Even with your interpretation/definition assist, I’m not clear what the refs were thinking on the punt call. Interference applies to when the dude tries to catch it the FIRST time. Once it bounces off his chest the ball is live and he’s live. No one MADE that guy return punts; presumably he AUDITIONED to sit there looking up in the sky w…
Even with your interpretation/definition assist, I’m not clear what the refs were thinking on the punt call. Interference applies to when the dude tries to catch it the FIRST time. Once it bounces off his chest the ball is live and he’s live. No one MADE that guy return punts; presumably he AUDITIONED to sit there looking up in the sky while big guys sprint at him full speed. I cannot tell you who the refs thought interfered with the initial catch cuz there was no one near him.
The TV announcers asked the refers at HT, and reported that the rule allows for the receiving team to recover the ball after it hits the ground, not before. So the rule was still in force after the bounce on the helmet since it had not hit the ground.
Shocked as I was, I think they got this one right, because of that "(Exception: Rule 6-5-1-b)" in the quoted 6-4-1-c.
> b. If a Team B player makes a valid fair catch signal, the unimpeded opportunity to catch a free or scrimmage kick continues if this player muffs the kick and still has an opportunity to complete the catch. If that player (or another Team B player) subsequently catches the kick, the ball belongs to Team B where the player making the signal first touched it. This protection terminates when the kick touches the ground.
The box score has the penalty on Cam Sidney (#20), despite the PA announcement, and Sidney did grab the ball out of the air more-or-less above the waiting Furd player.
That was a Saturday night find for me, trying to understand how even Pac-12 officials could be that wrong. I definitely didn't know that exception when I was booing from section 238.
Still mystified, though, on how Hunter's "failed" try wasn't at least "stands" on review. "Confirmed"?!
After reading Nick's interpretation, it sounds similar to the tag up rule in MLB. Once the player touches the ball, the runner can tag up regardless of if the player catches the ball cleanly or not.
Even with your interpretation/definition assist, I’m not clear what the refs were thinking on the punt call. Interference applies to when the dude tries to catch it the FIRST time. Once it bounces off his chest the ball is live and he’s live. No one MADE that guy return punts; presumably he AUDITIONED to sit there looking up in the sky while big guys sprint at him full speed. I cannot tell you who the refs thought interfered with the initial catch cuz there was no one near him.
The TV announcers asked the refers at HT, and reported that the rule allows for the receiving team to recover the ball after it hits the ground, not before. So the rule was still in force after the bounce on the helmet since it had not hit the ground.
But where is that rule written? Have you seen it?
Shocked as I was, I think they got this one right, because of that "(Exception: Rule 6-5-1-b)" in the quoted 6-4-1-c.
> b. If a Team B player makes a valid fair catch signal, the unimpeded opportunity to catch a free or scrimmage kick continues if this player muffs the kick and still has an opportunity to complete the catch. If that player (or another Team B player) subsequently catches the kick, the ball belongs to Team B where the player making the signal first touched it. This protection terminates when the kick touches the ground.
The box score has the penalty on Cam Sidney (#20), despite the PA announcement, and Sidney did grab the ball out of the air more-or-less above the waiting Furd player.
…something here about blind squirrels…
Ok, so I admit I didn't research it myself and just relied on the quoted rule in the article.
Thanks for the 6-5-1-b exception which i thought about but didn't look up myself.
That was a Saturday night find for me, trying to understand how even Pac-12 officials could be that wrong. I definitely didn't know that exception when I was booing from section 238.
Still mystified, though, on how Hunter's "failed" try wasn't at least "stands" on review. "Confirmed"?!
and definitely #9 McMorris was not near him.
After reading Nick's interpretation, it sounds similar to the tag up rule in MLB. Once the player touches the ball, the runner can tag up regardless of if the player catches the ball cleanly or not.