The Call no one talked about

#1
TopDog4TN

TopDog4TN

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
368
Likes
1,053
#1
In the Tennessee vs Pitt game in the 3rd quarter, Pitt attempted a long field goal and missed. Theo Jackson returned it for a TD and it was called back with offsetting penalties. The ref proceeded to explain that the fouls occurred after the change of possession, and immediately said the down would be replayed. If the fouls occurred after the change of possession then the change of possession should have still ensued and it should have been Tennessees ball, or this is how I've always understood the rules of football to be. I never saw any media coverage on it nor was there any questioning from the announcers as to why they replayed the down. Every game I've ever watched between any teams, the down is only replayed if the foul occurred before change of possession. It blew my mind completely when they still gave the ball to Pitt in this situation. Now this call didnt have much to do with the outcome, just more so blew my mind at the outcome of this individual situation and wanted to see if anyone else was confused by this as well or if anyone had any input on it. I've done a little reading through the rules and can't find anything that would indicate the down should have been replayed.

 
  • Like
Reactions: igotworms, dduncan4163, FLVOL_79 and 15 others
#2
#2
topdog4tn said:
In the Tennessee vs Pitt game in the 3rd quarter, Pitt attempted a long field goal and missed. Theo Jackson returned it for a TD and it was called back with offsetting penalties. The ref proceeded to explain that the fouls occurred after the change of possession, and immediately said the down would be replayed. If the fouls occurred after the change of possession then the change of possession should have still ensued and it should have been Tennessees ball, or this is how I've always understood the rules of football to be. I never saw any media coverage on it nor was there any questioning from the announcers as to why they replayed the down. Every game I've ever watched between any teams, the down is only replayed if the foul occurred before change of possession. It blew my mind completely when they still gave the ball to Pitt in this situation. Now this call didnt have much to do with the outcome, just more so blew my mind at the outcome of this individual situation and wanted to see if anyone else was confused by this as well or if anyone had any input on it. I've done a little reading through the rules and can't find anything that would indicate the down should have been replayed.

Click to expand...

It absolutely effected the outcome of the game...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jackcrevol, dduncan4163, StanfordVol and 11 others
#3
#3
topdog4tn said:
In the Tennessee vs Pitt game in the 3rd quarter, Pitt attempted a long field goal and missed. Theo Jackson returned it for a TD and it was called back with offsetting penalties. The ref proceeded to explain that the fouls occurred after the change of possession, and immediately said the down would be replayed. If the fouls occurred after the change of possession then the change of possession should have still ensued and it should have been Tennessees ball, or this is how I've always understood the rules of football to be. I never saw any media coverage on it nor was there any questioning from the announcers as to why they replayed the down. Every game I've ever watched between any teams, the down is only replayed if the foul occurred before change of possession. It blew my mind completely when they still gave the ball to Pitt in this situation. Now this call didnt have much to do with the outcome, just more so blew my mind at the outcome of this individual situation and wanted to see if anyone else was confused by this as well or if anyone had any input on it. I've done a little reading through the rules and can't find anything that would indicate the down should have been replayed.

Click to expand...

They called a block in the back on us where Banks threw his back into a player. Which is literally textbook how they are supposed to do blindside blocks now. Been saying that was a BS call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, dduncan4163, StanfordVol and 5 others
#6
#6
OP, I thought it should've been UT's ball as well, and no replaying of the down.

The way I see it, Pitt committed a penalty before the the possession changed hands (ball was being kicked or in air). If UT hadn't had the block in the back it would've been a TD. UT would've declined the penalty.

Since there was a penalty on the return (after change in possession), UT still should have retained possession and the penalty marked off from the spot of the foul. Don't see how they can call those offsetting in that circumstance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 901 Orange, MemphisVol77, PC Jr. and 1 other person
#9
#9
topdog4tn said:
In the Tennessee vs Pitt game in the 3rd quarter, Pitt attempted a long field goal and missed. Theo Jackson returned it for a TD and it was called back with offsetting penalties. The ref proceeded to explain that the fouls occurred after the change of possession, and immediately said the down would be replayed. If the fouls occurred after the change of possession then the change of possession should have still ensued and it should have been Tennessees ball, or this is how I've always understood the rules of football to be. I never saw any media coverage on it nor was there any questioning from the announcers as to why they replayed the down. Every game I've ever watched between any teams, the down is only replayed if the foul occurred before change of possession. It blew my mind completely when they still gave the ball to Pitt in this situation. Now this call didnt have much to do with the outcome, just more so blew my mind at the outcome of this individual situation and wanted to see if anyone else was confused by this as well or if anyone had any input on it. I've done a little reading through the rules and can't find anything that would indicate the down should have been replayed.

Click to expand...


Unfortunately it did have a big effect on the outcome. If we don't block in the back there, we can decline Pitt's foul, and take the TD. If Pitt doesn't foul, it would have been half the distance and 1st down inside the 8. They punted on the replay and downed it at the 2. We ended up punting on that possession. I wish he wouldn't have blocked in the back, but that's one of those full-speed/heat of the moment fouls that happen. I'm not sure if he thought he would have turned around by the time he hit him, but he cleaned his clock right in front of the ref...easy call.

Offsetting Fouls
ARTICLE 4. If live-ball fouls by both teams are reported to the referee, the fouls offset and the down is repeated (A.R. 10-1-4-I and VII). Any player who commits a foul that mandates disqualification or ejection must leave the game.
Exceptions: 1. When there is a change of team possession during a down, and the team last gaining possession had not fouled before last gaining possession, it may refuse offsetting fouls and thereby retain possession after completion of the penalty for its foul (A.R. 10-1-4-II-VII).

We had the option to decline Pitt's penalty and take the ball around the 8, but chose to make them kick again. You can see as the officials are talking with CJH one of them makes the decline motion. I am assuming they are asking if he wanted to decline Pitt's and would end up enforcing their own. I don't know if he thought they would try another field goal or not. In hindsight, it would have been better for us to decline it. However, the other options are taking the ball on the 37 if he missed again (showed no leg to get it there), or risk/return of a touchback or downed punt. Of the 3 options, of course, the worst option happened to us. I don't fault CJH for his decision...he played the percentages.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SAPPER 5, wrangler, TopDog4TN and 3 others
#10
#10
Since they were post-possession change fouls, I think what probably should've happened is the flag on Pitt gets declined by rule and the block in the back on us gets marked off from the spot of the foul and the TD negated and it's our ball on about the 6. But that's a guess on my part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37620VOL
#11
#11
This was explained by an SEC ref on the radio. If Tennessee declined the penalty on Pitt, Pitt would accept the penalty on Tenn & the ball would be placed half the distance to the goal from where block in the back occurred, inside the 10, first down Tennessee. Heupel chose to take the Pitt penalty making Pitt decide to punt or try another long FG.

I hope JH learned that returning long FGs are desperate plays at end of half or end of game. The lost field position really hurt Tennessee on that possession.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TopDog4TN, TrueOrange, Boca Vol and 1 other person
#12
#12
wmcovol said:
This was explained by an SEC ref on the radio. If Tennessee declined the penalty on Pitt, Pitt would accept the penalty on Tenn & the ball would be placed half the distance to the goal from where block in the back occurred, inside the 10, first down Tennessee. Heupel chose to take the Pitt penalty making Pitt decide to punt or try another long FG.

I hope JH learned that returning long FGs are desperate plays at end of half or end of game. The lost field position really hurt Tennessee on that possession.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the end of half/end of game. I kinda see where he was coming from...down 7, but for every Bama/Auburn "kick 6", you'll see 10 block in the backs like that. How much better would it have been to start on the 38 instead of the 2?
 
#15
#15
Nice thread. There were some WICKED moves by Theo on that play.

The block in the back looked to me like nothing other than a dumb play by Banks. 8th grade football dumb:

1643829638730.png1643829706509.png1643829735920.png

Although this hit may have been a defenseless player blindside block that wasn't called here:
1643829509324.png1643829540780.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinSmyrna
#17
#17
The Original Fade said:
I look forward to the day when we are beating opponents so handily that bad calls by the refs do not affect the outcome
Click to expand...
You're not gonna beat everyone by 40. We barely beat Syracuse and Arkansas in 1998. Calls are still gonna matter. Difference is when you're the popular team they give you the breaks.
 
#19
#19
Vol865 said:
You're not gonna beat everyone by 40. We barely beat Syracuse and Arkansas in 1998. Calls are still gonna matter. Difference is when you're the popular team they give you the breaks.
Click to expand...
Except the refs blew the call big time on the safety in the 98 Arkansas game in favor of Arkansas.

They awarded the safety when Tennessee should have been give the choice of the accepting safety or getting possession with 1st and goal at the 5 yard line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 67Vol, LoudOrange and Tennman
#21
#21
dobre_shunka said:
Except the refs blew the call big time on the safety in the 98 Arkansas game in favor of Arkansas.

They awarded the safety when Tennessee should have been give the choice of the accepting safety or getting possession with 1st and goal at the 5 yard line.
Click to expand...
Well I was 6 so I don't remember every detail but if it wasn't for a fluke fumble it would've cost us the game.
 
#23
#23
tennesseejoe said:
Pitt player in the end zone then hit the ball after punt
Click to expand...

as long as no part of your body is touching in the endzone, you can bat it back like that. He was a fraction from a foot being down, but he made a heck of a play. It is different than the NFL rule.
 
#24
#24
1NCvolunteer said:
This thread will not go anywhere unless Guntersvol gets involved.
Click to expand...

tumblr_nyqxaw28tk1qa9yc1o1_400.gifv
 
#25
#25
wmcovol said:
This was explained by an SEC ref on the radio. If Tennessee declined the penalty on Pitt, Pitt would accept the penalty on Tenn & the ball would be placed half the distance to the goal from where block in the back occurred, inside the 10, first down Tennessee. Heupel chose to take the Pitt penalty making Pitt decide to punt or try another long FG.

I hope JH learned that returning long FGs are desperate plays at end of half or end of game. The lost field position really hurt Tennessee on that possession.
Click to expand...
Just another example of lack of discipline penalties costing a team, in this case, a TD. The refs were not wrong and CJH made the right decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlinghamptonVol and volinSmyrna
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top