The last int

This forum is for Football related topics only. Other topics will be moved to the appropriate forum.
YouEssYou
Posts: 1475
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 7:54 am
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 173 times

The last int

Post by YouEssYou » October 17th, 2021, 7:50 am

Was anyone else surprised by the result of the review on that? He was clearly down when the ball came out. Seemed pretty clear from multiple angles and yet the mighty mwc officials get it wrong. Maybe it didn't matter in the big scheme of things but them having the ball close to midfield with 10 seconds left would've at least given them a chance. If the shoe was on the other foot (which it send like it usually is with these reviews) I'm sure we'd all be upset.
These users thanked the author YouEssYou for the post:
BLUERUFiO



Elkaggie
Posts: 5600
Joined: August 26th, 2011, 5:21 pm
Has thanked: 196 times
Been thanked: 1136 times

Re: The last int

Post by Elkaggie » October 17th, 2021, 7:54 am

YouEssYou wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 7:50 am
Was anyone else surprised by the result of the review on that? He was clearly down when the ball came out. Seemed pretty clear from multiple angles and yet the mighty mwc officials get it wrong. Maybe it didn't matter in the big scheme of things but them having the ball close to midfield with 10 seconds left would've at least given them a chance. If the shoe was on the other foot (which it send like it usually is with these reviews) I'm sure we'd all be upset.
Couldn’t agree more. Maybe I don’t understand the rule but he took 3-4 steps after the catch and was on the ground when the ball came loose. In the YBU game we did the same thing and it almost cost us a FG. If they would have called it a catch they wouldn’t have had time to run the FG unit on the field.
These users thanked the author Elkaggie for the post:
MrBiggle



gomretat
Posts: 1152
Joined: November 27th, 2013, 10:16 am
Has thanked: 357 times
Been thanked: 307 times

Re: The last int

Post by gomretat » October 17th, 2021, 8:04 am

We were at the game and every review on the large screen at the stadium it looked like a catch and then down to me. I was surprised they didn't let the Rebs keep the ball.



NVAggie
SJSU Ultimate Loser Award Winner - Given to someone that should probably give up but won't.
Posts: 23328
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:09 am
Location: Where the sagebrush grows!
Has thanked: 1400 times
Been thanked: 3128 times

Re: The last int

Post by NVAggie » October 17th, 2021, 8:07 am

Yup, I was shocked that it wasn’t overturned.



User avatar
brownjeans
Flatulent
Posts: 18612
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am
Has thanked: 951 times
Been thanked: 1739 times

Re: The last int

Post by brownjeans » October 17th, 2021, 8:08 am

It was a catch and he was down. Blown call.



User avatar
CaptainChaos
Posts: 1566
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:58 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: The last int

Post by CaptainChaos » October 17th, 2021, 8:10 am

Was it actually ruled an INT? If so, that might be the main reason it was such a tough call. I think had it been ruled a fumble the receiver is obviously down. Weird call in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



User avatar
brownjeans
Flatulent
Posts: 18612
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 10:21 am
Has thanked: 951 times
Been thanked: 1739 times

Re: The last int

Post by brownjeans » October 17th, 2021, 8:15 am

CaptainChaos wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:10 am
Was it actually ruled an INT? If so, that might be the main reason it was such a tough call. I think had it been ruled a fumble the receiver is obviously down. Weird call in my opinion.
Yeah, they ruled he never had everything needed to call it a catch. So he can't be ruled down, and since the ball didn't touch the ground, it's a live ball, picked by Bond.

I think it was clearly a catch and he was down, but that's me.
These users thanked the author brownjeans for the post:
cval



Imakeitrain
Posts: 13966
Joined: March 11th, 2011, 9:12 pm
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Re: The last int

Post by Imakeitrain » October 17th, 2021, 8:17 am

The question isn't whether he was down, the question is did he secure the ball sufficient enough prior to going down that he didn't need to secure the ball through the ground. If he made the catch then he's down. If he was in the process of making the catch then he has to control the ball "throughout the process of contracting the ground".
These users thanked the author Imakeitrain for the post (total 3):
AngusAgAhbye3rdGenAggie



CastIronAggie
Posts: 114
Joined: December 12th, 2018, 2:00 pm
Has thanked: 358 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: The last int

Post by CastIronAggie » October 17th, 2021, 8:26 am

I think the implication of the call was that had USU not caught the ball, it would have been ruled an incomplete pass. I'm not sure the rules in college today, but at one point in the NFL you had to complete the catch all the way through to the ground without it popping out at the end. They had big controversy over it for a few years.



User avatar
CaptainChaos
Posts: 1566
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:58 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 378 times

The last int

Post by CaptainChaos » October 17th, 2021, 8:30 am

brownjeans wrote:
CaptainChaos wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:10 am
Was it actually ruled an INT? If so, that might be the main reason it was such a tough call. I think had it been ruled a fumble the receiver is obviously down. Weird call in my opinion.
Yeah, they ruled he never had everything needed to call it a catch. So he can't be ruled down, and since the ball didn't touch the ground, it's a live ball, picked by Bond.

I think it was clearly a catch and he was down, but that's me.
I agree- it was a blown call. USU has had their fair share of crap calls over he years. They still would have needed another 25 yards and a field goal with their 3rd string qb running the hurry up. I still don’t think it would have mattered.

UNLV fans should be more concerned with why they abandoned the run game on us. The run game was clearly working and they had the lead and the ball multiple times late in the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



hvaggie
Posts: 310
Joined: August 3rd, 2014, 3:59 pm
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: The last int

Post by hvaggie » October 17th, 2021, 8:31 am

They were down 4. Field goal wouldn't have done them any good. They needed a touchdown
These users thanked the author hvaggie for the post (total 3):
MrBiggleaggies22bluegrouse



Bybs25
Posts: 535
Joined: September 22nd, 2012, 6:37 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 117 times

Re: The last int

Post by Bybs25 » October 17th, 2021, 8:48 am

In order to be a catch it has to be secured throughout the catch. If no one was there it would have been ruled an incomplete pass. He didn't secure the catch through the ground. Same thing if he made the catch then hits the ground and a moment later the ball pops out. Incomplete pass. He was still in the process of the catch so it was either an incomplete pass by pass break up or an interception. Could never be a fumble because he never finished the catch and made a football move.

Sent from my LG-G710 using Tapatalk

These users thanked the author Bybs25 for the post (total 2):
3rdGenAggieImakeitrain



Elkaggie
Posts: 5600
Joined: August 26th, 2011, 5:21 pm
Has thanked: 196 times
Been thanked: 1136 times

Re: The last int

Post by Elkaggie » October 17th, 2021, 8:52 am

Bybs25 wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:48 am
In order to be a catch it has to be secured throughout the catch. If no one was there it would have been ruled an incomplete pass. He didn't secure the catch through the ground. Same thing if he made the catch then hits the ground and a moment later the ball pops out. Incomplete pass. He was still in the process of the catch so it was either an incomplete pass by pass break up or an interception. Could never be a fumble because he never finished the catch and made a football move.

Sent from my LG-G710 using Tapatalk
What constitutes a football move? He took 4 steps after the catch and then fell on his behind and rolled over to his backside before it was jarred loose.
These users thanked the author Elkaggie for the post:
BLUERUFiO



aggies22
Aggie Insider, Pick'em Champ - '18 Kickoff, '19 Weekly
Posts: 19233
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 8:17 pm
Location: Smithfield, Utah
Has thanked: 23202 times
Been thanked: 14831 times
Contact:

Re: The last int

Post by aggies22 » October 17th, 2021, 9:14 am

hvaggie wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:31 am
They were down 4. Field goal wouldn't have done them any good. They needed a touchdown
I was wondering when someone was going to point that out!



User avatar
tkmad
Posts: 1294
Joined: December 7th, 2010, 7:23 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: The last int

Post by tkmad » October 17th, 2021, 9:22 am

Would have got them close enough for a hail mary, potentially.

I was also really surprised that they overturned the call and gave McGriff the catch. I thought he probably caught it but in TV, never saw an angle that gave a great view of it.

Happy that for once calls went the Aggie's way



User avatar
Blue Sage
Posts: 1251
Joined: January 28th, 2015, 6:24 pm
Has thanked: 754 times
Been thanked: 672 times

Re: The last int

Post by Blue Sage » October 17th, 2021, 9:33 am

Elkaggie wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:52 am
Bybs25 wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:48 am
In order to be a catch it has to be secured throughout the catch. If no one was there it would have been ruled an incomplete pass. He didn't secure the catch through the ground. Same thing if he made the catch then hits the ground and a moment later the ball pops out. Incomplete pass. He was still in the process of the catch so it was either an incomplete pass by pass break up or an interception. Could never be a fumble because he never finished the catch and made a football move.

Sent from my LG-G710 using Tapatalk
What constitutes a football move? He took 4 steps after the catch and then fell on his behind and rolled over to his backside before it was jarred loose.
After watching the footage the officials CONFIRMED the call. They saw why you did and clearly came to a different conclusion because he didn’t control the ball to the ground. The rules have gotten pretty tricky lately but it was the right call. Doesn’t mean fans have to like it but it was right same goes with the targeting call. I didn’t like it but it was right. I don’t like how granular things are getting. It’s like you have to have a Lawyer to understand some of these new rules. Enough already!


#hornsup!

aggiesdotcom
Posts: 1982
Joined: January 21st, 2011, 8:56 am
Has thanked: 247 times
Been thanked: 300 times

Re: The last int

Post by aggiesdotcom » October 17th, 2021, 9:45 am

It was not a check swing.
These users thanked the author aggiesdotcom for the post:
apo



coolag
Posts: 2397
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 10:10 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 762 times

Re: The last int

Post by coolag » October 17th, 2021, 9:50 am

The call was right. Not that hard to understand peeps.


Regulator of Class

Aggieforlife
Posts: 660
Joined: September 1st, 2015, 5:12 pm
Has thanked: 26 times
Been thanked: 53 times

Re: The last int

Post by Aggieforlife » October 17th, 2021, 10:25 am

Is there a good replay of this play anywhere? I only saw it a couple times on the big board in the stadium.



User avatar
GeoAg
Moderator
Posts: 8566
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 1:09 am
Has thanked: 292 times
Been thanked: 1691 times

Re: The last int

Post by GeoAg » October 17th, 2021, 10:26 am

coolag wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 9:50 am
The call was right. Not that hard to understand peeps.
This ^^^^^

Less sure about the other 2 reviews that went our way.


"You guys have sacrificed in ways you've never sacrificed before. You've given more. You expect more...Tonight is our opportunity to write the story of who this family, who this program, who this team will be" -Coach Blake Anderson

swordsman1989
Posts: 1562
Joined: December 26th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 542 times

Re: The last int

Post by swordsman1989 » October 17th, 2021, 10:49 am

coolag wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 9:50 am
The call was right. Not that hard to understand peeps.
Please explain for those of us that watched the numerous replays which clearly showed him down. Even the announcers were surprised at the result of the review.



HomeTown
Posts: 351
Joined: December 8th, 2018, 10:07 am
Location: Logan, Utah
Has thanked: 129 times
Been thanked: 186 times

Re: The last int

Post by HomeTown » October 17th, 2021, 11:19 am

The refs "confirmed" the call as an interception. They didn't just let the call stand, which can only mean he hadn't completed the catch enough to be called down. If the Aggies had not been there to rip it out and he had held on through the ground it would have been a catch, but he didn't and so it was ruled an interception. It would have been ruled a fumble if he had completed the catch, instead of an interception, but he would then have been down instead of the fumble. That's the explanation. Whether or not it was a completed catch is another issue all together.
These users thanked the author HomeTown for the post:
Aggie19



cval
Posts: 2166
Joined: December 10th, 2010, 1:32 pm
Has thanked: 705 times
Been thanked: 746 times

Re: The last int

Post by cval » October 17th, 2021, 11:22 am

It is explained clearly several times in this thread. If we had not caught it it would have been incomplete, not a catch then down. That is what they called and confirmed.
These users thanked the author cval for the post:
CastIronAggie



Bybs25
Posts: 535
Joined: September 22nd, 2012, 6:37 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 117 times

Re: The last int

Post by Bybs25 » October 17th, 2021, 11:39 am

Yes really easy. It was either an interception or incomplete pass no other options.

Sent from my LG-G710 using Tapatalk




User avatar
CaptainChaos
Posts: 1566
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:58 am
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: The last int

Post by CaptainChaos » October 17th, 2021, 11:59 am

swordsman1989 wrote:
coolag wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 9:50 am
The call was right. Not that hard to understand peeps.
Please explain for those of us that watched the numerous replays which clearly showed him down. Even the announcers were surprised at the result of the review.
I thought the one announcer was pretty homerish, but I was also confused by the call. I do see how the rules may interpret it the way they did especially with it being an interception and not a fumble. The announcers should have done a better job of providing unbiased explanations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



coolag
Posts: 2397
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 10:10 pm
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 762 times

Re: The last int

Post by coolag » October 17th, 2021, 1:04 pm

HomeTown wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 11:19 am
The refs "confirmed" the call as an interception. They didn't just let the call stand, which can only mean he hadn't completed the catch enough to be called down. If the Aggies had not been there to rip it out and he had held on through the ground it would have been a catch, but he didn't and so it was ruled an interception. It would have been ruled a fumble if he had completed the catch, instead of an interception, but he would then have been down instead of the fumble. That's the explanation. Whether or not it was a completed catch is another issue all together.
∆∆∆∆
Here's your explanation.


Regulator of Class

hvaggie
Posts: 310
Joined: August 3rd, 2014, 3:59 pm
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 136 times

Re: The last int

Post by hvaggie » October 17th, 2021, 1:57 pm

My initial thought was that UNLV challenged the call of an interception. Would it have resulted in a different call if they would have challenged the player was down before the ball came loose? Do the replay officials only look at what is being challenged or the entirety of the play?



dirtnsnow
Posts: 988
Joined: August 26th, 2011, 11:54 pm
Has thanked: 272 times
Been thanked: 584 times

Re: The last int

Post by dirtnsnow » October 17th, 2021, 2:31 pm

I thought it was a catch, and he was down. I was thinking the only way they confirm the call is if they saw the ball moving or starting to come out before he went down.


Aggies All the Way!

User avatar
AGNUMPI
Posts: 1684
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:41 pm
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 262 times

Re: The last int

Post by AGNUMPI » October 17th, 2021, 2:55 pm

Imakeitrain wrote:
October 17th, 2021, 8:17 am
The question isn't whether he was down, the question is did he secure the ball sufficient enough prior to going down that he didn't need to secure the ball through the ground. If he made the catch then he's down. If he was in the process of making the catch then he has to control the ball "throughout the process of contracting the ground".
I think this is the key here.


"Be there. Get crazy. Go Aggies!" - Matt 'Fafner' Sonnenberg

User avatar
AGNUMPI
Posts: 1684
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:41 pm
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 262 times

Re: The last int

Post by AGNUMPI » October 17th, 2021, 3:09 pm

Hard to tell if it was the right call or not, but if he had control of the ball he was moving it around a lot and that didn't help his cause. It's hard to tell from the replay that I'm watching, but when our boy Gilliam gets his hand on the ball it looks like it is breaking loose and their guy brings his other hand over to secure the ball because he knows it is going to get knocked out. Considering the call on the field, I think it was the right call.


"Be there. Get crazy. Go Aggies!" - Matt 'Fafner' Sonnenberg

User avatar
3rdGenAggie
Pick'em Champ - '16 Kickoff
Posts: 12303
Joined: November 3rd, 2010, 11:53 pm
Location: The City of the Salty Lake
Has thanked: 3955 times
Been thanked: 2283 times

Re: The last int

Post by 3rdGenAggie » October 17th, 2021, 4:59 pm

Catches get ruled incomplete all the time because the ball pops out after a knee or hip hits the ground. That's what I chalked that call up to.
These users thanked the author 3rdGenAggie for the post:
brossp24


"I have no idea what I'm doing, but I know I'm doing it really, really well." -Andy Dwyer

SLB
Posts: 12435
Joined: November 3rd, 2016, 8:47 pm
Has thanked: 1186 times
Been thanked: 2226 times

Re: The last int

Post by SLB » October 18th, 2021, 1:04 am

My take that the call makes no difference in reality since time was getting close to 0 seconds with UNLV zero offense. It is long overdue to have a questionable call go our way. It was the funniest INT that I have seen (it looked like something from a comedy).
These users thanked the author SLB for the post:
3rdGenAggie



Imakeitrain
Posts: 13966
Joined: March 11th, 2011, 9:12 pm
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1884 times

Re: The last int

Post by Imakeitrain » October 18th, 2021, 6:54 am

From unlv’s perspective it is a very big call. Yes they needed a touchdown but you can’t score a touchdown if you don’t have the ball, with seconds left and no timeouts remaining.

With the ball it’s “so you’re telling me there’s a chance”



Coloraggie
Posts: 2645
Joined: November 5th, 2010, 10:09 am
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 697 times

Re: The last int

Post by Coloraggie » October 18th, 2021, 9:27 am

SLB wrote:
October 18th, 2021, 1:04 am
My take that the call makes no difference in reality since time was getting close to 0 seconds with UNLV zero offense. It is long overdue to have a questionable call go our way. It was the funniest INT that I have seen (it looked like something from a comedy).
I give credit to Bond on that INT. Look at the replay, Bond is in on the tackle of the receiver and as a result goes down to the ground. Rather than lay there and think he's done his job, he jumps up and is there just in time to dive for the INT. Great hustle by Bond. I know the ball hitting the ground would have given us the ball farther up the field but if he is willing to hustle on a play like that at the end of the game I know he is working hard the entire game.



Locked Previous topicNext topic