Offsides Penalty on 1st Onside Kick (Pic)

[UTFootballFan]

The issue is with the offsides call itself. Noone was offsides. An official normally won't call offsides unless the guy steps over the line, not just when a piece of helmet crosses. That was the issue here: Noone crossed the line, except maybe JRM's facemask. That is unacceptable officiating in a crucial point in the game.

Wrong. If he didn't call it Mizzou would be screaming the refs let the Vols get away with one.

Again, they watch and call it closer when it is a likely onside kick situation.

Do you only want them to call offsides/encroachment on plays from scrimmage if the defender steps into the neutral zone? All it takes is a helmet, hand or other part of a defensive player when the ball is snapped.

 

[UTFootballFan]

Why is that? Its going to be discussed for a long time, just as any other controversial call. Especially one that decides the outcome of the game. Hopefully we have better refs next time who don't make bad calls.

This play did not decide the game.

 

[uttom300]

Wrong. If he didn't call it Mizzou would be screaming the refs let the Vols get away with one.

Again, they watch and call it closer when it is a likely onside kick situation.

Do you only want them to call offsides/encroachment on plays from scrimmage if the defender steps into the neutral zone? All it takes is a helmet, hand or other part of a defensive player when the ball is snapped.

That is exactly what I want them to call it for. When they step in the neutral zone, because that is the only time they call it during the regular kickoff. Its such a rare call on a kickoff anyway, so it should be clear evidence. That is the only way its fair: call it like you would during a regular kickoff, which if you watch any game is never called unless its blatant.

 

[GAVol]

Why is that? Its going to be discussed for a long time, just as any other controversial call. Especially one that decides the outcome of the game. Hopefully we have better refs next time who don't make bad calls.

Discussing the call is one thing, but it's insane how difficult it is for people to grasp what happened with the offsides call in conjunction with the illegal touching and then the replay. It's just not that hard to figure out.

...and if the guy standing at the 35 on a kickoff pulls a flag immediately after the kick, there's only one thing it's going to be.

 

[uttom300]

This play did not decide the game.

How do you know it didn't decide the game. The vols get the ball back on the 40 with 2 time outs and 2 minutes left. Did you not watch the SC game?

 

[UTFootballFan]

How do you know it didn't decide the game. The vols get the ball back on the 40 with 2 time outs and 2 minutes left. Did you not watch the SC game?

How do you know it did? There were lots of plays that decided this game.

 

[uttom300]

How do you know it did? There were lots of plays that decided this game.

You made the definite statement that it didn't decide the game. What if they score again and get the two point conversion. The reason it did decide the game was because it took away the last chance for UT to score. That by definition decides the game when the other team has no chance to win.

 

[UTFootballFan]

That is exactly what I want them to call it for. When they step in the neutral zone, because that is the only time they call it during the regular kickoff. Its such a rare call on a kickoff anyway, so it should be clear evidence. That is the only way its fair: call it like you would during a regular kickoff, which if you watch any game is never called unless its blatant.

So if a defensive guy leaps into the neutral zone and as long as his feet do not step across the line, there shouldn't be a penalty?

It's has to be any part of the player. Not just his foot stepping across the line.

 

[uttom300]

How do you know it did? There were lots of plays that decided this game.

Besides that, the vols were still in contention before that play, afterwards, they were not.

 

[UTFootballFan]

You made the definite statement that it didn't decide the game. What if they score again and get the two point conversion. The reason it did decide the game was because it took away the last chance for UT to score. That by definition decides the game when the other team has no chance to win.

Then what if Mizzou runs the kickoff back?

If he didn't call the offsides, Mizzou would claim the refs cheated them.

How about someone come up with some hard video evidence that the call was wrong? Then you can say the ref cheated the Vols out of the CHANCE to win the game.

 

[uttom300]

So if a defensive guy leaps into the neutral zone and as long as his feet do not step across the line, there shouldn't be a penalty?

It's has to be any part of the player. Not just his foot stepping across the line.

If the foot crosses the line, yep. Once the foot crosses the line, not touching mind you, then yes that is offsides on a kickoff. The helmet crosses all the time in kickoffs without any call being made. Its the only way to call it fairly since offsides is nearly never called unless the player steps over the line. Consistency is the key with penalties.

 

[uttom300]

Then what if Mizzou runs the kickoff back?

If he didn't call the offsides, Mizzou would claim the refs cheated them.

How about someone come up with some hard video evidence that the call was wrong? Then you can say the ref cheated the Vols out of the CHANCE to win the game.

I have not seen any video evidence that the call was right. Especially when players go over the line on a regular kickoff and it is rarely called. The fact that it was such a critical call, with such little proof that he stepped over the line makes it unacceptable.

 

[biggestvols]

So, again, I'm wondering if the refs are accountable for the flags they throw, and who do they have to signal to that they have witnessed an infraction of some sort, and when do they have to make that knowledge known?

The senior director of NFL officiating, Al Riveron says:

“The calling official makes the preliminary signal,” Riveron explains. “The official who threw the flag signals the foul and points to the offending team. The wing officials then report the foul to the head coaches. The coach (of the offended team) then makes the decision whether or accept or decline the penalty,”

Obviously the requisite procedure wasn't followed as the offsides was called after the review.

One problem is there seems to be sure something is going on with SEC officiating:


Mike Pereira criticizes SEC officiating, calls for investigation by Mike Slive and Rogers Redding

 

[DownTheField]

Sorry, I don't want to wade through all this. What is the consensus regarding the offsides call? Not the VN consensus, but the media consensus. All I've gathered is that people think it was the kicker who was 'offsides' but then no one seems to be sure if it's even possible for the kicker to be offsides.

 

[GAVol]

Again ... The kicker is allowed to encroach on the kick line. There is video and pic evidence in this thread demonstrating that's all Medley did.

 

[Morpheus]

I'd like to weigh in here. This is just the latest of a long string of strange calls late in close UT games over the past few years, that have consistently thwarted any hope of a Vol victory. This thread reads exactly like all the others.

Group A is upset that officials took the game out of the hands of the players and coaches because of some loosely stated, vague technicality that is inconsistent with the way every other football game has historically been called. We've even had some of these strange calls end up leading to new rules put in the following year.

Group B argues first and foremost, that play, or those plays in some cases, "didn't cause the Vols to lose". And while this is debatable, it really misses the point in my mind.

First, Mizzou was the better team last night and is the better team, IMO. But the better team doesn't always win. It bothers me that those players executed that very difficult play in a crucial situation to perfection, and the refs took it from them with a highly controversial and seemingly unsure technicality that goes uncalled 99.9% of the time in that situation. I don't believe anyone was offsides, but lets say someones hand actually did cross the line .001 sec too soon. Did that contribute anything to that play? Did that cause the mizzou player to muff the reception and let the ball squirt by him? Did that cause the other Mizzou players to be out of position, preventing them from taking possession? The obvious answer is no. Besides that, officials can't decide to call a penalty after the fact. Vols were either offsides before the review, or they weren't offsides.

And while I'm on this, unless they've changed the rules since I played, the kickoff return team cannot have more than 5 players on the front line to receive a kick. Mizzou had 6 on the 45, which should have been flagged. Again, unless they've changed that rule.

And it doesn't matter to me one bit that that play wouldn't have meant certain victory for the Vols, chances are they wouldn't have pulled it off. But they earned the opportunity to try. And the bigger point is, this pattern of controversial late game calls continues to plague UT like no other I've ever witnessed, other than Vandy there for a decade or so. As I've said numerous times here, the sec manipulates outcomes in order to maximize profits IMO. Just too much evidence to ignore.

So commence with "conspiracy theory, etc, etc"…my peace said, moving on.

 

[UTFootballFan]

The senior director of NFL officiating, Al Riveron says:

“The calling official makes the preliminary signal,” Riveron explains. “The official who threw the flag signals the foul and points to the offending team. The wing officials then report the foul to the head coaches. The coach (of the offended team) then makes the decision whether or accept or decline the penalty,”

Obviously the requisite procedure wasn't followed as the offsides was called after the review.

One problem is there seems to be sure something is going on with SEC officiating:


Mike Pereira criticizes SEC officiating, calls for investigation by Mike Slive and Rogers Redding

Where did you get this quote?

 

[uttom300]

I'd like to weigh in here. This is just the latest of a long string of strange calls late in close UT games over the past few years, that have consistently thwarted any hope of a Vol victory. This thread reads exactly like all the others.

Group A is upset that officials took the game out of the hands of the players and coaches because of some loosely stated, vague technicality that is inconsistent with the way every other football game has historically been called. We've even had some of these strange calls end up leading to new rules put in the following year.

Group B argues first and foremost, that play, or those plays in some cases, "didn't cause the Vols to lose". And while this is debatable, it really misses the point in my mind.

First, Mizzou was the better team last night and is the better team, IMO. But the better team doesn't always win. It bothers me that those players executed that very difficult play in a crucial situation to perfection, and the refs took it from them with a highly controversial and seemingly unsure technicality that goes uncalled 99.9% of the time in that situation. I don't believe anyone was offsides, but lets say someones hand actually did cross the line .001 sec too soon. Did that contribute anything to that play? Did that cause the mizzou player to muff the reception and let the ball squirt by him? Did that cause the other Mizzou players to be out of position, preventing them from taking possession? The obvious answer is no. Besides that, officials can't decide to call a penalty after the fact. Vols were either offsides before the review, or they weren't offsides.

And while I'm on this, unless they've changed the rules since I played, the kickoff return team cannot have more than 5 players on the front line to receive a kick. Mizzou had 6 on the 45, which should have been flagged. Again, unless they've changed that rule.

And it doesn't matter to me one bit that that play wouldn't have meant certain victory for the Vols, chances are they wouldn't have pulled it off. But they earned the opportunity to try. And the bigger point is, this pattern of controversial late game calls continues to plague UT like no other I've ever witnessed, other than Vandy there for a decade or so. As I've said numerous times here, the sec manipulates outcomes in order to maximize profits IMO. Just too much evidence to ignore.

So commence with "conspiracy theory, etc, etc"…my peace said, moving on.

Excellent post. Sums it up pretty well. My biggest problem is with the offsides call. Its never called, yet in the most crucial moment, they throw the flag because part of a helmet or hand is over the line? Absolutely ridiculous decision and cost UT the CHANCE to tie. That's all that matters is the chance, not whether UT actually gets it done or not. Thank you for your thoughts on this matter. I 100% agree. :clapping:

 

[uttom300]

Where did you get this quote?

He got it from here:

Penalty enforcement is an entire-crew effort | Football Zebras

 

[UTFootballFan]

He got it from here:

Penalty enforcement is an entire-crew effort | Football Zebras

Thanks for the link. Here is a pertinent quote from the linked page.

Riveron says when the choice of obvious, the officials don’t even consult with the coaches. “If a foul on the offense will wipe out a first down run, or if there is defensive pass interference on an incomplete pass, the referee doesn’t even consult with the coach, since it is obvious the coach will want the penalty. The referee will just instruct the umpire to walk off the penalty and he’ll make the announcement,” he explained.

The officials didn't originally make a big issue of the offsides because it would obviously be declined because because the ref thought there was illegal touching of the ball. Once they realized there wasn't illegal touching, they had to deal with the offsides that was called. If the ref saw any part of the player past the line when the kick, it's offsides.

Time to accept it and move on.

 

[TechnoVol]

To those that say we weren't offside...

By rule, any part of a player may not break the plane of the 35-yard line before the ball is kicked. The call was most likely made on Maybin since he was leaning forward and his head was across the line before the ball was kicked. A ticky tack call for sure, but by rule, enforceable.

 

[GAVol]

To those that say we weren't offside...

By rule, any part of a player may not break the plane of the 35-yard line before the ball is kicked. The call was most likely made on Maybin since he was leaning forward and his head was across the line before the ball was kicked. A ticky tack call for sure, but by rule, enforceable.

It's beyond ticky tack. I've got a super slo-mo replay in here somewhere that pretty much proves that if anything, JRM's hand might have been on the line when the kick happened. His head, body and feet were clearly behind the line.

With the speed of the game, the officials have a really tough job, but that's one heck of a time to start guessing or anticipating.

 

[gray0306]

To say maybin is across the line may be inaccurate these pics, because of the angle distorts where he really was, the only way is a headon line shot of the 35 yard line. I am sure that this was part of the coaches argument as they sent it off the the SEC this morning.

 

[Face]

It's beyond ticky tack. I've got a super slo-mo replay in here somewhere that pretty much proves that if anything, JRM's hand might have been on the line when the kick happened. His head, body and feet were clearly behind the line.

With the speed of the game, the officials have a really tough job, but that's one heck of a time to start guessing or anticipating.

Key word here. You have to be anticipating a penalty to make a call that close when it's something that slides by 99.9 % of the time.

 

[UTFootballFan]

It's a judgement call.