invalid fair catch signal

Donate To GopherHole

swede2 said:
South Dakota State/Southern Illinois has a not dissimilar play today. SIU returner waived a shoulder height back arm waive (intending fair catch) as he retreated to field a punt kicked over his head. He fielded the ball, stopped, and two SDSU gunners pulled up, looked to the ref, no whistles, so then preceded to tackle the returner. Then were flagged for P.I. Bizarre sequence.
Click to expand...
Pass interference?
 

MaxyJR1 said:
It’s a reviewable play by rule. There is no flag or yardage. It just comes back to where they possess the ball.
Click to expand...
Correct. In 2021, paragraph g was added to the definition of reviewable kick plays to cover the play in question. This also assumes that "fair catch signal" in the definition of reviewable plays includes an invalid fair catch signal, which is a reasonable assumption, but perhaps not crystal clear.

ARTICLE 4. Reviewable plays involving kicks include:
a. Touching of a kick.
b. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball.
c. Kicking team player advancing a ball after a potential muffed kick/ fumble by the receiving team.
d. Scrimmage kick crossing the neutral zone.
e. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch the ball on an on-side kick.
f. A player touching or recovering a kick or loose ball who is or has been out of bounds during the kick.
g. Receiving team advancing after a fair catch signal.


​
 

The following is from "Hawk Central" publication:

"Here is what the NCAA rule book says about invalid fair-catch signals, with an example given: “While a free kick is in the air, (a player) gives a waving signal that does not meet all the requirements of a valid fair-catch signal. The ball is caught by (that player). RULING: The ball is dead when caught.”

My question...why was the play not whistled dead??? DeJean was out in the open. His waving was obvious whether intentional or not, yet no whistle from the back judge.
 

BigTenGuy said:
Correct. In 2021, paragraph g was added to the definition of reviewable kick plays to cover the play in question. This also assumes that "fair catch signal" in the definition of reviewable plays includes an invalid fair catch signal, which is a reasonable assumption, but perhaps not crystal clear.

ARTICLE 4. Reviewable plays involving kicks include:
a. Touching of a kick.
b. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball.
c. Kicking team player advancing a ball after a potential muffed kick/ fumble by the receiving team.
d. Scrimmage kick crossing the neutral zone.
e. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch the ball on an on-side kick.
f. A player touching or recovering a kick or loose ball who is or has been out of bounds during the kick.
g. Receiving team advancing after a fair catch signal.


​
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that rule was added after another controversial punt return where the gunners thought the returner waved. Interesting.
 


Tully55 said:
The following is from "Hawk Central" publication:

"Here is what the NCAA rule book says about invalid fair-catch signals, with an example given: “While a free kick is in the air, (a player) gives a waving signal that does not meet all the requirements of a valid fair-catch signal. The ball is caught by (that player). RULING: The ball is dead when caught.”

My question...why was the play not whistled dead??? DeJean was out in the open. His waving was obvious whether intentional or not, yet no whistle from the back judge.
Click to expand...
Because it wasn't and they reviewed it.

That's what reviews are for.
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Because it wasn't and they reviewed it.

That's what reviews are for.
Click to expand...
Duh....my question refers to what was the ref watching. Its his job to watch the play as it develops, which includes whether or not he should blow the play dead. Also the review was initially whether or not DeJean stepped outof bounds, not whether or not there was a fair catch. They just happened to catch the invalid fair catch.
 




MplsGopher said:
Have you ever seen this called in a game before?

I didn't even know this was a rule before today. Suspect a lot of people are the same.
Click to expand...
It's because it rarely happens that the returner tries to advance the ball. I have seen it called several times, albeit over a couple decades.
 

Yeah, fair point.

Or maybe if/when he does try to advance it, the competent ref crew knows it right away and blows the whistle as soon as he touches the punt.
 


Tully55 said:
Duh....my question refers to what was the ref watching. Its his job to watch the play as it develops, which includes whether or not he should blow the play dead. Also the review was initially whether or not DeJean stepped outof bounds, not whether or not there was a fair catch. They just happened to catch the invalid fair catch.
Click to expand...
Watching blocking and maybe not entirely sure how much if any waving was going on maybe?

Who knows.

One issue is that an invalid fair catch signal can start with valid movement. It’s not like a false start where it is any movement.


I get how a ref might struggle to make the call immediately.
 



A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Watching blocking and maybe not entirely sure how much if any waving was going on maybe?

Who knows.

One issue is that an invalid fair catch signal can start with valid movement. It’s not like a false start where it is any movement.


I get how a ref might struggle to make the call immediately.
Click to expand...
I think there are refs who are taking advantage of the replay process now to avoid getting caught with a bad call. In this case, I can see a ref thinking I will let this go even if he thinks the fair catch signal was given as he knows all scoring plays are reviewed. Then let the replay officials make the call and avoid getting hung out to dry if you blow it dead and then it gets analyzed after the fact and they say you made a bad call.
 

99Gopher said:
I think there are refs who are taking advantage of the replay process now to avoid getting caught with a bad call. In this case, I can see a ref thinking I will let this go even if he thinks the fair catch signal was given as he knows all scoring plays are reviewed. Then let the replay officials make the call and avoid getting hung out to dry if you blow it dead and then it gets analyzed after the fact and they say you made a bad call.
Click to expand...
I dunno , refs missed calls before instant replay too…
 

Ope3 said:
If I was looking at it from a Hawkeye perspective, I would be miffed that if was an obvious fair catch signal then it should have been blown dead right away.

Letting the play go leaving it subject for review is a terrible look. Would suck to have an injury result of that.

For Iowa fans, I am shedding a tear. Crocodile tears.
Click to expand...

Well the refs have been told to let plays go and then review. So that's what they did. And as a fan I prefer that. Let the fumble pickup and return go before you decide the runner was down.
 

Sparlimb said:
Well the refs have been told to let plays go and then review. So that's what they did. And as a fan I prefer that. Let the fumble pickup and return go before you decide the runner was down.
Click to expand...
I dislike "letting plays go" process.

- No guarantee there's a good camera angle for a clear overturn. What if this was on BTN instead of NBC with a much better production crew?
- To many reviews as it is.
- Increased injury risk.

I'm more of a fan of "get it right the first time", in a perfect world.

However, "better late than never" can also be true.
 

99Gopher said:
I think there are refs who are taking advantage of the replay process now to avoid getting caught with a bad call. In this case, I can see a ref thinking I will let this go even if he thinks the fair catch signal was given as he knows all scoring plays are reviewed. Then let the replay officials make the call and avoid getting hung out to dry if you blow it dead and then it gets analyzed after the fact and they say you made a bad call.
Click to expand...
How would the ref know in advance it would be a scoring play before attempting the return? Just getting to FG range would be just as damaging.
 

99Gopher said:
I think there are refs who are taking advantage of the replay process now to avoid getting caught with a bad call. In this case, I can see a ref thinking I will let this go even if he thinks the fair catch signal was given as he knows all scoring plays are reviewed. Then let the replay officials make the call and avoid getting hung out to dry if you blow it dead and then it gets analyzed after the fact and they say you made a bad call.
Click to expand...
He knew he was going to score?
 


A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
Somewhat related, it is reviewable regardless of the score.
Click to expand...
Ok, that's different. I would still prefer the refs get it right on the field, but perfection is highly improbable.
 

60's Guy said:
I don't think it was called live action? It came up in the scoring review.
Click to expand...
I'm glad for the scoring review. I can see the arm movements as waving off others for the fair catch. The thing is his pointing distracted people from seeing the motions. Essentially Dejean was doing two things at once to throw off the Gopher punt coverage and he forgot about how that affected the play.

The people who claim it is overlooked (wink wink) forget that the punt returner is usually wrapped up quickly so the ball being dead isn't an issue. The returner is not advancing the ball significantly (one or two feet) beyond the point where the ball is touched, so it becomes moot in regards to spotting the ball.
 

No matter what ..... that spin move on the first would-be Gopher tackler was pretty nifty.

Just mashing the circle button.
 


Panthadad2 said:
Also, if they can review that, why couldn't they review the bad call on illegal contact on Nubin earlier in the game?
Click to expand...
I believe the rule in college is that when you signal a fair catch, which Cheater DeJean did, you must give them one yard to field the ball.
If the cheater didn’t reach out and contact Nubin, they probably call nothing. Probably a smart move to initiate contact to show he was too close.
 

I was pretty impressed on some of the solo tackles our D had today on some of their running plays.

Feel like those were missed tackles for bigger gains against Wisc. Obviously the really huge play.


Devon Williams looked pretty good, against the run. I think where our younger LB's have struggled moreso is covering the pass?
 

ergopher said:
The simple reality of the situation is that if he did not wave for a fair catch he would have been tackled instead and the play would not have happened. The TD happened because Gopher special teams assumed he was going to play by the rules and not run.
Click to expand...
Yep. He did that to get the defender to stop and they did. Then he took advantage of it.
 

howeda7 said:
Yep. He did that to get the defender to stop and they did. Then he took advantage of it.
Click to expand...

They almost definitely had that planned out. Because really.....what's the downside for Iowa? Ball is dead where it's fielded regardless. Ferentz had an absolute shit eating grin on afterwards....like a plan worked out.
 


Tully55 said:
Duh....my question refers to what was the ref watching. It’s his job to watch the play as it develops, which includes whether or not he should blow the play dead. Also the review was initially whether or not DeJean stepped outof bounds, not whether or not there was a fair catch. They just happened to catch the invalid fair catch.
Click to expand...
We don’t know why it was reviewed. Could have been for the exact thing they called.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom