Was Jackson's hit clean?

[volsroxmysox]

Agree. And they need to make a rule where they can't go back and replay after the refs have declared the game over. (Instead of the refs replaying it first, they talked it out and then declared the game over only to replay it and screw everything up.)
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[IM4TN]

On the catch, I had no problem with Jackson being called for a penalty but it wasn't a catch either. Half of the ball was touching the ground when the receiver landed plus he landed out of bounds.

On the last few seconds, this is just a dumb rule. The official should have stood over the ball with the clock running to allow us to sub when NC was trying to run the field goal team on. It doesn't make sense why there isn't a 10 second run off rule. What's the point in rushing to line up if the center and QB can just snap the ball with no else set.

Does anyone actually think that a rule for a 10 second runoff would be followed any differently than what's in the rule book already??

 

[UGADawg4Life]

On the catch, I had no problem with Jackson being called for a penalty but it wasn't a catch either. Half of the ball was touching the ground when the receiver landed plus he landed out of bounds.

On the last few seconds, this is just a dumb rule. The official should have stood over the ball with the clock running to allow us to sub when NC was trying to run the field goal team on. It doesn't make sense why there isn't a 10 second run off rule. What's the point in rushing to line up if the center and QB can just snap the ball with no else set.

As an impartial fan, I thought the refs got it right. Because the ball was shielded, you couldn't really tell if he had complete possession. But you have to give the receiver the benefit of the doubt, especially since the UT defender made an illegal hit. Think about it this way, what if the uniforms had changed and it was a UT receiver.

 

[Smokeybluetick]

He's about used up his credits in my book. This guy, while he could be a good player, is a pure thug. Let him go to U of Miami or Va. Tech. where he'll have a lot of company with people just like him.

How about you go! I wish you were the one he hit!!! damf!!!:finger3:

 

[FootVolintheFall]

My take on the last 30 seconds:
-Declared the game over, but I understand the process of replay. However, if he knew they were going to review it, he should have not said it was over. By the strictest letter of the law, the game was over.

-Janzen’s hit was illegal – he left his feet/launched himself; it’s a penalty per the rule change this year. I’m not saying he shouldn’t have done it, but it’s even a penalty in hockey, the only sport equivalent with the physicality of football. Malik’s personal foul was more atrocious in my opinion; his hand brushed Yates' helmet. It wasn't a "Shot to Head"

-With that said, the ball was moving on that catch. I’m 99% sure it hit the ground, but in the lack of “undisputable video evidence” the call can’t be overturned. Regardless, he did not secure until he was out of bounds. It wasn’t a legal catch.

-The game clock, not just play clock, winds after the offensive penalty. Not saying they wouldn’t have had the chance to snap it, but that kicker had all the time in the world to set up to kick it. The officials treated it like an untimed down.

 

[ApacheVol]

As an impartial fan, I thought the refs got it right. Because the ball was shielded, you couldn't really tell if he had complete possession. But you have to give the receiver the benefit of the doubt, especially since the UT defender made an illegal hit. Think about it this way, what if the uniforms had changed and it was a UT receiver.

He was juggling the ball and landed out of bounds! What difference does it make which uniform he had on?

 

[all4vol]

My take on the last 30 seconds:
-Declared the game over, but I understand the process of replay. However, if he knew they were going to review it, he should have not said it was over. By the strictest letter of the law, the game was over.
-Janzen’s hit was illegal – he left his feet/launched himself; it’s a penalty per the rule change this year. I’m not saying he shouldn’t have done it, but it’s even a penalty in hockey, the only sport equivalent with the physicality of football. Malik’s personal foul was more atrocious in my opinion; his hand brushed Yates' helmet. It wasn't a "Shot to Head"

-With that said, the ball was moving on that catch. I’m 99% sure it hit the ground, but in the lack of “undisputable video evidence” the call can’t be overturned. Regardless, he did not secure until he was out of bounds. It wasn’t a legal catch.

-The game clock, not just play clock, winds after the offensive penalty. Not saying they wouldn’t have had the chance to snap it, but that kicker had all the time in the world to set up to kick it. The officials treated it like an untimed down.

I agree, thats where we got screwed. Just shows how bad REFS, ESPN, and the NCAA wants to keep UT down.

 

[TrueOrange]

Does anyone actually think that a rule for a 10 second runoff would be followed any differently than what's in the rule book already??

please explain your point/idea here

 

[kptvol]

Someone needs to cite the rule that explains why Janzen's hit was illegal.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[smowkee]

Someone needs to cite the rule that explains why Janzen's hit was illegal.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

One of the annoucers commented that Jackson lauched into the air and left the ground and that made it illegal. I've never heard of that rule.

 

[kptvol]

One of the annoucers commented that Jackson lauched into the air and left the ground and that made it illegal. I've never heard of that rule.

I've looked at the rule book. The launching stuff only applies against defenseless players. The receiver could not be classified as such.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[NWO4LIFE]

I am Jackson fan but that was a boneheaded play, followed by a comedy of errors. Additionally i like Brays "attitude" but dont be a douche...act like you have been there before.

 

[kptvol]

I am Jackson fan but that was a boneheaded play, followed by a comedy of errors. Additionally i like Brays "attitude" but dont be a douche...act like you have been there before.

What exactly was bone-headed? How could he have played it differently?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[vol11]

One of the annoucers commented that Jackson lauched into the air and left the ground and that made it illegal. I've never heard of that rule.

Yea, they said it several times. I googled the rule book and I couldn't find anything about a launching rule.

 

[DocVOLiday]

That was a great hit and he was penalized for hitting "too hard" it seems. He led with his shoulder and jarred the WR like he's supposed to and got a BS call because the refs are probably jealous/ mad that they couldn't hit like that. Maybe they're just not used to so many big hits in their amazing Big Ten
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[UGADawg4Life]

He was juggling the ball and landed out of bounds! What difference does it make which uniform he had on?

You must have had a different camera angle than I did. I didn't see an undisputable juggle. My point is that, if it was a Vol receiver, you'd be saying that it was a catch, especially given the hit. I think the refs got that one right. Now they totally screwed up the "end-of-game" thing. They should not have declared the game over until they took everything under consideration. Also, UT should have been penalized on the play before that due to an EXTREMELY late hit. I don't know how the ref missed it as he was standing right there. So Vol fans really can't complain too much. I thought it was a good game with the two teams pretty evenly matched.

 

[UGADawg4Life]

That was a great hit and he was penalized for hitting "too hard" it seems. He led with his shoulder and jarred the WR like he's supposed to and got a BS call because the refs are probably jealous/ mad that they couldn't hit like that. Maybe they're just not used to so many big hits in their amazing Big Ten
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The defender had his head down and launched his helmet into the receiver's helmet. That is the very rule of "helmet-to-helmet contact". They got that call right.

 

[NWO4LIFE]

What exactly was bone-headed? How could he have played it differently?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Initiating Contact/Targeting an Opponent—
ARTICLE 3
Approved Ruling 9-1-3
II. Receiver A83 has just leaped and received a forward pass. As
A83 is about to regain his balance, B45 launches and drives
into A83 above the shoulder area with his helmet or shoulder.
RULING: Foul by B45 for targeting and initiating contact with a defenseless opponent above the shoulders. Ejection for a flagrant
foul.

 

[WesternKyVol]

You must have had a different camera angle than I did. I didn't see an undisputable juggle. My point is that, if it was a Vol receiver, you'd be saying that it was a catch, especially given the hit. I think the refs got that one right. Now they totally screwed up the "end-of-game" thing. They should not have declared the game over until they took everything under consideration. Also, UT should have been penalized on the play before that due to an EXTREMELY late hit. I don't know how the ref missed it as he was standing right there. So Vol fans really can't complain too much. I thought it was a good game with the two teams pretty evenly matched.

False. The Lamarcus Thompson has been completely discussed in another thread. He was shoved in the back into the player. If anything, the "late hit" was caused by a 10 yard block in the back by UNC.

 

[tvolsfan]

It was a penalty, but it wasn't thuggish.

 

[UGADawg4Life]

I've looked at the rule book. The launching stuff only applies against defenseless players. The receiver could not be classified as such.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Look under "helmet-to-helmet" contact. They got it right. He should have just tackled the receiver rather than launching into him with his helmet. Refs have to protect players or there will be players getting killed or paralyzed.

 

[NWO4LIFE]

Pages 236 -237 of the NCAA rule book

Initiating Contact/Targeting an Opponent—
ARTICLE 3
Approved Ruling 9-1-3
II. Receiver A83 has just leaped and received a forward pass. As
A83 is about to regain his balance, B45 launches and drives
into A83 above the shoulder area with his helmet or shoulder.RULING: Foul by B45 for targeting and initiating contact with a defenseless opponent above the shoulders. Ejection for a flagrant
foul.

 

[kptvol]

Initiating Contact/Targeting an Opponent—
ARTICLE 3
Approved Ruling 9-1-3
II. Receiver A83 has just leaped and received a forward pass. As
A83 is about to regain his balance, B45 launches and drives
into A83 above the shoulder area with his helmet or shoulder.
RULING: Foul by B45 for targeting and initiating contact with a defenseless opponent above the shoulders. Ejection for a flagrant
foul.

he didn't hit him above the shoulders.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[DocVOLiday]

The defender had his head down and launched his helmet into the receiver's helmet. That is the very rule of "helmet-to-helmet contact". They got that call right.

Buddy... watch it again. He didn't hit his head...

Can somebody post a picture please??
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[NWO4LIFE]

anything from the bottom of the shoulder pads UP is the area

It was a bad choice on his part. A great hit, I loved the contact, but it wasnt clean