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

[33jacket]

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.

Intent is not part of the rule. The rule is arm fwd ball out. And the ball went fwd. not far fwd but fwd.

The right call is incomplete pass and intentional grounding. They missed the penalty since they ruled a fumble on field, but they should have overturned the fumble imo at the replay level. The officials screwed it up.

 

[B Lifsey]

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?

Seems like he's moved away from doing that last few games.

 

[GTech63]

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.

I also saw it as pump fake and lost control of ball. However if the rule and ruling about arm motion, as related, and where balls comes out, then it certainly could have been ruled intentional grounding. and maybe should have been. This play is not conclusive either way IMHO.

BUT the stripped ball after reaching the goal line and letting that stand will stay in my "craw" forever. A blatant missed call. Like several by ACC officials in the Duke game. The overall refereeing in the DUKE game will also remain in my "craw" forever.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Intent is not part of the rule. The rule is arm fwd ball out. And the ball went fwd. not far fwd but fwd.

The right call is incomplete pass and intentional grounding. They missed the penalty since they ruled a fumble on field, but they should have overturned the fumble imo at the replay level. The officials screwed it up.

I agree, but their argument could have been the ball slipped out of his hand as it was moving backward. That's the definition of a pump fake, move your hand forward then backward with the ball still in it. It's purely a judgement call.

 

[GTech63]

Seems like he's moved away from doing that last few games.

I was very disappointed that Byerly didn't get into the last 3 minutes of the Clemson game.
I do understand in a close game there is always a concern of snap count cadence change and the center QB exchange causing errors. My guess is that is why CPJ does not always put TB at the goal line.

I never heard it discussed before. Are we are a right handed team. Seems we go right more than left. May have a lot to do with Mason being on that side.

 

[Ash]

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.

I tried to explain forward motion in relation to the Swann "fumble" recovery to my GF who is not familiar with the finer points of football. It's not easy to do. She could not understand why I was so upset over the call. She kept saying "He wasn't tackled so he wasn't down, right?"

As an aside: when it comes to tennis, the situation is reversed with the two of us. I still don't get tennis scoring.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

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.

I was talking about the "forward pass" fumble. They call that a strip in the replay I watch.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

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.

My thoughts exactly. Almost all of my favorite Tech plays were left out. Can you say homer video?

 

[RLR]

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.

I'm not. You completely took my statement out of context. I was saying that the ref had no reason to be focusing on JT's throwing motion in that play. He dropped the ball suddenly. So, if the ref wasn't focusing on that exact issue (how could he have been?) how do you, as the ref, react when you suddenly realize the ball is on the ground? Would you blow your whistle in the first 1 or 2 seconds after the ball is loose & when there's no clear possession? Personally, I wouldn't.

In hindsight, it's probably the wrong call. And yes, my reasoning probably gives rise to a conservative bias. But at the end of the day, it's not a bias towards a specific team (btw, thwg). It's a bias towards human reality. And on review, it's not an indisputable call, as you can see from the disagreement in this thread. therefore, even though it's the wrong call, it's correct call. If you don't like the call, don't fumble/unintentionally spike the ball on 3rd down with 2 minutes left near midfield when you have a 4 point lead and are playing in front of 90,000 fans on the road.

 

[Longestday]

Incomplete pass... they never look for what the ball is doing on these plays... only the hand.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Incomplete pass... they never look for what the ball is doing on these plays... only the hand.

Yes, I side with coach and the head of the ACC officials as well as every other flipping time they deal with this issue. Normally it is when a drop back passer is getting blind sided sacked while having the ball out in a throwing motion. There is no assumption of pump fakes, tucks, or any such nonsense. All such assumptions about QB intention are irrelevant. They simply are supposed to look at whether the arm is in a throwing motion when the ball comes out or is knocked loose and once the motion is forward that is all that matters because the default stance it to it having been a pass.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

To really mess with our heads though. The call was bogus but do we win the game without it?

I think it was a 3rd and 15 or so at the time, and Thomas has nowhere to run here. That is one reason I think all the claims he was obviously pump faking are illegitimate as he could be trying to force a pass in towards Waller in desperation to continue the drive.

Anyway, what can Tech do after this play fails but punt from that distance? Or maybe try and run another passing play and hope for a miracle first down? My point is that whichever way they decide Tech uses up more of the clock but does not score any points. Of course we would have had 2 TOs instead of 1 but still it may have been easier for Richt to drive the field for a TD and leave no time on the clock instead of 18 seconds.

 

[RLR]

Yes, I side with coach and the head of the ACC officials as well as every other flipping time they deal with this issue. Normally it is when a drop back passer is getting blind sided sacked while having the ball out in a throwing motion. There is no assumption of pump fakes, tucks, or any such nonsense. All such assumptions about QB intention are irrelevant. They simply are supposed to look at whether the arm is in a throwing motion when the ball comes out or is knocked loose and once the motion is forward that is all that matters because the default stance it to it having been a pass.

Ya, I guess my argument based on the reality of that situation doesn't hold up when it's viewed in slow motion & we know what to look for, when to look for it, and from the perfect angle.

 

[GTonTop88]

I dont think that we would ever get that strip and score, or that pass ruled as a fumble. Only thing better than beating ugag, is beating them and their officials. THWG! WERUNTHISSTATE

 

[RLR]

I dont think that we would ever get that strip and score, or that pass ruled as a fumble. Only thing better than beating ugag, is beating them and their officials. THWG! WERUNTHISSTATE

That could very well be true. But that's also why I said the bottom line is the away team can't make that play and hope the ref makes the right ruling on a close call. By close call, I mean that I would be pissed if the situation was reversed & GT recovered the fumble & then it was overturned as an incomplete pass.

 

[Dustman]

I hadn't even considered the intentional grounding aspect. Usually there is contact on these calls and the QB is inside the tackles and they never call intentional grounding on those plays. Is the rule different when there is no contact?

 

[Longestday]

GT was on the 17 yard line. If this is considered an incomplete pass, we go for the field goal and hopefully have GT 24 UGA 17. Kickoff to UGA and hopefully have them behind the 25 versus the 32. If they make a TD then the score is tied and we go into OT.

 

[Longestday]

JT was outside the tackle box but did not cross the LOS and there was a player directly down field.

 

[RLR]

I hadn't even considered the intentional grounding aspect. Usually there is contact on these calls and the QB is inside the tackles and they never call intentional grounding on those plays. Is the rule different when there is no contact?

I don't think contact is a factor at all. If the QB is inside the tackle box, you have to throw near an eligible receiver (unless the QB is under center & immediately spikes the ball after the snap). If outside the pocket, you only have to throw the ball past the line of scrimmage. (I didn't look this up, so I could very well be wrong).

Since JT did not throw the ball past the LOS and it's not a spike, if it was ruled a pass, it's definitely intentional grounding, which, ironically, would probably work out better for us, b/c I believe the clock would continue to run (i could be wrong)

 

[Longestday]

This vines is even more damaging to the SEC refs... he was thinking about this pass....