‘23 Recruiting Forum: Official Florida Pregame/Game Thread

[volfaninpa]

The Austin Peay refs would have let it go as they let a couple go in that game.

It's the constant inconsistencies by the refs that's maddening to me. I know they are human and mistakes will be made, but there's too much $$$ involved in all these games now for the refs to be so shoddy.

As some have said, making them full-time would help a lot. Also, I wish coaches could challenge bad or missed calls. Let them use the challenge flag for botched calls too and if the coach is correct, they keep the challenge flag. If they are wrong, they lose it until the next half.

At least try something different.

 

[Smokey123]

The Austin Peay refs would have let it go as they let a couple go in that game.

It's the constant inconsistencies by the refs that's maddening to me. I know they are human and mistakes will be made, but there's too much $$$ involved in all these games now for the refs to be so shoddy.

As some have said, making them full-time would help a lot. Also, I wish coaches could challenge bad or missed calls. Let them use the challenge flag for botched calls too and if the coach is correct, they keep the challenge flag. If they are wrong, they lose it until the next half.

At least try something different.

PI is reviewable in the NFL now… I’ve yet to see it actually reviewed. As someone who doesn’t like to blame refs, it seems like they’re getting worse in all 3 sports especially football and baseball

 

[knoxvol52]

PI is reviewable in the NFL now… I’ve yet to see it actually reviewed. As someone who doesn’t like to blame refs, it seems like they’re getting worse in all 3 sports especially football and baseball

Professional officiating is way better than collegiate...baseball in MLB is about to go to the computerized strike zone which will solve that problem...

 

[Smokey123]

Professional officiating is way better than collegiate...baseball in MLB is about to go to the computerized strike zone which will solve that problem...

There’s an average of 80 missed calls during a day full of MLB games. That’s awful

 

[JCVol00]

This is why it was a foul…

It is a foul if a player initiates a block when his path is toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder.

While it may not appear to be forceful to some, he went after him with his shoulder/forearm. As I’ve said, it’s an extremely borderline call per the rules and I hate it. Some of the best hits I ever had playing were crack back blocks. But that is what the ref said caused the penalty, a forearm/shoulder strike to the upper body per my friend.

Dawg, the commentators and the former ref they have on as a rule’s expert all disagreed with the call

 

[RikidyBones]

Dawg, the commentators and the former ref they have on as a rule’s expert all disagreed with the call

He's a gator fan so he will pound the table for them.

 

[jave36]

I guess my question is what is he supposed to do, let the defender go? How can that block be made in the defenders field of view?

Not arguing with your point, we all agree it was an awful call, I just don’t know how our defender was supposed to make the block. It’s almost as if the official decided that the only way it isn’t a flag is to just let the defender make the tackle.

Arms out is always allowed. Lead with hands and it's never a penalty. But really he did nothing wrong. It was an atrocious call because it was nowhere near violent enough to be a foul.

 

[Orange.]

Arms out is always allowed. Lead with hands and it's never a penalty. But really he did nothing wrong. It was an atrocious call because it was nowhere near violent enough to be a foul.

Probably cost us a touchdown.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

This is why it was a foul…

It is a foul if a player initiates a block when his path is toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder.

While it may not appear to be forceful to some, he went after him with his shoulder/forearm. As I’ve said, it’s an extremely borderline call per the rules and I hate it. Some of the best hits I ever had playing were crack back blocks. But that is what the ref said caused the penalty, a forearm/shoulder strike to the upper body per my friend.

He accepted more force than he gave. He got to the spot in time for the defender to have his feet on either side of Castles at point of contact. No way he was not in the defenders range of vision before the contact. It was a football play with I THINK implied required levels of force similar to the commingled ruling from the book with targeting since the word is in THE rule itself. THE FACT HE TOSSED 34 Out of the way and continued pursuit is telling as well.

 

[UT_Tix79]

The hit jerked his head about 90 degrees, watch the clip, that’s why it was called, it looked worse than it was. There’s a reason he’s looking into the defenders ear hole, and it’s because the hit forced his neck to turn 90 degrees from where he was looking (at the player with the ball)

I hate the call, it’s a terrible call for the defense. As a defender you look for those hits to light the player up. But that’s why it was called, because of the jerk to the head from the hit.

Look at the position of his body, and then look at the position of his head and neck. That’s 100% of the reason for the call.

Herbie said during the broadcast, that’s a terrible call, and then they showed the slow motion and he said, well it looks much worse there, but I still don’t like the call.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

This is why it was a foul…

It is a foul if a player initiates a block when his path is toward or parallel to his own end line and makes forcible contact to his opponent with his helmet, forearm, or shoulder.

While it may not appear to be forceful to some, he went after him with his shoulder/forearm. As I’ve said, it’s an extremely borderline call per the rules and I hate it. Some of the best hits I ever had playing were crack back blocks. But that is what the ref said caused the penalty, a forearm/shoulder strike to the upper body per my friend.

One last MAIN Ruling right from the book...

Blind-Side Block—ARTICLE 18 Approved Ruling 9-1-18I.

B44 intercepts the pass of A12 at the B-20 and turns back up-field on thereturn. During the return, B21 approaches A88 at midfield from the blind side and blocks A88 (a) with extended hands; (b) with a screen type block; (c) by attacking with forcible contact with his shoulder into the chest of A88; (d) by attacking with forcible contact with the shoulder into the head of A88. B44 returns the pass to the A-20. RULING: (a) No foul. (b) No foul. (c) Personal Foul, blind-side block, 15-yard penalty from the spot of the foul. (d) Personal Foul, Blind-Side Block with Targeting, 15-yard penalty from the spot of the foul and B21 is disqualified.

a is not applicable`
b closer to a screen type block than c
c requires forceable contact with a shoulder not a forearm by your side.
d not applicable

Once again look at my previous screen shot in #3115 and you will see the initial contact was Castles right arm, not shoulder, at his side to the defenders number area. In fact his elbow is in contact with the defenders elbow. NO POSSIBLE WAY TO CALL THAT FORCIBLE CONTACT. The force is being brought by the defender's momentum not 34 which makes this more a screen by rule. Also had to be in field of vision since he was directly between ball carrier and the defender and blow up the screen shot to see all of this. It fails rule compliance on two fronts.

Anybody got more applicable rules and rulings and pics? If not case closed.

 

[UT_Tix79]

The referee said he called the penalty because he saw the head snap. Which to him was forcible contact to the head. Should it have been a penalty? It’s a complete judgment call. Just like pass interference. They got away with several during the game, and so did we. Any of them could have been called, And one side would have complained.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

The referee said he called the penalty because he saw the head snap. Which to him was forcible contact to the head. Should it have been a penalty? It’s a complete judgment call. Just like pass interference. They got away with several during the game, and so did we. Any of them could have been called, And one side would have complained.

The rules and rulings don't cover that. That is why they write them down.

here is the REAL rule from my moments ago down loaded 23 rule book.

Blind-Side BlockARTICLE 7. A blind-side block is an open field block against an opponent that is initiated from outside the opponent’s field of vision, or otherwise in such a manner that the opponent cannot reasonably defend themselves against the block.

He did a great job of defending himself by shedding the block and pursuing the ball carrier. Ref should have used the rule. The block was not initiated before the first contact and he could not avoid seeing Castles per any view of the replay you would like to employ. He blew the call unless you got some more rules to add. Quit trying to make up excuses for the guy. You ever see another one like this get called when the blocker is totally inside the frame of the defender? There is no requirement to give them one or two steps like it is written down in the basketball rule book for charge block. If your in his face at time of contact it is not blindside for that reason.

 

[Grey_pilgrim]

If Joe had the right pocket presents to climb the pocket when pressure was there and then take off, he’d be so dangerous.

You look at him and know that he won’t and it just pisses you off.

Mmmhhhh pocket presents…