think if the ball would have flown forward, it would have been ruled an incompletion. It was pretty obvious not a pass attempt, but a pump fake.

 

[vamosjackets]

But, on the other hand, every time I watch the replay of JT's ill fated pass attempt the ESPN announcer refers to it as "a stripped ball." That is a pretty generous voice over interpretation. Not simply the ball comes loose and the refs rule it a fumble, but the ball was "stripped."

Yeah, those "highlights" are a joke. They show all of Ugag's scores. They don't show any of ours except what they have to show because they determined the outcome of the game. They didn't show the huge TD to Waller to tie it at the end of the half. They didn't show any of our plays shoving it down their throats to tie the game. They show the Ugag fake field goal as a huge play (it turned out to be meaningless because they kicked the field goal anyway). They didn't show anything about us stuffing Chubb in the 2nd half. They didn't show our TWO goalline stands with Ugag at the 3 and getting 6 tries at it after that fake field goal. They didn't show our TD in OT. I think they only showed 1 offensive play for us that wasn't one of our big fumbles for Ugag. I felt like I was watching highlights of a Ugag win and then the fact that we actually won the game was just an anti-climactic afterthought.

 

[GTech63]

But, on the other hand, every time I watch the replay of JT's ill fated pass attempt the ESPN announcer refers to it as "a stripped ball." That is a pretty generous voice over interpretation. Not simply the ball comes loose and the refs rule it a fumble, but the ball was "stripped."

This is how I saw it and since forward motion had been stopped and pushed back for 4 seconds the ball should have been dead.