Kentucky won 45-44! 1 point safety
 

During the 3rd overtime, Kentucky had the ball first, scored a touchdown and had to go for 2. Tennessee player intercepted on his 5, had possession, and fumbled backward into his own end zone. Loose ball was batted and hit the pylon clearly (obvious on multiple angle replay), which is a safety! Score 1 point for Kentucky! The lead 45-38. Tennessee scores a touchdown and has to go for 2. Conversion fails. 45-44, game over.

So either 1-point safeties are not allowed during the 3rd overtime in NCAA, or the refs blew this game, changing the fortunes of several teams. The 1-point safety is definitely allowed in the 2nd overtime, so what gives?

The play did not end in a touchback.

http://www.refstripes.com/forum/inde...24129#msg24129

1 point safety in 3rd Overtime?
 

I do not know what the official ruling was, but it was a safety. The ball clearly hit the pylon. Watch the impact where the ball's rotation accelerates when it makes contact and the pylon recoils. Whether or not rules permit one point to be scored for this in overtime number 3 is my question.

I just found the rule and it says "Beginning with the third extra period, teams scoring a touchdown must attempt a two-point try. A one-point try by Team A (although not illegal) will not score a a point". If you go by this literally, it is something even more odd, since it is "not illegal". It is a score which is awarded 0 points. Rather than a 1-point safety, it is a 0-point safety. It would actually be recorded as a safety but then say, however, due to its occurence in overtime number 3, no points are awarded. Just as if you lined up to kick a field goal for a try in overtime 3+.

But is this sentence meant to include safeties, because this in no way implies that Team B could not score a 1-point safety and win the game on a bizarre change of possession play (such as Team A running backward 97 yards through its own end zone). I would assume that such a play would still end the game.

Anyone want to take a shot at this one? I would think that the idea was for the field goal try to be eliminated only..

You can't see, then, as the ball was clearly outside the pylon. Obvious on live ball and on replay.

Why would you assume the play call would be the same on Tennessee's conversion even if this had been a 1-point safety?

Would you happen to be a fan of one of the team's playing? The one in blue, perhaps? The team that hasn't beaten Tennessee in something like 23 years?

Fine, I disagree, but if it hit pylon, what is the call?
 

Fine, I disagree, but if it hit pylon, what is the call?

No preference for either team.
 

Born and raised in California, never even been to Kentucky. It was a really good game though!

What?
 

Why would it be any different? They would have been down 45-44 and would have still been forced to go for 2 by the rules. Instead of their super play, would the coach have called his super-duper play? Like they were not trying to score in overtime 3 just because they were tied rather than down by one? In both scenarios, a try wins the game (assuming that Tennessee doesn't also somehow score a safety on their try). Of course, the world would have to then end!

What are you on?

How does "a one point try by Team A will not score a point" mean that there's such a thing as a 0-point safety?

And "kick a field goal for a try?" Do you want to rephrase that? It's either a field goal or a try. Not both.

The back judge was just a little too far away from that catch. It was almost over in the corner but he just didn't get over there in time.

The ball appeared to touch the ground, but the receiver had both hands around the ball, it appeared to me. Which, I believe, is the NFL rule, but not the NCAA rule.

2nd Overtime Blocked Kick
 

I will admit up front that I pull for Tennessee. My question concerns the run back of the blocked kick in the 2nd overtime. The end of the play was a personal foul face mask penalty. The referee stated that by rule, the foul was ignored. I am not greatly versed on NCAA overtime rules but this sounds to me like the opportunity for a cheap shot. Any input from the group on the ruling. Thanks.

The R could have chosen his words a little carefully on his announcement. After a change of possession any fouls are automatically cancelled and so are any scores if there are fouls by the scoring team.

I thought about the opp for a cheap shot. I agree. If you grab and pull on the facemask there's a good chance the player with the ball will be tackled. If he scores the game is over so why not do anything you can to avoid the score? That's a heckuva way to think about it but with the rule stated the way it is there's no deterrent.

That is the correct ruling. However, if a cheap shot is deemed to be a flagrant personal foul that player will be disqualified.

Check that: Rule 8.4.a has an EXPRESS exception -- 8.3.3.d.2, which reads: "Live ball fouls penalized as dead ball fouls occurring during the try down are penalized ... from the succeeding spot in extra periods."

A PF face mask is such a foul. Blocks in the back, holding, and even a BBW are declined by rule, but a personal foul penalty is not and would fall under this exception.

Whachoo talkin' bout Willis??

Since when has a PF facemask been a "live ball penalized as a dead ball foul"? It is a live ball foul , penalized as such. Accordingly, if it happens after a COP in extra periods, the penalty is declined by rule.

I don't officiate football and do not know the rules. I just enjoy watching the college games. So if my terminology is incorrect, I apologize in advance.

I did see the facemask penalty in question and thought that it was severely unsporting. If the current rule is that the offending team does not suffer the consequences of the penalty for this, then the NCAA needs to change the rule.
Please note that the Tenn. player who threw the ball away after being tackled on the two point try with the game tied at 44 was flagged for unsporting conduct and that 15-yard penalty was assessed on the following OT possession, which forced Tenn. to start at the 40.

The same should apply with the facemask infraction. The NCAA should not give teams free reign to foul on conversions in this manner.