The Call no one talked about

#26
#26
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...

That is correct. When Ark snapped the ball over the punters head, he kicked the ball illegally and Tennessee should have been given the ball around the 10 yard line, first down, down 24-20......
 
#27
#27
volinSmyrna said:
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.
Click to expand...


NFL allows the ball to be batted back but College rule says if the ball breaks the plane of the goal line, its a touchback. In neither case can a player be in contact with the goal line or end zone
 
#29
#29
wmcovol said:
NFL allows the ball to be batted back but College rule says if the ball breaks the plane of the goal line, its a touchback. In neither case can a player be in contact with the goal line or end zone
Click to expand...

Yes. Correct. As long as he is not touching in the endzone, though, he can bat it as long as the ball doesn't break the plane. That ball was really close to the line, but they didn't show the pylon cam for whatever reason.

Loose Behind the Goal Line
ARTICLE 11. If a scrimmage kick untouched by Team B after crossing the neutral zone is batted in Team B’s end zone by a player of Team A, it is a violation for illegal touching (Rule 6-3-2). The spot of the violation is Team B’s 20-yard line. This is a special case of batting in the end zone and is not a foul.
 
#30
#30
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...

Excellent topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: topdog4tn
#31
#31
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...
Thank you for explaining. That makes sense. UT had the choice in this instance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: topdog4tn
#32
#32
Yes, the officials 100% botched that call. I through for sure the replay guys in the booth would have been in the officials earpieces and got it straightened out before putting the ball in play next but they didn’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tradevol
#33
#33
There were questionable calls, both from the refs and play calls from our coaches, that resulted in 3 heart breaking losses against Pitt, Miss and Purdue that could have easily been wins and a 10 win season. All we can do is get better next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#34
#34
Orange Raid said:
Yes, the officials 100% botched that call. I through for sure the replay guys in the booth would have been in the officials earpieces and got it straightened out before putting the ball in play next but they didn’t.
Click to expand...

Not a fan of officials usually, but they didn't do anything wrong here. If we want to talk their horrendous spot later on, that's another story. We had the option to decline Pitt's penalty and take our half the distance penalty and the ball. We chose to replay the down. The odds were in our favor that we would get the ball at a better position than the 7-8 yard line, but, being Tennessee fans long enough, we know how those things go. We end up with the ball at the 2.
 
#36
#36
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...

I was at the game and screaming my lungs out, the refs were making the wrong the wrong call. It should have been illegally kicking the ball in field of play and Tennessee ball 1st and goal on the 4/5 yard line.
 
#37
#37
Right... I guess the field goal would have served the safe purpose as a punt in this case. They punt it to us, we block in the back, the refs then give the ball to the other team?
 
#38
#38
TNinSC said:
Exactly. How the heck did we agree to bring them in? ACC refs (Jerry Magallanes) called the Music City Bowl too.
Click to expand...

I believe the visiting team's conference officials are used. We should have an SEC crew when we play at Pitt this year. I never want to see an ACC crew again!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#41
#41
The problem is offsetting penalities. The way I understand the rule is that the play never happened when both teams commit a foul. It's reset and replayed. I hate it though. I see no reason to replay a down because both sides were guilty. I would prefer the play to stand when offsetting fouls happen. Sometimes it would bite us in the arse and times it would work out.
 
#43
#43
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...
If we accepted that penalty, we would have scored and they would have had time on the clock and might have scored again and beaten us. I think things worked out pretty good for us. I am not complaining.
 
#45
#45
Vol865 said:
Maybe so but people don't typically sit the ball on the ground when they fumble. That's up their with the Mark Sanchez butt fumble
Click to expand...
Not to beat a dead horse on a play from 14 years ago, but it's the offseason so why not.

You know the refs didn't award a W to Tennessee after the fumble. All Arkansas needed to do was keep Tennessee out of the end zone for a little more than 90 seconds and they win. Instead they started giving up huge chunks of yards on run after run after run and 6 plays later, Tennessee had the 6 points they had to have to win.

If you want to call a fumble directly created by Ratliff totally blowing up his guy, I guess you can. But the game was ultimately lost by an Arkansas defense that folded like a cheap suit and yielded 43 yards on 6 plays in the final seconds of the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangebloodgmc
#46
#46
Vol865 said:
Maybe so but people don't typically sit the ball on the ground when they fumble. That's up their with the Mark Sanchez butt fumble
Click to expand...
As soon as Stoerner tried to use the ball to catch his balance, a fumble was coming. It’s nearly impossible to do that without dropping the ball. I’ve seen it happen to multiple QBs trying to avoid a sack. If he just eats it and takes the loss, Arkansas probably wins.
 
#47
#47
dobre_shunka said:
Not to beat a dead horse on a play from 14 years ago, but it's the offseason so why not.

You know the refs didn't award a W to Tennessee after the fumble. All Arkansas needed to do was keep Tennessee out of the end zone for a little more than 90 seconds and they win. Instead they started giving up huge chunks of yards on run after run after run and 6 plays later, Tennessee had the 6 points they had to have to win.

If you want to call a fumble directly created by Ratliff totally blowing up his guy, I guess you can. But the game was ultimately lost by an Arkansas defense that folded like a cheap suit and yielded 43 yards on 6 plays in the final seconds of the game.
Click to expand...
The whole point was we are not going to blow everyone out by 40. Y'all can twist my words 20 different ways but the point was to say that we aren't magically going to beat everyone by enough to where bad officiating won't affect games.
 
#48
#48
GAVol said:
As soon as Stoerner tried to use the ball to catch his balance, a fumble was coming. It’s nearly impossible to do that without dropping the ball. I’ve seen it happen to multiple QBs trying to avoid a sack. If he just eats it and takes the loss, Arkansas probably wins.
Click to expand...
I know. That's the gist of what I was saying.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top