so correct me if im wrong

[mick2]

But isn't intentional grounding in the endzone considered a safety?

how in the world was that not game over?

memories of last year were starting to creep into my head after that, and you gotta think if the tables were turned and that was crist throwing at his linemens feet in the endzone, they would have called it.

any way we won and i dont have to take a trip to the big east's headquarters this week, so Go Irish!!!

 

[bornready85]

Terrible no-call but I'm not surprised. It seems like the other team has 9 lives when playing a close game vs ND.

 

[Bubba]

The fact is, there was a RB in the vicinity. The rule sucks the way it is written, but the call was correct. He did intend to ground the ball, that was obvious. Until they change the rule, the offense will always get away with this.

 

[mick2]

this is the kinda stuff the rules committee or whatever need to be concerned with, also the floyd td they called back was highway robbery. quit worrying about player celebration and get some competent refs

 

[NeuteredDoomer]

The fact is, there was a RB in the vicinity. The rule sucks the way it is written, but the call was correct. He did intend to ground the ball, that was obvious. Until they change the rule, the offense will always get away with this.

The FACT is, if ND was the one on offense, refs would have had the flags ready and called it a safety before the ball hit the ground.

 

[bornready85]

The fact is, there was a RB in the vicinity. The rule sucks the way it is written, but the call was correct. He did intend to ground the ball, that was obvious. Until they change the rule, the offense will always get away with this.

The way it was written by the NFL rule books(not sure about college)...that was DEFINITELY intentional grounding.

NFL Rules Digest: Intentional Grounding of Forward Pass

this is the kinda stuff the rules committee or whatever need to be concerned with, also the floyd td they called back was highway robbery.

I've gone back and forth with this one. I do believe this was probably the correct call...the problem is that it's almost NEVER enforced. I could make an argument that MSU committed offensive pass interferance on their fake FG play if this was the case.

 

[ARALOU]

I would just say that I was trying to stop the clock. Intentional grounding is too open to interpretation. I hate the rule. I saw two plays where the QB threw the ball away and the rusher got penalized for roughing the passer on ticky tack hits. It is footbal for pete's sake. The D-Lineman doesn't know the ball is gone if the qb had it when he grabbed him.

 

[lookingdeadred]

Simple

Simple

they ruled it was a legally thrown (incomplete) pass because it was thrown in the direction of the RB.

But isn't intentional grounding in the endzone considered a safety?

how in the world was that not game over?

memories of last year were starting to creep into my head after that, and you gotta think if the tables were turned and that was crist throwing at his linemens feet in the endzone, they would have called it.

any way we won and i dont have to take a trip to the big east's headquarters this week, so Go Irish!!!

 

[lookingdeadred]

If you mean Riddick's pick

If you mean Riddick's pick

that was the right call. Riddick went out of his way to pick off the defender. He will need to learn to do it more surreptitiously.

this is the kinda stuff the rules committee or whatever need to be concerned with, also the floyd td they called back was highway robbery. quit worrying about player celebration and get some competent refs

 

[TDHeysus]

they ruled it was a legally thrown (incomplete) pass because it was thrown in the direction of the RB.

it can even be thrown in the direction of a receiver, but the rule says that if the ball is thrown to avoid a sack, its a penalty. i thought it was clearly a penalty, he threw the ball in the direction of a reciever to avoid a sack. it was a bad no call. its as close call, but a penalty nonetheless

 

[GoingGreen]

He was avoiding a sack, and the running back was blocking. Seems like a penalty to me.

 

[lookingdeadred]

I thought it should have been a penalty and a safety, too

I thought it should have been a penalty and a safety, too

as he was clearly throwing it to the ground to avoid the sack. But I was saying the only possible explanation for the no call was there was an eligible receiver in the area.

it can even be thrown in the direction of a receiver, but the rule says that if the ball is thrown to avoid a sack, its a penalty. i thought it was clearly a penalty, he threw the ball in the direction of a reciever to avoid a sack. it was a bad no call. its as close call, but a penalty nonetheless

 

[phgreek]

because as everyone knows all the refs are out to get ND. Get a grip, folks.

I have a perfect grip...Are the refs out to get anyone...who the hell knows. I will say there seems to be an inordinate amount of calls, and no calls that were called previously in the same game at pivotal points in ND games ...you'd have to have been wearing a blindfold during ND games, and not watching any other college football games to miss this stuff.

I don't whine about it much...it is what it is...not going to change. I was raised to expect the refs to make the wrong call...and to never leave a game in their hands...so no excuses...but I also have eyes and a damned brain...and so far, both aposable thumbs, which enables thet grip you mention...

whats worse than a conspiracy theorist is a sheep dude...don't assume just because a guy puts the stripes on that he has a halo...

 

[Jason Pham]

Folks,
Posts were deleted because they were off-topic and bordered upon becoming personally charged attacks. You guys know better than to do that. Cool it.
Jason