Is it just me or did the refs try to steal that game?

Donate To GopherHole
B

btowngopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
7,712
Reaction score
3,992
Points
113
What was the deal with that last punt??? In the replay it looked like it brushed his leg, the player reacted like he felt he touched it, the entire stadium went dead silent, the anouncer just kept saying oh my god, oh my god, oh my god. And the refs just blow it dead for a touch back and don't even review it? That was unbelievable!
 

And no i'm not blaming the refs for the game being close, I realize we didn't play well. I'm just talking about that one play.
 

Once the whistle blew it was no longer a play that could be reviewed. He should have never blown his whistle and then allowed it to go to replay. The big part of it would have been what the ruling was on the field. He ruled it was not touched, which with one replay looked right, but either way he calls it replay is probably not conclusive.

At the end of the day, the refs did not affect the outcome.
 

My opinion was a good number of calls went the Gophers way last night. Hageman got away with a horse collar tackle, they got a hitting the qb penalty that was ticky tack, etc. So I think we should count ourselves lucky the way the officiating went. And as far as the punt goes, even if the guy touched it, it still went out the back of the end zone (or at least it appeared to), which would lead to a touch back.
 

Sparlimb said:
My opinion was a good number of calls went the Gophers way last night. Hageman got away with a horse collar tackle, they got a hitting the qb penalty that was ticky tack, etc. So I think we should count ourselves lucky the way the officiating went. And as far as the punt goes, even if the guy touched it, it still went out the back of the end zone (or at least it appeared to), which would lead to a touch back.
Click to expand...

You're right that the Gophers got a ton of breaks. If the UNLV guy touched the punt and it went out of the back of the end zone, it's a touchback, but possesion would be awarded to the Gophers at that point. At least that's how I understand the rule.
 


Breakin' The Plane said:
You're right that the Gophers got a ton of breaks. If the UNLV guy touched the punt and it went out of the back of the end zone, it's a touchback, but possesion would be awarded to the Gophers at that point. At least that's how I understand the rule.
Click to expand...
Why would the Gophers get the ball? I think the difference is if it the UNLV player had possession and then lost it out the end of his end zone, it would have been a safety. But if all he did was touch it on the way by, that would make it a live ball, Gophs could land on it in the endzone for a td, but if it goes out the back then UNLV gets it at the 20. I could be wrong as well though...
 

There were terrible calls on both sides of the ball. Officiating was very questionable last night. That said, we got the W, and the terrible calls went both ways. So, I'm over it.
 

Sparlimb said:
And as far as the punt goes, even if the guy touched it, it still went out the back of the end zone (or at least it appeared to), which would lead to a touch back.
Click to expand...

Not a safety?
 

It seems nobody knows what the ruling would have been. Maybe refs didn't either and called it the way the knew how? lol
 



afurry91 said:
It seems nobody knows what the ruling would have been. Maybe refs didn't either and called it the way the knew how? lol
Click to expand...

If it is muffed and Gophers fall on it, it is Gopher's ball at the spot. If in the endzone, touchdown. If UNLV falls on it, it is their ball at the recovery spot, if in the endzone, touchback. The force of the kick put the ball in the endzone.

If it is caught and then fumbled the Gophers can recover or scoop and run. If UNLV recovers in the endzone or it goes out the back of the endzone, it is a safety.

Based on the ruling that it was not touched, and it went out the endzone, it was called properly. Problem is the official should have never blown his whistle and let it play out, so replay would have been an option. Whistle killed the whole play.
 

Sparlimb said:
My opinion was a good number of calls went the Gophers way last night. Hageman got away with a horse collar tackle, they got a hitting the qb penalty that was ticky tack, etc. So I think we should count ourselves lucky the way the officiating went. And as far as the punt goes, even if the guy touched it, it still went out the back of the end zone (or at least it appeared to), which would lead to a touch back.
Click to expand...

Hageman did not horse collar him if you watch the replay and we had an equally lame roughing call on a hit on UNLV's QB, so I'd say that's a scratch.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
If it is muffed and Gophers fall on it, it is Gopher's ball at the spot. If in the endzone, touchdown. If UNLV falls on it, it is their ball at the recovery spot, if in the endzone, touchback. The force of the kick put the ball in the endzone.

If it is caught and then fumbled the Gophers can recover or scoop and run. If UNLV recovers in the endzone or it goes out the back of the endzone, it is a safety.

Based on the ruling that it was not touched, and it went out the endzone, it was called properly. Problem is the official should have never blown his whistle and let it play out, so replay would have been an option. Whistle killed the whole play.
Click to expand...
So for arguement's sake, let's say he did touch it and then it went out the back of the endzone. Is that a safety? I think I'm confusing the rule with a case where the offensive player has the ball poked out from behind or fumbles it forward and it goes through the back of the endzone before the offensive player breaks the plane. In that case, the ball goes to the defense at the 20. Wasn't there a play like that with Tinsley against Purdue a couple of years ago?
 

If I remember correctly, the ref called a touchback as soon as the ball crossed the goal line, not when it went out of the endzone. Which I would think means he felt it was never touched.
 



Breakin' The Plane said:
So for arguement's sake, let's say he did touch it and then it went out the back of the endzone. Is that a safety? I think I'm confusing the rule with a case where the offensive player has the ball poked out from behind or fumbles it forward and it goes through the back of the endzone before the offensive player breaks the plane. In that case, the ball goes to the defense at the 20. Wasn't there a play like that with Tinsley against Purdue a couple of years ago?
Click to expand...

The difference is if he had posession ever or not. But muffed punt out of end zone means touch back as far as I can remember.
 

Lamonte Edwards touched a punt....

gophers had their breaks to. edwards for some stupid reason touched a unlv punt.
 

3399 said:
gophers had their breaks to. edwards for some stupid reason touched a unlv punt.
Click to expand...
You're right, but it sure looked like he was basically pushed into it by a UNLV player. I don't know if that's legal or not, but you could see Kill give him an earful, as he had no business being anywhere near that ball.
 

When I first watched it I was screaming at the TV because there is absolutely no reason to get near the football at that point. H5owever on the replay, it looked like he was being pushed into it from 5 yards away, which I'm pretty sure isn't legal. Just next time, please stay FAR away from it.
 

It is a confusing play, here are my questions/understandings about it.
1) Is it instantly a touchback when it hits the endzone IF the returner touched it?
2) If it is still live in the endzone and the returning team forces it out then it's a touchback from my understanding.
3) If it is still live and the punting team forces it out it is a safety I believe.
 

They did call UNLV for a disconserting defense, which was nice.
 

btowngopher said:
It is a confusing play, here are my questions/understandings about it.
1) Is it instantly a touchback when it hits the endzone IF the returner touched it?
2) If it is still live in the endzone and the returning team forces it out then it's a touchback from my understanding.
3) If it is still live and the punting team forces it out it is a safety I believe.
Click to expand...

1) No. If he touched it, it is a muffed punt and MN can recover. Can't recall whether it is pro or college, but it is possible the punting team would only gain posession at the point the punt was muffed (can't pick it up and go). That rule has changed over the years.
2) I believe if either team forces it out it is a touchback since no one had possession.
3) I believe it is only a safety if the receiving team ever had posession of the ball, which he did not last night.
 

The whistle blew as soon as it hit the endzone though correct? Which was a really bad call by the refs, I can't imagine watching that play live and thinking he didn't touch it somehow. The whole stadium thought he touched it.
 

I believe it would have been called a safety if it had been touched. At the point when the ball is touched it is an open scramble for either team to recover it but technically still UNLV's possession, just like a fumble. The rules of the game don't allow for a player to recover a ball outside the end zone, and return back into the endzone. I believe this play should have been ruled a safety, as I refuse to believe that the ball traveled through the returners hands and legs without being touched at all.
 

I would have to agree that we benefited from the majority of the refs calls last night.
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8_scPiq_Zc



Its a touchback. I'm under the assumption that he touched the ball but the UNLV player never had possession of the football. If we could have recovered it yes it would have been a touchdown.

The ref is wrong for blowing the whistle when he did. Unless of course the ball never touched the returner.
 

paulser21 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8_scPiq_Zc



Its a touchback. I'm under the assumption that he touched the ball but the UNLV player never had possession of the football. If we could have recovered it yes it would have been a touchdown.

The ref is wrong for blowing the whistle when he did. Unless of course the ball never touched the returner.
Click to expand...

No. When the ball is touched by a returner, that is a possession. This is why the kicking team is then eligible to recover the ball, just like a fumble. In lesser terms, would a returner be able to catch the ball within the five yards line, turn, and toss the ball out of the back of the end zone for a touchback? The answer to this riddle is "no".
 

stocker08 said:
No. When the ball is touched by a returner, that is a possession. This is why the kicking team is then eligible to recover the ball, just like a fumble. In lesser terms, would a returner be able to catch the ball within the five yards line, turn, and toss the ball out of the back of the end zone for a touchback? The answer to this riddle is "no".
Click to expand...

Maybe so, but there is a difference between a muff and established possession. This whole scenario just confused me.
 

GopherInPittsburgh said:
Maybe so, but there is a difference between a muff and established possession. This whole scenario just confused me.
Click to expand...

I agree. However, the way that I interpret the rules, when the ball is touched by the returner on a punt, possession transfers from the punting team to the returning team.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom