Confusion on Challenge Rule

[cbbowlingmd]

Hey guys, help me understand something: In the 3rd quarter last night, Ethan Wolf was tackled and there was some question if there was a fumble at the end of the play. Now, at this point there was no challenge. UT in hurry up comes up to the line, snaps the ball, and gets called for a false start.

AFTER the false start, the refs went back and reviewed the prior play to see if Wolf was down before the ball came out. They determined that he was down.

But when the game continued, we were still assessed a 5 yard penalty for the false start call.

So, if they call a penalty on a play, can they really then go back and review a play from the snap before and then penalize you on the following play at the same time? Seems like they are ruling on 2 plays at once, no?

 

[rocky top buzz]

I was confused too. Has the SEC office addresed this?

 

[JonWard]

The review and penalty are both pre-snap.

 

[Ten_Titans]

A false start is a pre-snap penalty. There was never another snap, technically.

 

[JonWard]

So, if they call a penalty on a play...

There was no play.

 

[MedicT]

Just to add to the question, I thought that once the ball was snapped a previous play could not be challenged?

EDIT: Thanks for clearing my question up quickly. LOL

 

[cbbowlingmd]

I see. That makes more sense. Thanks.

 

[JonWard]

If we didn't jump they couldn't have reviewed.

 

[cbbowlingmd]

In other news, I still dislike Coleman's coverage skills.

 

[GAVol]

If we didn't jump they couldn't have reviewed.

Which is kind of dumb if you think about it. IMO, a penalty that results from something having to do with the next play ought to be treated the same as a snap on the next play. There was ample time before the false start to buzz the referee.

Also, a couple of reviews took way too much time. There ought to be a 60 second clock that starts as soon as the ref announces the review. If you can't figure it out in 60 seconds, there's probably not enough evidence to overturn the call on the field.

 

[cbbowlingmd]

Which is kind of dumb if you think about it. IMO, a penalty that results from something having to do with the next play ought to be treated the same as a snap on the next play. There was ample time before the false start to buzz the referee.

Also, a couple of reviews took way too much time. There ought to be a 60 second clock that starts as soon as the ref announces the review. If you can't figure it out in 60 seconds, there's probably not enough evidence to overturn the call on the field.

I agree on both parts.

 

[chad4930]

In other news, I still dislike Coleman's coverage skills.

Hit that nail on the head. One of the other guys needs to step up and take the spot. He is a liability against better teams.

 

[Dr Dread]

Should either be no review, or no penalty. The challenge backs it up to before the penalty.

 

[volinbham]

Should either be no review, or no penalty. The challenge backs it up to before the penalty.

That was my thinking.

Can't say we got screwed though since it was a fumble that didn't get called correctly to begin with.

 

[TnStud]

That was my thinking.

Can't say we got screwed though since it was a fumble that didn't get called correctly to begin with.

Was it a fumble? I Couldn't tell.

 

[rayvol6]

no it was not a fumble?