|
Replies: 16
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [10919]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12998
Joined: 8/4/14
|
Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 4, 2016, 9:51 PM
|
|
For starters, his progress had been stopped well before the "fumble", then, the defender that punched the ball loose, was standing three feet out of bounds when he did it! No way that was a fumble!
Message was edited by: longtallsam®
|
|
|
|
 |
Legend [15549]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 21430
Joined: 9/24/07
|
Re: Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 4, 2016, 9:57 PM
|
|
Yep! I expected no better at Auburn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7222]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6987
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 4, 2016, 9:57 PM
|
|
No doubt. I am dumbfounded that was not reversed. I have never seen a player participate from that far OB ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10871]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12937
Joined: 4/18/12
|
Re: Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 4, 2016, 10:05 PM
|
|
You'd think, but it I'm sure there is a poster here that thinks it was a good call...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1123]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1429
Joined: 2/5/10
|
Re: Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 4, 2016, 10:07 PM
|
|
Can you provide the part of the rule book that states that's an illegal play. Did googling last night and couldn't find anything concrete to confirm what Palmer said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10919]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12998
Joined: 8/4/14
|
Pretty sure you can't make a play like that while standing
Sep 4, 2016, 10:12 PM
|
|
out of bounds. And he was clearly well out of bounds!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2522]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3332
Joined: 8/23/02
|
Defenders can still play after OB, only offensive players
Sep 4, 2016, 10:15 PM
|
|
can't catch a ball afterward.
I don't what Palmer was talking about. A defender can't be out when recovering a fumble, but causing it doesn't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1123]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1429
Joined: 2/5/10
|
Re: Defenders can still play after OB, only offensive players
Sep 4, 2016, 10:19 PM
|
|
Think you are right. Rule 2-27-15 covers these type of scenarios, though this isn't specifically mentioned I think it's actually perfectly fine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4956]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6983
Joined: 10/12/06
|
Re: Defenders can still play after OB, only offensive players
Sep 5, 2016, 3:25 AM
[ in reply to Defenders can still play after OB, only offensive players ] |
|
You can't touch a ball while OB or the ball is OB. He caused the fumble therefore touched the ball while no one possessed it and it was OB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3732]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 4859
Joined: 11/4/03
|
Even Palmer thought the fumble was going to be overturned!***
Sep 4, 2016, 10:44 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1239]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1922
Joined: 10/25/15
|
Re: Even Palmer thought the fumble was going to be overturned!***
Sep 5, 2016, 2:20 AM
|
|
I believe he thought that the play should have been stopped because of the forward progress, but after looking at the replay, there wasn't enough evident to prove it was the case.
As much as I hate it and not saying I agree with the call on the field, the review booth made the right call by not reversing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4988]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7962
Joined: 2/27/02
|
Forward progress wasn't the issue, it was the defender being
Sep 5, 2016, 2:23 AM
|
|
out of bounds when he stripped the ball, making the ball out of bounds, thus keeping it our ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [44160]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 33057
Joined: 2/22/03
|
It must have been the right call since we won the game.
Sep 5, 2016, 12:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mascot [21]
TigerPulse: 75%
Posts: 47
Joined: 6/12/16
|
Classic***
Sep 5, 2016, 3:38 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1149]
TigerPulse: 66%
Posts: 2668
Joined: 8/14/14
|
Re: Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 5, 2016, 8:28 AM
|
|
I would of loved to had to call reversed.
The player oob cannot cause the fumble. He took a swipe at it, but it was not clear and indisputable that he caused the fumble, therefore the play stood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16071]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 24600
Joined: 5/14/02
|
Re: Wasn't that a terrible call on Mike Williams' sideline fumble?
Sep 5, 2016, 8:54 AM
|
|
There was zero doubt who caused the fumble. Only one other player had his hand on the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 16
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
