Safety shouldn't have counted - Ejection for roughing-the-passer instead

#1

goldvol

VolNation's Lesser Poobah
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
2,594
Likes
3,853
#1
This is just for football discussion, and I am not trying to make excuses. In my opinion, Refs really missed this call, but you can understand they were likely looking at the pass, since this HIT comes so late. Clearly a late hit on Aguilar where his body lands on top of him and his hands hit Aguilars helmet, well after the throw while he's on the ground. Easily could have been roughing the passer / targeting with an ejection.

1760979994014.png

Ball is out of the screen. #31 is coming in for the HIT from the left


1760980213865.png

full 1 second later - full on Superman flying through the air. Notice how #42 is moving away to celebrate.
1760980248401.png

two seconds later, lands full body, hands on his helmet
1760980316859.png

hands clearly on Aguilars head



Here's ChatGPT thought's - thinks shouldnt have been a safety. (
I am not sure if it is after the play / dead ball foul. Yes. I am aware it's a judgement call; and it's a badly missed judgement call.)


In NCAA football, if there is:


  • Intentional grounding by the offense in their own end zone (which would normally result in a safety),
  • AND there is a roughing the passer penalty by the defense on the same play,

then the roughing the passer penalty would negate the intentional grounding, and no safety would be assessed.




Here's how the rules apply:


  • Roughing the passer is a personal foul by the defense.
  • Intentional grounding is a live-ball foul by the offense.

Under NCAA rules, when fouls by both teams occur during the same live-ball period (i.e., before the play ends), it's typically treated as offsetting penaltiesthe down is replayed, and the result of the play is nullified.


However, if the defensive foul (roughing the passer) occurs before the offensive foul (intentional grounding), the defensive penalty would take precedence, and the grounding would be ignored.


But in most cases — and certainly how it's officiated — roughing the passer will override the intentional grounding penalty because you cannot penalize the offense for a throw under duress when a roughing foul occurred.





Final Ruling:


  • Roughing the passer is enforced.
  • Intentional grounding is disregarded.
  • 15-yard penalty against the defense and an automatic first down for the offense.
  • No safety.
I think ChatGPT is a little confused because it’s considering the Roughing prior to the grounding. Would it matter when the ball hits the ground and then be a dead ball foul?
 
Last edited:
#2
#2
Looks like it should have been a penalty on the defense. Aguilar was clearly on the ground when the defender landed on top of him. Official was standing right there watching. Also, I didn’t notice until I just watched the replay that Alabama didn’t even cause the safety, Aguilar just tripped over an offensive lineman’s leg.
 
#3
#3
Another interesting thought-- while roughing-the-passer is a judgement call and not-reviewable:
1. Targeting fouls are able to be reviewed
2. Roughing the passer can have targeting, as is the case here.

In this case, Coach Heupel would share some culpability, because he could have noticed this and appealed for a review. Any good coach, think Kirby Smart, is getting in the ear of the ref and getting what they want. No, it's not guaranteed they would have reviewed it, but would be nice to see Heupel fired up at the ref for not reviewing it, and then filing a complaint after the game.
 
Last edited:
#4
#4
A sack in the endzone, or an intentional grounding is an automatic safety each and every time. The unnecessary roughing the passer is an interesting fact and if was called then the intentional grounding and roughing would off-set and replay the down.
 
#5
#5
I didn't even see it live. This looks like it might have been a deadball foul. Best case, we move them back a little for the free kick after the safety.
 
#9
#9
A sack in the endzone, or an intentional grounding is an automatic safety each and every time. The unnecessary roughing the passer is an interesting fact and if was called then the intentional grounding and roughing would off-set and replay the down.
Every time EXCEPT when Brice Young did it in our game a few years back. That they said was just a bad pass because we were in the process of sacking him and he lost control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#11
#11
Maybe post the video instead of just posting still shots:



The play starts around 5:35. Keeley is engaged with Heard, and as he sheds him Heard gives him a shove from behind. Keeley stumbles while he's pursuing Aguilar and lands on him within a second of Aguilar hitting the turf. The first still shot is the literal instance Aguilar hit the turf, and Keely is already stumbling toward him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaltonVol2298
#13
#13
Maybe post the video instead of just posting still shots:



The play starts around 5:35. Keeley is engaged with Heard, and as he sheds him Heard gives him a shove from behind. Keeley stumbles while he's pursuing Aguilar and lands on him within a second of Aguilar hitting the turf. The first still shot is the literal instance Aguilar hit the turf, and Keely is already stumbling toward him.

Not quite. Keeley took several steps and stretched out to land on Aguilar.
 
#14
#14
Maybe post the video instead of just posting still shots:



The play starts around 5:35. Keeley is engaged with Heard, and as he sheds him Heard gives him a shove from behind. Keeley stumbles while he's pursuing Aguilar and lands on him within a second of Aguilar hitting the turf. The first still shot is the literal instance Aguilar hit the turf, and Keely is already stumbling toward him.

Maybe watch the play before that one.
That's clearly leading with the crown of the helmet.

Is it your position that the game was called fairly?
 
#15
#15
Maybe watch the play before that one.
That's clearly leading with the crown of the helmet.
On the OPI play? Who are you accusing of targeting?

Is it your position that the game was called fairly?

Yeah. Both teams got the benefit of some calls/no-calls. The refs weren't good, but they never are. In the end, they had nothing to do with the result.
 
#17
#17
On the OPI play? Who are you accusing of targeting?



Yeah. Both teams got the benefit of some calls/no-calls. The refs weren't good, but they never are. In the end, they had nothing to do with the result.
Come on, man. The officials pretty much didn't throw a flag on Bama until the game was over in the final minutes of the 4th quarter to make the number of flags look more fair. My point is if an officiating crew can find so many things to nitpick with us they can find a few more on the other team. It seems teams we play never get called for holding especially, but we'll get a holding call to kill half our good drives. If it's going to be called free and loose, I'm fine with that. If it's going to be called more tightly, I'm fine with that too. But games should be officiated the same way both ways. And that clearly doesn't happen in SEC games in 2025. The league clearly has an agenda to help certain teams because they see those teams as having more of a chance to make a run.
 
#18
#18
After Aguilar hit the ground, Keeley took maybe one step. Again, less than a second went by from Aguilar hitting the ground and Keeley landing on him.
The second view of the replay shows it more clearly. Definitely more than one step and he stretched out, but I know we will never agree on this. I’d probably be making the same argument as you if it was the other way around.
 
#20
#20
Come on, man. The officials pretty much didn't throw a flag on Bama until the game was over in the final minutes of the 4th quarter to make the number of flags look more fair. My point is if an officiating crew can find so many things to nitpick with us they can find a few more on the other team. It seems teams we play never get called for holding especially, but we'll get a holding call to kill half our good drives. If it's going to be called free and loose, I'm fine with that. If it's going to be called more tightly, I'm fine with that too. But games should be officiated the same way both ways. And that clearly doesn't happen in SEC games in 2025. The league clearly has an agenda to help certain teams because they see those teams as having more of a chance to make a run.

UT got possession twice when they shouldn't have. Once was a fumble that got ruled incomplete and forced Bama to punt. The other was ruled a fumble, but UT's blatant illegal batting went uncalled when it would have kept possession with Bama.

Getting the ball when you shouldn't is a pretty big deal.
 
#22
#22
It wasn't a missed call, so it changed nothing.
It was and it did.

If you think officiating is equitable at bama home games, you're obviously biased beyond reason.

That's as absurd as Kirby saying he was clapping......reasonable people no better, and the benefiting team giggles.
 
#23
#23
It was and it did.

If you think officiating is equitable at bama home games, you're obviously biased beyond reason.

That's as absurd as Kirby saying he was clapping......reasonable people no better, and the benefiting team giggles.

I'm giggling because your delusion is quite funny.

You are mad because a non-penalty that had absolutely nothing to do with the play wasn't called to bail UT out after the RT was shoved into Aguilar's lap.
 
Advertisement



Back
Top