|
Replies: 15
| visibility 2
|
Legend [6963]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 13911
Joined: 2000
|
Why no 10 second run off in Auburn game?
Sep 24, 2016, 9:40 PM
|
|
I thought if you committed an offensive penalty, you had to take TO or run 10 seconds off
|
|
|
|
 |
Top TigerNet [32451]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 16513
Joined: 2015
|
Re: Why no 10 second run off in Auburn game?
Sep 24, 2016, 9:41 PM
|
|
Lsu didn't have any TO......
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6963]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 13911
Joined: 2000
|
exactly, no TO = game ove, no play***
Sep 24, 2016, 9:43 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12943]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
|
illegal shift is a pre-snap penalty
Sep 24, 2016, 9:43 PM
|
|
all i can think of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3389]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: illegal shift is a pre-snap penalty
Sep 24, 2016, 9:47 PM
|
|
Same thing happened in the Stanford game just before half and the did the runoff.
I am now officially lost on this rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6963]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
Posts: 13911
Joined: 2000
|
well if that is the reason, kind of a dumb rule
Sep 24, 2016, 9:47 PM
[ in reply to illegal shift is a pre-snap penalty ] |
|
The whole point was to prevent a team from being able to stop the clock with no TO. So now just commit an illegal shift and stop the clock. Doesn't make sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Legend [12995]
TigerPulse: 100%
47
Posts: 10521
Joined: 2006
|
Exactly!*********
Sep 24, 2016, 10:14 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [31673]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 37022
Joined: 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [891]
TigerPulse: 92%
23
|
Re: SO is false start
Sep 24, 2016, 9:52 PM
|
|
False start is a dead ball foul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [31673]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 37022
Joined: 2000
|
True.
Sep 24, 2016, 9:56 PM
|
|
I didn't see the end of the game, but if the illegal shift didn't cause the play to be called dead then there is no runoff after the end of the play.
In this case, I'd assume the play in which there was an illegal shift was completed normally, and as such there would be no run off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2408]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8210]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
Posts: 10565
Joined: 2013
|
Re: Why no 10 second run off in Auburn game?
Sep 24, 2016, 9:47 PM
|
|
It's not a dead ball foul.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3456]
TigerPulse: 79%
34
|
Should've been game over.***
Sep 24, 2016, 10:00 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7011]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
It's the SEC!!!!!
Sep 24, 2016, 10:03 PM
|
|
'Splains a lot....
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7011]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
It's the SEC!!!!!
Sep 24, 2016, 10:04 PM
|
|
'Splains a lot....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2408]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: Why no 10 second run off in Auburn game?
Sep 24, 2016, 10:07 PM
|
|
First, Illegal Shift is not a dead ball foul, so the clock correctly continued to run until the play was whistled dead.
Second, I believe there should have been a 10-second run-off, and the game should have ended. I'm not 100% sure on this, but reading the rule and the reason it was instituted in Wikipedia, it appears that the 10-second run-off would have been appropriate.
Third, the Referee clearly announced that the clock would start on his signal. Since the ball could not be snapped prior to the ready for play signal, it was virtually impossible for it to be snapped prior to time expiring.
Fourth, contratulations to Les Miles for, once again, mismanaging the game clock!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 15
| visibility 2
|
|
|
50
