Louisville @ ND, Rich's video request #1

[JetMetFan]

Sorry. Getting to these as fast as I can what with work, games and...what's that thing? Oh yeah, sleep getting in the way

6:54 second half. Fifth foul on ND player

[maven]

What a nut cutter! Did R5 go straight up and W45 back up into him? Or was R5 on W45 before he backed up?

Usually you'd see this go the other way...

[Raymond]

That's a call I would make. W45 backed into airborne R5. It was inadvertent but most fouls are. I err in favor of protecting airborne players.

[Red_Killian]

I think this is the correct call.

[Johnny Ringo]

I like the call. However, could you have called RED #44 with a push?

[Tio]

The real foul is on Gold #22 who made no attempt to block out #5. That would have cleaned up the whole mess.

Tough play...

[Camron Rust]

I think The Beatles wrote a song about this play.

[kk13]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

I like the call. However, could you have called RED #44 with a push?

I'm with Johnny on this one!

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by kk13

I'm with Johnny on this one!

I also think this would have been the better call although I think the official got it right if you had to choose between R5 and W45.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

I like the call. However, could you have called RED #44 with a push?

Especially with the positioning and look the lead has on the play. There's definitely a forearm across the chest of the ND player, but can't really tell if it was enough to cause that much displacement. Again, the official has the perfect look, gotta trust it.

[Rich]

I liked the call, personally, but I can see why everyone (that is the other team and the announcers) wouldn't like it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BLydic

Especially with the positioning and look the lead has on the play. There's definitely a forearm across the chest of the ND player, but can't really tell if it was enough to cause that much displacement. Again, the official has the perfect look, gotta trust it.

If you're going to look at that, you also need to look at the reverse...what that ND player (#45) was doing as well. I wouldn't exactly call him the victim in that situation with #44. He was behind #44 when the ball was up on the rim and used his arms to reverse the positions....all before the forearm from #44. Not really enough for a foul in my book but no less than was #45 did either.

[OKREF]

Louisville 44 pushes Notre dame 45 back into Louisville 21. Don't know the lead didn't see that shove.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Wisconsin 44 pushes Notre dame 45 back into Wisconsin 21. Don't know the lead didn't see that shove.

Louisville, dude, Louisville.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If you're going to look at that, you also need to look at the reverse...what that ND player (#45) was doing as well. I wouldn't exactly call him the victim in that situation with #44. He was behind #44 when the ball was up on the rim and used his arms to reverse the positions....all before the forearm from #44. Not really enough for a foul in my book but no less than was #45 did either.

I agree, probably wasn't clear that I liked the call made in the video and was only responding to a specific address of the ND player getting pushed. While there may be a push, forearm in the chest, there's no doubt a whistle was needed on #45 for the undercut IMO.

Again, any questioning of the call would be highly difficult with the look the lead had on the play.