PI in end zone

[upperdeck]

as much as I wanted ND to lose i dont see how that call or the SU one can be called PI by any rule. the SU one was even worse as i dont think Flemming did anything but run a very slow route that did nothing to effect the play. the ND play there was some contact but if you are going to let the defender jamb the WR all over the field by rule then there will be some contact. The pick play is usually called when you effect the route of the DB covering another player.

If you ran that same play and you were the only WR on that side it wouldnt be called ever. if you think back to our ND game, the TE ran that type of play multiple times running down 10 yds and then pushing off the LB to get open. thats much more severe than what happened yesterday.

 

[oldpinepoint]

as much as I wanted ND to lose i dont see how that call or the SU one can be called PI by any rule. the SU one was even worse as i dont think Flemming did anything but run a very slow route that did nothing to effect the play. the ND play there was some contact but if you are going to let the defender jamb the WR all over the field by rule then there will be some contact. The pick play is usually called when you effect the route of the DB covering another player.

If you ran that same play and you were the only WR on that side it wouldnt be called ever. if you think back to our ND game, the TE ran that type of play multiple times running down 10 yds and then pushing off the LB to get open. thats much more severe than what happened yesterday.

The guy was blocking the dude in the end zone, you have to make the call. The receiver was all over the guy, if he had simply run they don't make the call

 

[upperdeck]

who was doing any blocking? you are allowed contact on both sides of the ball. the D was jambing both WR so there will be contact. the inside guy was reacting to the jamb, the outside guy had the DB jump the slant and the FSU DB that covered robinson blew the coverage.

the play ND ran earlier in the game was a penalty not called at all, the WR blocked the DB covering the slot guy and no penalty was called.. much worse.

 

[Upstate]

The guy was blocking the dude in the end zone, you have to make the call. The receiver was all over the guy, if he had simply run they don't make the call

The thing is, he probably would have scored even if the guy didn't block. It was too obvious. BUT, in the SU game, I don't think there was any contact between the SU WR and any of the WF DBs. Which made it really a strange call. He ran his route close to the WF DB, but was far enough away so that they never even touched. Really confusing -- would have liked to get that one back. What it does, though, is just reaffirm the Long-Ish connection and showed how great a throw Long can make. It was a perfect play.

 

[upperdeck]

the SU call was just plain awful. not sure what that ref was looking at. they really need to change the chuck rule on college, perhaps contact at all in the endzone.

 

[Tobias Funke]

who was doing any blocking? you are allowed contact on both sides of the ball. the D was jambing both WR so there will be contact. the inside guy was reacting to the jamb, the outside guy had the DB jump the slant and the FSU DB that covered robinson blew the coverage.

the play ND ran earlier in the game was a penalty not called at all, the WR blocked the DB covering the slot guy and no penalty was called.. much worse.

There were two receivers blocking. The closest guy was not too obvious looked like normal contact. The other legitimately had a locked in block 7 yards off of the line. No question it was the right call. The tough thing is the play was there without the blocks

 

[upperdeck]

There were two receivers blocking. The closest guy was not too obvious looked like normal contact. The other legitimately had a locked in block 7 yards off of the line. No question it was the right call. The tough thing is the play was there without the blocks

i agree both WR ran the play poorly. had they done the correct thing and curl nothing gets called.

 

[Chip]

The whole rule is bizarre and obviously needs a revisit. Defensive PI has more consistency in how it's called and I never thought I'd say that.

Our call was just awful, Flemming ran his route, which was certainly designed to free up the crossing receiver, but he really didn't do anything. How would the ref not be able to tell that it was his defender bumping him? And because the outside WRs defender has to go around that traffic, it's worth a flag? Completely nonsensical.

With ND, it was a little different, but I think FSU was still caught without a defender out there. I think there was a better case in the ND game to call offensive holding. I might have understood that more. The ND player initiated the contact, at least to these eyes.

 

[upperdeck]

The whole rule is bizarre and obviously needs a revisit. Defensive PI has more consistency in how it's called and I never thought I'd say that.

Our call was just awful, Flemming ran his route, which was certainly designed to free up the crossing receiver, but he really didn't do anything. How would the ref not be able to tell that it was his defender bumping him? And because the outside WRs defender has to go around that traffic, it's worth a flag? Completely nonsensical.

With ND, it was a little different, but I think FSU was still caught without a defender out there. I think there was a better case in the ND game to call offensive holding. I might have understood that more. The ND player initiated the contact, at least to these eyes.

if ND just runs the routes with hands down its probably a non call. if you know the play dont put your hands up and take whatever contact the D applies.

 

[ClkWrkOrange]

The whole rule is bizarre and obviously needs a revisit. Defensive PI has more consistency in how it's called and I never thought I'd say that.

Our call was just awful, Flemming ran his route, which was certainly designed to free up the crossing receiver, but he really didn't do anything. How would the ref not be able to tell that it was his defender bumping him? And because the outside WRs defender has to go around that traffic, it's worth a flag? Completely nonsensical.

With ND, it was a little different, but I think FSU was still caught without a defender out there. I think there was a better case in the ND game to call offensive holding. I might have understood that more. The ND player initiated the contact, at least to these eyes.

#20? was straight up blocking from the snap let alone before the ball was thrown.I think the refs might have just gotten the # wrong but there was an obvious penalty.

 

[Full_Rebar]

if ND just runs the routes with hands down its probably a non call. if you know the play dont put your hands up and take whatever contact the D applies.

Agree with this. Even if the FSU initiates contact, the ND WR is grabbing back and making it easy for the refs to call it. It was a great play design and didn't need any kind of blocking. Both WR's just needed to run into the end zone to clear the flat.

 

[upperdeck]

#20? was straight up blocking from the snap let alone before the ball was thrown.I think the refs might have just gotten the # wrong but there was an obvious penalty.

i watched it several times.. you tell me what you would do when the D puts his hands up to chuck you.. as I said , if he was running a single and did the same thing it wouldnt be called. he didnt try to turn the DB just ran straight into him. i think he was creating contact which he is allowed to do.

 

[Full_Rebar]

i watched it several times.. you tell me what you would do when the D puts his hands up to chuck you.. as I said , if he was running a single and did the same thing it wouldnt be called. he didnt try to turn the DB just ran straight into him. i think he was creating contact which he is allowed to do.

The ND player grabbed as well. If he put his arms straight up or down, I don't think he gets called. It's clear that ND was using those guys to pick the defenders from the formation, so I'm sure the refs were watching for it.

 

[Crusty]

Looking at the replay in frame-by-frame, Flemming was backing and turning into the defender. If he had just sat there or continued his route (better) there would have been no penalty. The thing of it is that the rub had already worked by the time Flemming sat down. The official threw the flag pretty quickly. Just a judgment call.

Great throw by AJ by the way.

 

[upperdeck]

The ND player grabbed as well. If he put his arms straight up or down, I don't think he gets called. It's clear that ND was using those guys to pick the defenders from the formation, so I'm sure the refs were watching for it.

yet on the td earlier in the game they didnt call it when the ND Wr picked off the DB.. much worse no call.

 

[Full_Rebar]

I think one of the problems is that when they miss one, the opposing coaches tell the refs they blew it and they end up watching closer for the next one. It was a great game and I would have no problem with a rematch in the playoffs.

 

[ClkWrkOrange]

yet on the td earlier in the game they didnt call it when the ND Wr picked off the DB.. much worse no call.

i watched it several times.. you tell me what you would do when the D puts his hands up to chuck you.. as I said , if he was running a single and did the same thing it wouldnt be called. he didnt try to turn the DB just ran straight into him. i think he was creating contact which he is allowed to do.

 

[upperdeck]

watching it over and over. the DB covering 20 created the contact and clearly hit the WR, thats on the DB and thats the one that people complain about.. the penalty was on WR 7. his route was more of a slant type and you can see the DB jump in front of him.

its a bad call. the earlier one was the pick play not this one. same for flemming. that was a bad call. the db's create the contact they get what they get.

 

[SmilinBob]

I remember when Kelly was at Cincy and they had a bad snap vs SU and a linemen was blocking in the end zone when a pass was thrown by their holder. Clearly pass interference AND ineligible receiver downfield but it wasn't called. Can't feel too sorry for Kelly...nice to see a call against him as it took too long for my revenge!!!!

 

[007]

i watched it several times.. you tell me what you would do when the D puts his hands up to chuck you.. as I said , if he was running a single and did the same thing it wouldnt be called. he didnt try to turn the DB just ran straight into him. i think he was creating contact which he is allowed to do.

It's pretty simple - he is to not allowed to initiate contact when the ball is in the air pass the LOS.

 

[Crusty]

I remember when Kelly was at Cincy and they had a bad snap vs SU and a linemen was blocking in the end zone when a pass was thrown by their holder. Clearly pass interference AND ineligible receiver downfield but it wasn't called. Can't feel too sorry for Kelly...nice to see a call against him as it took too long for my revenge!!!!

Remind me not to get on your bad side!

 

[upperdeck]

I remember when Kelly was at Cincy and they had a bad snap vs SU and a linemen was blocking in the end zone when a pass was thrown by their holder. Clearly pass interference AND ineligible receiver downfield but it wasn't called. Can't feel too sorry for Kelly...nice to see a call against him as it took too long for my revenge!!!!

when you bring that up then i change my mind.. good call

 

[Full_Rebar]

Both ND Wr's are blocking before the ball is in the air and Robinson is not behind the LOS. Correct call

 

[money3189]

watching it over and over. the DB covering 20 created the contact and clearly hit the WR, thats on the DB and thats the one that people complain about.. the penalty was on WR 7. his route was more of a slant type and you can see the DB jump in front of him.

its a bad call. the earlier one was the pick play not this one. same for flemming. that was a bad call. the db's create the contact they get what they get.

what? that play should be in the dictionary for pick play. You cant block a DB on a pass play before the ball is thrown. Period, whether DB jam or not. Every rule cant be designed to benefit the offense. I am a defensive guy and I hate that these rules put the defenses disadvantaged. ND WR's should have done a better job of hiding it. That was too obvious and had to be called.

 

[upperdeck]

what? that play should be in the dictionary for pick play. You cant block a DB on a pass play before the ball is thrown. Period, whether DB jam or not. Every rule cant be designed to benefit the offense. I am a defensive guy and I hate that the rules puts the defense at a disadvantage. ND WR's should have done a better job of hiding it. That was too obvious and had to be called.

watch the play again.. niether WR created the contact, the fact they did a poor job running the play is secondary. the one the penalty is called on did not block the DB at all, I would be ok had the penalty been called on 20 since that at least looked like a block even if the DB caused it to look so.. but 7 did nothing wrong. he ran the play correctly, 2 steps then slant, kelly is right on how they had him run that play.

still you are correct the WRs did a bad job and made it look like a block and thats on them.