Alabama 12, Tennessee 10 (final)

[matt_thatsme]

I personally think that even if UT did get to re-kick 15 yards closer then the FG gets blocked again. Alabama was getting a ton of penetration and that kicker was horrible. Of course that is complete speculation.

 

[Gatorubet]

You can call me a whiner all you want, but the fact of the matter is is that the SEC definitely cheats more than the other conferences, what is the streak at now?

OK. You're a whiner.

20 years in a row with at least one team on some sort of NCAA probation? But hey, maybe that 20 years of cheating has finally paid off, you guys are finally relevant in college football as an entire conference ever since the 2000's, before that what did you have... Bama?

A winning SEC Post-season Bowl record over your fine institution, if I recall correctly. I am surprised that you slow pitched that one at me. :p

I am not going into the storied history of the SEC over the decades MSJ, as your mindset show that you will neither note or care what I say. Suffice it to say that there were teams outside of your own storied conference prior to 2000 that the rest of the nation recognized as possessing talented squads, skilled coaches, and many fine traditions. While I hope you beat the Hawkeyes, if they remain undefeated, and we do too, I hope we can meet for the crystal and keep USC as an observer.

I am not going to assist in hijacking this thread beyond this post, so I will PM you after your reply.

 

[Gatorubet]

No, the play has to be over. It's like the clock going to 0:00 while a guy is running for a TD - the game isn't over at 0:00, it's over when the play is over.

BTW, do you have the rule that says the ball is dead when a blocked kick crosses the line - even if it went over the line, the ball is still live until it's downed or blown dead by the refs - since the blocking team has a chance to run it back, I don't believe that ball's dead immediately.

I've seen discussion on SEC boards that say that since Bama recovered it, and the helmet removal is a 'dead ball' foul by rule (according to them), that even if the penalty was called it would have been Bama ball. I'm not convinced that's true, either, since the helmet came off before the ball was recovered, and before the play was blown dead, it seems like it should be a 15-yard penalty with an untimed down for Tennessee to me.

The ball is dead when it crosses the neutral area in a scrimmage kick and comes to rest - although there is some question that "an attempt" to gain possession could make it a live ball, but I do not know if and how it applies to a kick blocked by the non-kicking team and that crosses the neutral area. I do think that a helmet penalty is treated as a dead ball foul and assessed at the next play, which would be a Bama possession

 

[Nutriaitch]

as i much as i would have love for them redneck pricks (both teams) to lose, the helmet was a non issue.
removing the helmet was a non-issue.
according to SEC officials:

"That is, if it happens on a play where time does not expire then the penalty is enforced on the following play. However since the clock ran out on that play, then there is no next play, so there is no penalty to mark off."

but, if I was Tennessee's AD, I would fire Kiffen 1st thing Sunday morning, then re-hire him Monday afternoon just so I could fire him again that evening.

it is inexcusable that exactly ZERO UT players even made an attempt at recovering that ball.
Even if the ref eventually rules that the ball was dead, you at least gotta make an attempt at picking that thing up and running to the endzone.

That lack of effort, awareness, and intelligence is a phucking joke.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

That's pure conspiracy theory, Kiffin's acting like he wasn't going to run a play in the last 30 seconds to make the FG shorter because he was afraid the SEC refs would call a phantom holding penalty or something, in order to help ensure the Bama-Florida undefeated matchup later in the year.

He deserved to be fined/warned for those comments.

I don't know which is worse......that he said that or if he actually believes it.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

as i much as i would have love for them redneck pricks (both teams) to lose, the helmet was a non issue.
removing the helmet was a non-issue.
according to SEC officials:


but, if I was Tennessee's AD, I would fire Kiffen 1st thing Sunday morning, then re-hire him Monday afternoon just so I could fire him again that evening.

it is inexcusable that exactly ZERO UT players even made an attempt at recovering that ball.
Even if the ref eventually rules that the ball was dead, you at least gotta make an attempt at picking that thing up and running to the endzone.

That lack of effort, awareness, and intelligence is a phucking joke.

they didn't even know where the ball was.

 

[BB73]

The ball is dead when it crosses the neutral area in a scrimmage kick and comes to rest - although there is some question that "an attempt" to gain possession could make it a live ball, but I do not know if and how it applies to a kick blocked by the non-kicking team and that crosses the neutral area. I do think that a helmet penalty is treated as a dead ball foul and assessed at the next play, which would be a Bama possession

I'll buy the 'comes to rest' across the line of scrimmage as being the end of the play and the game. But I believe the helmet was removed before the ball stopped moving. It seems odd that the SEC officials say that it would be a 'dead ball' penalty that wouldn't matter since Bama recovered the ball, since it happened before the play was over. But that answer helped settle things down.

I've seen the high school youtube from earlier this year, where a kick is blocked, the blocking team ran off to celebrate, and a coach on the sideline (OK, maybe he ran onto the field a little ), got one of the players on the kicking team to pick it up from behind the LOS and run it into the end zone for the game-winner, long after the clock was at zero. The refs did a good job of calling nothing until the TD. Obviously Kiffin should have shown his players that video.

There's another good youtube where a HS team tried a long FG as time expires, which falls way short. The defensive team had two safeties back near the goal line - one of them caught the ball and ran out a few yards before spiking the ball on the field. Somebody on the kicking team picked it up and ran it in for the game-winning TD. That kicked wasn't blocked, so it's not the same play - but it may be something else that Kiffin needs to show to his special teamers.

It happens about 1:35 into this video.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1JpJ53FbXg"]YouTube - WCAX 2609200917590128098 6225726B[/ame]

 

[jlb1705]

How dumb is this helmet rule? What's the reason for it? Player safety? It's not like the offender is putting someone else at risk like other player safety driven penalties. If somebody has to eat thru a straw for the rest of their life because they couldn't figure out that it's a bad idea to take off their helmet on a football field that's not a penalty, that's a Darwin Award.

I think the real reason for this rule is that if somebody did get hurt that way more people might start talking about all of these guys that get three to four years of free college and never figure out how to keep themselves getting their gourd smashed in or shooting themselves in the leg or getting bombed and slamming a Lamborghini into a light pole.

I'm glad it wasn't called. It's fucking stupid.

 

[BB73]

How dumb is this helmet rule? What's the reason for it? Player safety? It's not like the offender is putting someone else at risk like other player safety driven penalties. If somebody has to eat thru a straw for the rest of their life because they couldn't figure out that it's a bad idea to take off their helmet on a football field that's not a penalty, that's a Darwin Award.

I think the real reason for this rule is that if somebody did get hurt that way more people might start talking about all of these guys that get three to four years of free college and never figure out how to keep themselves getting their gourd smashed in or shooting themselves in the leg or getting bombed and slamming a Lamborghini into a light pole.

I'm glad it wasn't called. It's fucking stupid.

It was called on a Cincy player last week. He got to the goal line, the ref signaled TD, and he removed his helmet before he got off the field. Replay showed that he didn't score, he was down on the 1, so Cincy ended up with 1st down on the 16 yard line. They got a TD anyway.

It's to stop players from showboating, I'm OK with the rule. But it apparently needs to be re-written in relation to when it occurs during a live ball on a play that has a potential change of possession.

 

[Gatorubet]

Bill, Rule 9-2-1

Unsportsmanlike Acts
ARTICLE 1. There shall be no unsportsmanlike conduct or any act that interferes with orderly game administration on the part of players, substitutes, coaches, authorized attendants or any other persons subject to the rules, before the game, during the game or between periods. a. Specifically prohibited acts and conduct include: 1. No player, substitute, coach or other person subject to the rules shall use abusive, threatening or obscene language or gestures, or engage in such acts that provoke ill will or are demeaning to an opponent, to game officials or to the image of the game, including but not limited to:
. . .

(f) Removal of a player's helmet before he is in the team area (Exceptions: Team, media or injury timeouts; equipment adjustment; through play; between periods; and during a measurement for a first down).
. . .

If committed while the ball is alive, these fouls are treated as dead-ball fouls.

PENALTY - Dead-ball foul or live-ball foul treated as dead-ball foul. 15 yards [S7 and S27] from the succeeding spot. Flagrant offenders, if players or substitutes, shall be disqualified [S47]. If a player or an identified squad member in uniform commits two unsportsmanlike fouls in the same game, he shall be disqualified.

And in conjunction with Rule 3-3:

Extension of Periods
ARTICLE 3. A period shall be extended until a down (other than a try), free from live-ball fouls not penalized as dead-ball fouls, has been played when:
a. A penalty is accepted for a live-ball foul(s) not penalized as a dead-ball foul that occurs during a down in which time expires (Exception: Rule 10-2-2-g-1) (A.R. 3-2-3-I-VIII).
b. Offsetting fouls occur during a down in which time expires.
c. An inadvertent whistle is sounded or an official signals the ball dead during a down in which time expires.

It was a live ball foul that WAS of a type penalized as a dead ball foul....so no extension of period. Had it been a personal foul or a roughing the kicker or a slap to the head, etc., it would have extended the game as the period would have to be extended until a down free from live ball fouls not treated as dead ball fouls - and those type are not treated as dead ball fouls.

IOW, game over.
​

 

[BB73]

Bill, Rule 9-2-1

And in conjunction with Rule 3-3:

It was a live ball foul that WAS of a type penalized as a dead ball foul....so no extension of period. Had it been a personal foul or a roughing the kicker or a slap to the head, etc., it would have extended the game as the period would have to be extended until a down free from live ball fouls not treated as dead ball fouls - and those type are not treated as dead ball fouls.

IOW, game over.
​

Yes, I saw those rules late yesterday. Poorly written rules, IMO. If a player commits a penalty when the ball is live, and before his team has taken possession of the ball, fairness and common sense would indicate that the penalty should be enforced and an untimed down given.

There is an obscure rule that would have given the ball back to Tennessee if the penalty had occurred within 3 yards of the line of scrimmage (which it didn't, fortunately for Bama and SEC officials). And rule 10-2-2-XXIII says that if Team B (Bama) had committed clipping or holding after the kick block that didn't cross the neutral zone, it would be Team A's (UT's) ball. I don't understand why an unsportsmanlike call that occurs during live play before a change of possession is treated as a post-possession penalty.

I'm not saying the refs screwed up. I'm saying that they probably didn't throw the flag because they didn't want to have another UGA-unsportsmanline situation where a technicality on a a guy celebrating a huge play affected the outcome of the game. The poorly written rule allowed the SEC to justify their no-call after the fact. If they had thrown the flag, and given an untimed play to Tennessee, who kicked a FG, it would be interesting to see how Bama fans would be acting now.

I'm hoping that rule gets changed for next year.

And your posting actual rules works much better than acting like the clock at zero makes a difference during a live play.

 

[Gatorubet]

And your posting actual rules works much better than acting like the clock at zero makes a difference during a live play.

Your mama.

 

[Gatorubet]

I'm not saying the refs screwed up. I'm saying that they probably didn't throw the flag because they didn't want to have another UGA-unsportsmanline situation where a technicality on a a guy celebrating a huge play affected the outcome of the game. The poorly written rule allowed the SEC to justify their no-call after the fact.

They aren't poorly written. They are clear. Now, they might be poorly reasoned, but the rule is the rule, and it was interpreted correctly. When you say that "they probably didn't throw the flag because they didn't want to have another UGA-unsportsmanline situation where a technicality on a a guy celebrating a huge play affected the outcome of the game", you fail to consider that theyprobably didn't throw the flag simply because they knew the rules and applied them correctly.

The wisdom or philosophy of letting the penalty not affect the outcome of the game is entirely a different matter, and the NCAA is the one to look at, not the refs who called it right for a change.

 

[Nutriaitch]

There's another good youtube where a HS team tried a long FG as time expires, which falls way short. The defensive team had two safeties back near the goal line - one of them caught the ball and ran out a few yards before spiking the ball on the field. Somebody on the kicking team picked it up and ran it in for the game-winning TD.

yet another coach that needs to be fired.
why line up the two safeties?

if kick is short, game over, you win.
no need to have anyone field the ball, just let it hit the ground, and you win the game.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

you fail to consider that theyprobably didn't throw the flag simply because they knew the rules and applied them correctly.