Re: (With Screenshot) Onsides Kick Illegal Procedure by Alabama

The procedure you are speaking of is for match-up purposes.

A bit before the kick-off, the players from the kicking team must all gather between the nine-yard marks (in the NCAA, the nine-yard marks are the top of the yard numbers closest to each sideline).

Once the players are inside the nine-yard marks, the referee whistles the ready for play. The players can then spread out beyond the nine-yard marks for the kick-off.

Your screenshot is well beyond when the ready for play would be whistled, so it proves nothing. Besides, the flag would have been thrown for this penalty long before the kick-off.

Here is a video of the championship game that shows the procedure.

https://youtu.be/RySXCog-n7M?t=7768 (2:09:28 in time in case it doesn't work).

Notice how all the players are inside the 9-yard marks? Listen to the ref blow the whistle for the ready-for-play. Now watch the players move beyond the 9-yard marks.

However, the first shot of the onside kick formation is when the referee is moving behind the Alabama players, which means he has long since blown the ready for play.

Your screenshot is after the ready for play, which is a perfectly legal formation.

yubyub

Team Captain [471]

TigerPulse: 97%

Posts: 742

Joined: 11/16/08

Jan 25, 2016, 4:11 AM

I've already exhaustively explained why the onside kick was perfectly legal, but the recovery was not, due to the Onside Kick Rule #2's Exception - Approved Ruling #5, which states:

V. A Team A player beyond the neutral zone first touches or catches a

scrimmage kick that no receiver could have caught while it was in flight.

RULING: Illegal touching but not interference

In high school it is flagged as First Touching, in college the infraction is called Illegal Touching(but notice AR V. actually includes the phrase "first touches" because they are talking about the exact same situation. The result of this type of recovery in football at every level of the game always results in the same thing - the receiving team taking possession of the ball at the point of the First Touching/Illegal Touching infraction.

The vicinity or lack thereof of any receiving team players does not matter as AR V. clearly and succinctly states that it is referring to a catch that "no receiver could have caught while it was in flight." A fair-catch, player vicinity issue and/or catch interference, while all being much more commonly occurring infractions and all things that would have had a greater chance of being flagged(since refs see them more often) didn't happen; but nevertheless, this fact does not negate the validity of AR V.

And again, don't argue word play games with me; ask the NCAA Ruling Committee instead why the words "scrimmage kick" are used in AR V. and if they are used properly in this context or if it was a simple mistake in the rule book wording. The reality of the situation is that one of three rules specific to an Onside Kick intentionally and specifically cites the AR. V exception, which once again, is an Approved Ruling that is in accordance with and reflects the spirit of the rules for a legal Onside Kick Recovery for football at every level of the game(from pee wee, to high school, to college, to the pros).

Ultimately, every football fan willing to be honest with themselves has always known that the ball has to touch the ground or a receiving team player prior to being eligible for a kicking team recovery. The rule has always been this way and always will be this way until and unless it is changed in the future. This is precisely why teams don't use the lob kick method, which is basically a jump-ball pass, for onside kicks, since doing so results in a kick that is the most difficult to legally recover by the kicking team due to the cited recovery exceptions - AR's I, II and V(catch interference based on vicinity, catch interference based on physical contact, first/illegal touching). But indeed, if those Approved Rulings were not cited as recovery exceptions, almost all teams would and should attempt onside kicks using the lob since it would greatly increase the odds of a kicking team player catching the ball.

However, the fact that some want to discuss the mechanics of this play has brought about a vast and sudden increase in selective amnesia and cognitive dissonance in both Alabama and Clemson fans. As for the Bama fans, nothing, including the NCAA releasing a statement saying, "Oops, we F'd up!" would convince them and that's perfectly understandable; and as for the Clemson fans, I think it's a mixed bag of some that just prefer to put the whole game out of their minds and move on and others that consider it to be in poor taste to discuss any aspect of anything at all that didn't go Clemson's way because they consider it dishonorable and entirely about making excuses for the loss.

However, I did indeed state from the very start and multiple times since in numerous replies that I don't think Clemson deserved to win the game, because they had so many chances and opportunities - outplaying Alabama in literally every aspect other than special teams, luck and the scoreboard and that I only wanted to discuss the legality of this specific play with no intentions of creating an excuse thread.

I simply wanted to breakdown this one play and discuss it in detail since it has been flagged specifically for "the ball not touching the ground or a receiving team player first" in the past in many other games. However, the resulting response was more or less me being dog-piled by a bunch of Bama fans bringing the "...here come the excuses LOLZ" and a bunch of Clemson fans spouting the "we lost, get over it!" Although I do wonder if Clemson fans would still feel the same way if they somehow managed to clone Ron Cherry and he and his clones officiated all Clemson games going forward

Anyways dude, I guess they're all just right in the end...might as well get over it. Nobody cares and nobody wants to discuss it with you. All they care about is winning and/or not looking like whiners when they lose even if it turned out to be a game where it was later revealed the refs were paid off or something that flagrant. Winning and losing with pride trumps the truth every time.

UNC got flagged for BS on their onside kick and no one cared to make it right. When it was later pointed out that there was a severe missed targeting hit made against a Clemson player on the same play, the same UNC fans that were crying foul against the refs suddenly developed temporary blindness and still accused the refs of being bought off. But you can't turn back time and the simple reality is no one cares about the truth anymore these days, just winning. And that's not just in football, but also every other aspect of life in our modern society.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

(With Screenshot) Onsides Kick Illegal Procedure by Alabama

Just let it go.***

Re: Just let it go.***

Re: Just let it go.***

Re: Just let it go.***

Re: Just let it go.***

Re: Just let it go.***

Chris Gaines is under rated

The game is over. They won.

Tell That to ESPN ("the Perfect Onsides Kick")

We had other issues that we didn't take care of...

Agreed - Just Tired of Reading About "Perfect" "Legal" Kick***