Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mike L
Put me in the minority, but I thought they actually had a lot of problems.
First the Olshansky thing. "Legal but completely unnecessary". That to me usually generates an unnecessary roughness call. The ball was already spiked, the offense knew it was to be a spike (especially the center), the linemen delays and then dives at Olshansky's knees. Sorry, but I'm flagging that in a second. Olshansky still sits for his reaction, but I don't think you should allow free shots at players knees that are "completely unnecessary" (and it was).
Then we have the problem of where the ball was spotted on the kickoff. Catch made with knees down in the endzone, but the ball is probably at about the 1. The slide continues to the 4 where he is touched. And the ball gets spotted on the 2?
Making an assumption, especially close to the endzone, that the penalty will be accepted rather than take the incomplete and the down?
Letting a snap go off with 2 balls on the field?
Going nose to nose with a player after a penalty call and then hitting them again with a USC?
I guess the way this may be used in a clinic in my opinion might be a little different that the way you think.
|
Did the center even make contact? If not, then what foul are you calling? As far as the 2 balls on the field, that looked bad, but what can you do when both the game clock and play clock are both running.