FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[OzJohnnie]

Ok, I'm enjoying wasting this time on a Friday morning, even if I do have some important work to do.

As to the no delay of game penalty, it looks like SJU3 took two meaningful steps and was in the midst of a third stutter step when he pulled up.  Clearly, the whistle had been immediately blown.  As I said, there was no contact beyond UWW81 reaching out in a half-hearted arm tackle.  A whistle had been blown upon catch and play was dead.  Why no five-yard delay of game penalty for advancing the ball two-and-a-half steps?  Perhaps because the catching player had no mens rea, stopped immediately upon hearing the whistle and it's really nitpicking to claim a foul there.  I had to rewind and watch the play three times to make sure I was counting the steps correctly.

Also, the 25-yard line is meaningless for interpreting the validity of the catch.   It's simply the touchback line on a kickoff.  Any fair catch on a kickoff inside the 25 is placed on the 25.  Any fair catch outside the 25 is placed at the point of the catch.

Lastly, in defence of the reffing crew, the radio guys mentioned once or twice that this was a playoff crew that had been brought in for this game.  They had last called the national semi-final if memory serves.

EDIT:

One last interesting point I found when reading the NCAA rules on touchbacks for a kickoff (can be found here: http://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4648-2022-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx).  The receiving team can choose anywhere they want between the hashes on the 25-yard line.  The ref places the ball in the middle but they can have it anywhere.  If they don't tell the ref before he calls to play on and starts the 25-second clock, however, then they need to call a timeout to move the ball where they want it.  Who knew?

[SJU13]

I didn't have 'counting the number of steps after a fair catch' on my football watching bingo card. Might have to explain to the folks around me why I'm screaming for a delay of game penalty.

[RoyalsFan]

Ok, if  he only took 2 or 3 steps then that would explain no penalty. Sure seemed like he took more than 2 steps, but as you said, our memories aren't the best the older we get. Ok, I'm satisfied.

[OzJohnnie]

More important topic:

Any news on Roste?  Fingers crossed it's just sprain or uncomfortable bruising.

[faunch]

More important topic:

Any news on Roste?  Fingers crossed it's just sprain or uncomfortable bruising.

I watched the Roste video and think he initially injured his arm a few plays earlier. On the video it looked like he was favoring his right hand/arm after his first run (around the 12 minute mark...VOD on the BU site). On the second run a couple plays later he get hit and as he's going down it looked like he did not want to land on his left hand or arm and just fell in a clump.

[sju56321]

I know I'm way late of this but had a great time last Saturday at the game and tailgating with usual suspects, section 105, Veek, TDT, finsleft, and Veek Senior and Dusty. Thanks again Duff for the seats!
Looking for improvement tomorrow in the run game and I think a less stressful victory-this team is really good.

[84SJU]

When the MIAC and WIAC square off, where are the officials from?

[art76]

More important topic:

Any news on Roste?  Fingers crossed it's just sprain or uncomfortable bruising.

So, straight from Coach J's mouth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofyfvUHk2HA

"I joked with him when I knew he was going to be relatively ok..." at around the 3:20 mark sounds promising, but doubtful for this week at Platteville - but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

[hazzben]

More important topic:

Any news on Roste?  Fingers crossed it's just sprain or uncomfortable bruising.

His non-throwing arm was amputated on Monday and he was fitted for his prosthetic (with hook for hand) on Tuesday. Not sure if he'll play against UWP, but word is he will be allowed to wear the hook, as long as the tip is covered by a cork* during game play.

*no word on if said cork was taken from a non-alcoholic bottle of wine, given Roste is 30 and Bethel's updated rules, probably just a standard wine cork is my assumption.

[hazzben]

When the MIAC and WIAC square off, where are the officials from?

I think for regular season games, the home team's conference supplies the officials.

[art76]

More important topic:

Any news on Roste?  Fingers crossed it's just sprain or uncomfortable bruising.

His non-throwing arm was amputated on Monday and he was fitted for his prosthetic (with hook for hand) on Tuesday. Not sure if he'll play against UWP, but word is he will be allowed to wear the hook, as long as the tip is covered by a cork* during game play.

*no word on if said cork was taken from a non-alcoholic bottle of wine, given Roste is 30 and Bethel's updated rules, probably just a standard wine cork is my assumption.

+K - hilarious!

[Ice Bear]

More important topic:

Any news on Roste?  Fingers crossed it's just sprain or uncomfortable bruising.

His non-throwing arm was amputated on Monday and he was fitted for his prosthetic (with hook for hand) on Tuesday. Not sure if he'll play against UWP, but word is he will be allowed to wear the hook, as long as the tip is covered by a cork* during game play.

*no word on if said cork was taken from a non-alcoholic bottle of wine, given Roste is 30 and Bethel's updated rules, probably just a standard wine cork is my assumption.

Ice Bear says his inside sources have told him that the Royals and Pioneers are currently in a week long legal battle in regards to the cork. Ice's sources fed him a quote from a closed door legal meeting where Royal representatives stated very clearly, "what kind of weak ass **** goes on in Pioneer land? You're telling me after losing to Tech in week one those ****ers are afraid of a little sharpened hook?" At that point Pioneer representation abruptly left the meeting. Ice hasn't heard anything since.

Ice Bear says paws crossed there will be no enforcement of "the cork" rule come Saturday.

[Pat Coleman]

Am I getting the right?  This whole conversation is going on and no one has reviewed the tape?

It's not available on the portal anymore.

You answered your own question.

[repete]

Looking beyond faircatchgate, weren't archived FB games previously archived for those who paid the subscription?

[bleedpurple]

You're quite tenacious about a potential no-call that had no impact on the outcome of the game.

I thought I explained why earlier. I just want to know why it was ruled the way it was. I like to know what the rules are. It has absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of the game. Others here must also want to know. This looks like the refs really didn't understand the fair catch rule.

Same reason I have been interested in this! I got the clarification last night from Coach Bullis. When I heard the "25 yard line" from the referee, he was talking about the placement of the ball, not where the ball was caught. The reason a penalty was not called was because the deep returner signaled the fair catch and the up back caught the ball. The up back had no way of knowing the deep receiver had signaled a fair catch because he was behind him. So the play was blown dead, but no penalty was assessed. Seems like a reasonable outcome. Sorry about the confusion. At least it gave us one more thing to talk about to get us to Saturday!