What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Why would you facemask the guy when there are three of you there to tackle him?

Oh come on, that's illegal hands to the face, that's not the ball carrier! So it should only be 5 yards!!!
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Jason A said:
That's a good point about Musburger. He decides what the right call is ahead of time, pre-replay (99.9% of the time it's whatever the officials have called). And if the replay agrees with his notion, then it's, "See, folks, that was a great call!" And if the replay disagrees, then it's, "Hey, folks, don't forget that the Ugly Betty season premier is next Friday!"
Click to expand...

Some guys really really wait to judge until they have the replay, they don't want to look like fools if they're wrong.

But a few guys think they are so amazing they can make a snap judgment watching it from the press box before watching the replay.

Musberger is in the latter crowd.
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Jason, did you hear that. He said face mask right away and then watched the replay and actually changed his mind!
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

I think that's not a touchdown, on two points: (1) guy didn't cross the goalline and (2) isn't that a muff, since the returner never had full possession?
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Halftime

Michigan 49
Delaware St. 3

And the game isn't nearly as close as the score indicates.
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Ok...because it was a muffed kick they can't return it?

That makes no sense.

All the rules point to the ball being unable to be advanced if the returner is interfered with catching it or the ball hits the receiver unaware.

But if the guy possesses the ball and then fumbles it, I think the refs blew the call. And I think he did possess it and then fumbled it. The ball can be advanced then.
 
Last edited:
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Brenthoven said:
He had two hands on the ball, it was just a great play by OU.

And this review will be......interesting.
Click to expand...

I guess they got it right in the end.

...and you're right about the play. My first thought was the guy celebrated before getting in the end zone. Hadn't realized it was forced. :o
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Ok, understand the rule now. Got explanation from someone well versed in punt rules. The referees wait for it, wait for it. Made the right call.

6-3. Texas gets on the board with a FG.
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

This is the most lopsided three-point game I've ever seen.:confused:

Texas gets the ball to start the third; OK really needs to score on this drive.
 
Re: College Footbal 2009: Anybody want to be in the Top 5?

Is OU the next BC point-shaving scandal? Are these guys TRYING to lose?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top