re: the onside kick

quote:

---

So, the photo shows that the officials weren't able to make such a call.

---

Good Lord!

You are honestly trying to claim that both the Linesman and the Field Judge managed to position themselves on an onsides kick in a way they had no vision of that play?
You think that claim is somehow exonerating?
Really?

How about this . . . THE SEC OFFICIALS DID NOT KNOW THE RULES!

Importantly, though I'm not a Miles fan, CLEARLY LES DID KNOW THE RULES!
. . . and he had coached his team accordingly.
The conversation he had with the officials on the sideline during the video review confirmed that.
Give the Devil his due.

It was a very good onsides kick. LSU played it perfectly. UNC did not. That is a fact seemingly lost amongst all the negatigers here.
It should not be.

quote:

---

On how he interpreted the onside kick ruling...
"I talked to the head of officials in the SEC, Rogers Redding, and he said frankly you cannot block anyone in advance of the ball. Anybody that would contact somebody in advance of the ball has created a foul. It's irrespective of the 40-yard line. In other words, if (Alfred) Blue steps across the 40-yard line to make the reception on the kick, then he is protected because you still cannot block in advance of the ball, and you still cannot contact a guy until the ball has gone 10 yards, so we are in a position where we should be able to field the ball certainly until we get possession without interference. In review, the officials are given a responsibility not to apparently create flags and throw flags from a reviewed look, and I think that was really the position that was taken. They reviewed it, and they really could not overturn the call on the field."

---

No thanks. This is a quote from Les Miles. I need something directly from Rogers Redding.

Surely if it was so egregious you could produce that, right?

-YTC

quote:

---

You are citing to Rule 6-4-1-a, which is a clearly a limitation on Rule 6-4-1, not Rule 6-1-2-g. In other words, the phrase "this protection" in Rule 6-4-1-a refers to the protection afforded by rule 6-4-1. Now, look at the language of Rule 6-4-1 itself, which defines the scope of the protection:

"A player of the receiving team within the boundary lines attempting
to catch a kick, and so located that he could have caught a free kick or a scrimmage
kick that is beyond the neutral zone, must be given an unimpeded opportunity to
catch the kick."

BY its own terms, 6-4-1 refers to players who are attempting to catch a kick "beyond the neutral zone." All 6-4-1-a is stating is that if a player is waiting to catch a kick BEYOND THE NUETRAL ZONE and the kick has already hit the ground, then the defense can hit the awaiting receiver.

(I assume that nuetral zone here refers to the ten yard buffer between the teams.)

However, the rule is entirely silent as to players who are in the nuetral zone. In such a case, where a player is IN the neutral zone, you have to apply Rule 6-1-2-g, which says that you can't block anyone until the ball reaches ten yards or hits someone, etc.

---

Anyone that doesn't understand this is either stupid or is just trying to frick with everyone.....err 777

quote:

---

No. Cpt is wrong. UNC can not block a player until the ball has traveled 10 yards or touched an LSU Player. Cpt would have be correct if Blue had stayed beyond the neutral zone AND the ball had traveled ten yards or touched an LSU player first. Then the protection would have been off.

---

From my last post in response to the same question:

"No. Had he stayed beyond the neutral zone then he could have been hit because the ball had already touched the ground and the protection of 6-4-1 no longer applied. See my post above.

Reading the provisions together, the rule appears to be this: If the ball goes ten yards and somewhere in its path hits the ground, you can crush receiving team players. If the ball hasn't gone ten yards (or touched a receiving team player), you can't block/hammer receiving team players."

Jax and I have independently reached the same interpretation of 6-4-1-a. It applies to 6-4-1, which by its terms protects players beyond the neutral zone. It didn't apply to our onsides and it doesn't abrogate or supercede or even affect rule 6-1.

I think our interpretation is correct.

Maybe him and tigerfan55555 can go study bump and run together?

quote:

---

SURE. The SEC is real big on admitting officiating mistakes in public

---

It happened twice just last season.

LSU-Georgia and Arkansas-Florida

By all means, continue on with your conspiracy theories though.

-YTC

quote:

---

how are you arguing after the reading the rules?

Are you really that fricking stupid?

---

Yes, yes he is.

quote:

---

ive heard that once the ball touches the ground, everything is fair game.

---

Doesn't the ball touch the ground immediately off the tee? Doesn't make sense.

quote:

---

Tell you what. You go with Rogers Redding. I'll go with the officials at the field.

---

do you mean the same officials on the field who never blew this play dead when Ron Brooks had his entire foot on the line AND the ball broke the plane of the end zone by three yards, and then when they did blow the play dead, signaled that it was LSUs ball?

are those the officials you're siding with?