KO OOB Play (LSU-FL) Video

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by TXMike

By "what actually happened" do you mean what they ruled and how they handled or do you mean what really happened, regardless of how it was ruled?

I cannot tell you what they ruled because I still do not know why the F had no flag (even though he was the only one who could see ball and feet at the same time). I know what the L ruled and what the R did based on that but have no idea what input, if any, the F had.

I also do not know what views the replay official had. If all he had was what we at home had, there is NO WAY he could "confirm" the call on the field.

We talked about this last night at our college study group and general consensus was this was a valid call. It was so close that ruling he had possession with one foot down and then put the other foot down was being too technical. If he had caught the ball and then took a step to get his other foot out of bounds, then it would have been LSU's ball at the spot.

I think you can make valid arguments either way but I lean toward the call the officials made.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

If he had caught the ball and then took a step to get his other foot out of bounds, then it would have been LSU's ball at the spot.

.

I think that is exactly the right interpretation.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

We talked about this last night at our college study group and general consensus was this was a valid call. It was so close that ruling he had possession with one foot down and then put the other foot down was being too technical. If he had caught the ball and then took a step to get his other foot out of bounds, then it would have been LSU's ball at the spot.

I think you can make valid arguments either way but I lean toward the call the officials made.

So if this was a pass you would rule incompletion as opposed to completion/interception?

The thing that I really do not understand on this specific play is the L, who has absolutely NO view of the ball, making the call over the F who had feet and ball.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by TXMike

So if this was a pass you would rule incompletion as opposed to completion/interception?

The thing that I really do not understand on this specific play is the L, who has absolutely NO view of the ball, making the call over the F who had feet and ball.

It wasn't a pass, it was a free kick. And the position of the ball is irrelevant because the player was ruled out of bounds when he caught the ball.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

It wasn't a pass, it was a free kick. And the position of the ball is irrelevant because the player was ruled out of bounds when he caught the ball.

Are you saying a pass is different than a free kick when it comes to touching and catching it?

What made the player "out of bounds when he caught the ball"?

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by TXMike

Are you saying a pass is different than a free kick when it comes to touching and catching it?

What made the player "out of bounds when he caught the ball"?

I think you need to review the play and listen to the explanation given by Gary Danielson who relayed information supplied to him by an official in the press box. That was pretty clear.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

It was so close that ruling he had possession with one foot down and then put the other foot down was being too technical.

That doesn't make sense to me. With the amount of detail insant replay examines, it would seem that the the technical details in situations such as this matter now more than ever.

[DadofTwins]

This play was similar to one of my favorite "IBM Presents: You Make the Call" segments. They showed a kick returner catching a kickoff while straddling the sideline, then taking off up field. As my dad and I discussed whether the ball should be placed at the 1 (where he caught it) or where he was tackled, the announcer came back from commercial to say it was a kick-off out of bounds and the kicking team re-kicked.

I don't remember whether they specified NFL or NCAA rules, and as a soccer guy I don't know enough of the football rule book to know if it makes a difference.

Does anybody else remember these commercials?

Just me, then?

OK.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by DadofTwins

This play was similar to one of my favorite "IBM Presents: You Make the Call" segments. They showed a kick returner catching a kickoff while straddling the sideline, then taking off up field. As my dad and I discussed whether the ball should be placed at the 1 (where he caught it) or where he was tackled, the announcer came back from commercial to say it was a kick-off out of bounds and the kicking team re-kicked.

I don't remember whether they specified NFL or NCAA rules, and as a soccer guy I don't know enough of the football rule book to know if it makes a difference.

Does anybody else remember these commercials?

Just me, then?

OK.

I remember those commericals. ALCOA was the sponsor and they were in NFL games.

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by TXMike

The thing that I really do not understand on this specific play is the L, who has absolutely NO view of the ball, making the call over the F who had feet and ball.

Originally Posted by jimpiano

It wasn't a pass, it was a free kick. And the position of the ball is irrelevant because the player was ruled out of bounds when he caught the ball.

I think Mike's point is - how can an official who can not see the ball rule on whether the ball was possessed before the player touched out of bounds?

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by waltjp

I think Mike's point is - how can an official who can not see the ball rule on whether the ball was possessed before the player touched out of bounds?

Because catching the ball was irrelevant.
The question was was the ball out of bounds? The official only needed to see the receiving team touch the ball and judge if he was in bounds or out of bounds. His ruling was out of bounds and it was confirmed by replay.

[TXMike]

Originally Posted by jimpiano

Because catching the ball was irrelevant.
The question was was the ball out of bounds? The official only needed to see the receiving team touch the ball and judge if he was in bounds or out of bounds. His ruling was out of bounds and it was confirmed by replay.

And so that official has x-ray vision which allowed him to see through the returner's back to see when he touched the ball?