|
Replies: 25
| visibility 1
|
All-Conference [444]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1027
Joined: 10/29/03
|
Just got back from game, since there was no PA at the game
Sep 29, 2012, 8:54 PM
|
|
No one knew why Hopkinks apparent TD that was reviewed was not called a TD. It was the catch where he hit the pylon.
What was the official reason?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [6937]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 22594
Joined: 5/4/03
|
Re: ACC refs***
Sep 29, 2012, 8:55 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Member [20]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 80
Joined: 11/22/03
|
Re: Just got back from game, since there was no PA at the game
Sep 29, 2012, 8:55 PM
|
|
rule states when he hit the plyon, he was out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [178]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 283
Joined: 12/4/08
|
Apparently when you hit the pylon
Sep 29, 2012, 8:56 PM
|
|
You are out of bounds. Since he touched it before he caught the ball, it's not a touchdown
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [117]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 167
Joined: 10/22/11
|
Re: Just got back from game, since there was no PA at the game
Sep 29, 2012, 8:56 PM
|
|
Apparently, you are officially out of bounds when you make contact with the pylon. And he made contact with it before controlling the ball with his foot in bounds. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4265
Joined: 10/1/00
|
On the surface that makes sense, but I have a question.....
Sep 29, 2012, 9:07 PM
|
|
How many time have you seen a WR/RB dive for the end zone, aim for the pylon, hit it, and have it NOT be called a touchdown?
I have never seen that scenario called out of bounds. I've always seen it called a touchdown. If it's inbounds for the ball then it should be inbounds for a foot as well.
If someone can explain the difference to me I would appreciate it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Follower [295]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1267
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: On the surface that makes sense, but I have a question.....
Sep 29, 2012, 9:10 PM
|
|
the running back has ball and once you break the plane it is a touchdown. Nuk did not have the ball so when he hit pylon he is out of bounds
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4265
Joined: 10/1/00
|
Re: On the surface that makes sense, but I have a question.....
Sep 29, 2012, 9:21 PM
|
|
So, if you hit it with the football, it's breaking the plane of the endzone, but if you hit it with your foot it's breaking the plane of the sideline.
Oh yeah, that makes sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18133]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22431
Joined: 9/1/99
|
Re: On the surface that makes sense, but I have a question.....
Sep 29, 2012, 9:23 PM
|
|
If he had already caught the ball before touching the pylon, it would have been a TD. He was out of bounds before catching it though. Correct call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4265
Joined: 10/1/00
|
Well, like Hawg said below, if that same catch had been made
Sep 29, 2012, 9:26 PM
|
|
anywhere else on the field where there wasn't a pylon it would've been a catch. You can't debate that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18133]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22431
Joined: 9/1/99
|
Re: Well, like Hawg said below, if that same catch had been made
Sep 29, 2012, 9:32 PM
|
|
Not arguing with that at all. That is true. Since his foot touched the pylon, though, he was o-o-b before catching the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4265
Joined: 10/1/00
|
I think that rule needs to be re-examined......
Sep 29, 2012, 9:40 PM
|
|
I don't have a problem with the call because it seems to fall in line with the rule. It's the rule that is the problem.
They need to take a look at that one. Seem to me to be opposing definitions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18133]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22431
Joined: 9/1/99
|
Well, look at it this way. The pylons are there to help the
Sep 29, 2012, 9:45 PM
|
|
refs know where the end line ends. They are part of the field and are positioned on the outside edge of the end zone. So, they are out of bounds and part of the field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4265
Joined: 10/1/00
|
Re: Well, look at it this way. The pylons are there to help the
Sep 29, 2012, 9:57 PM
|
|
As asked before, if it's out of bounds then why is it a TD when the ball hits the pylon?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18133]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22431
Joined: 9/1/99
|
Because you can't hit it with the ball without breaking the
Sep 29, 2012, 10:04 PM
|
|
plane.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24687]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42354
Joined: 7/31/10
|
You can from the backside.***
Sep 29, 2012, 10:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4265
Joined: 10/1/00
|
Re: Because you can't hit it with the ball without breaking the
Sep 29, 2012, 10:14 PM
[ in reply to Because you can't hit it with the ball without breaking the ] |
|
Yeah, but WHICH plane?
The endzone plane or the sideline plane?
The rule needs to be addressed. While it didn't make a difference in our game, it could in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [875]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 2348
Joined: 12/17/07
|
I feel like the pylon should just be a marker, but the rules
Sep 29, 2012, 9:13 PM
[ in reply to On the surface that makes sense, but I have a question..... ] |
|
make it part of the field. It shouldnt be an extension of the sidelines just higher. If nuke had done the same thing with his foot any where else on the sideline it would have been a catch. Why should his foot brushing the pylon be reason for a no catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67700]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115415
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Just got back from game, since there was no PA at the game
Sep 29, 2012, 8:57 PM
|
|
pylon it is ob so when he touched it and the ball was INC
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [444]
TigerPulse: 84%
Posts: 1027
Joined: 10/29/03
|
Re: Just got back from game, since there was no PA at the game
Sep 29, 2012, 8:59 PM
|
|
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67700]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115415
Joined: 11/30/98
|
thanks to you for traveling and supporting them
Sep 29, 2012, 8:59 PM
|
|
seriously
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [401]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 1665
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I think I've seen in the NFL that it is a catch
Sep 29, 2012, 9:05 PM
[ in reply to Re: Just got back from game, since there was no PA at the game ] |
|
Pretty sure I saw an NFL game a couple weeks ago where a receiver kicked the pylon during the act of making a catch and the announcers said it counted as one knee or two feet. Could be wrong but rather vividly remember that.
Just really odd the two leagues have a discrepancy in this rule if that is the case
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67700]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115415
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I think I've seen in the NFL that it is a catch
Sep 29, 2012, 9:09 PM
|
|
may be different rules like there are w 1 foot in for NCAA and 2 for NFL. just speculating
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2213]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3396
Joined: 9/2/07
|
Both Yannity and Merritt were pretty much.....
Sep 29, 2012, 9:04 PM
|
|
..in disbelief when it wasn't ruled a TD.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3677]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9417
Joined: 5/31/06
|
no PA ?
Sep 29, 2012, 9:13 PM
|
|
that must be weird
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [864]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 3124
Joined: 12/8/11
|
Nfl would have been go***
Sep 29, 2012, 9:22 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 25
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
