Was Baylor kickoff offside call ever explained?

[klamath632]

Was the offsides that was called on us in the Baylor game ever explained? As was discussed endlessly at the time, the kicker, by rule, cannot be offsides. Nobody else in an Iowa State jersey was anywhere close to the line of scrimmage at the moment the ball was kicked.

This still bugs the hell out of me. Yeah, yeah, so I can hold a grudge forever. I want an apology, but I'll settle for an explanation.

Phantom Offside Penalty on Onside Kick - YouTube

[State43]

Nope, not that I am aware of.

[cyman05]

TV announcers said the kicker was offsides, but someone said later that isn't in the rulebook. The kicker can't be offsides no matter what.

So it was determined that one of the other 10 guys was offsides, although replays clearly showed nobody else was close to be offsides.

Blown call...luckily it didn't make a difference in the outcome of the game.

[JUKEBOX]

TV announcers said the kicker was offsides, but someone said later that isn't in the rulebook. The kicker can't be offsides no matter what.

So it was determined that one of the other 10 guys was offsides, although replays clearly showed nobody else was close to be offsides.

Blown call...luckily it didn't make a difference in the outcome of the game.

Maybe, maybe not. Remember how much the onside swung the momentum during the Oklahoma State game? ISU was down 24-7 and won.

[Clonefan94]

Maybe, maybe not. Remember how much the onside swung the momentum during the Oklahoma State game? ISU was down 24-7 and won.

Agree, granted, we could have done more to win that game, but between this and the Tuck rule being part of college football that night, really made it tough for ISU. I won't blame the loss on that call, but it definitely would have been a different game.

[cyhiphopp]

Agree, granted, we could have done more to win that game, but between this and the Tuck rule being part of college football that night, really made it tough for ISU. I won't blame the loss on that call, but it definitely would have been a different game.

Don't forget Jantz crapping the ball to them for a TD when we were on the doorstep. If we get the TD there it's a 7 point game.

[cyhiphopp]

... Tuck rule ...

Seriously, it seemed like they were trying to find any way possible to keep the momentum from swinging to ISU.

[cyman05]

Agree, granted, we could have done more to win that game, but between this and the Tuck rule being part of college football that night, really made it tough for ISU. I won't blame the loss on that call, but it definitely would have been a different game.

Yes, the tuck rule call could've changed the flow of the game. But when the onsides kick occured, there were only a few minutes left and we were down by something like 21. It was all but over at that point.

[ISUAlum2002]

Seriously, it seemed like they were trying to find any way possible to keep the momentum from swinging to ISU.

Ease up, you're close to getting called out by the legion of fans here who refuse to question officiating under any circumstance.

College football doesn't have the tuck rule like the NFL does. The fact is that RGIII knew he had fumbled that ball rather than throwing an incompletion. He went after the ball as soon as it hit the turf. Unfortunately, once the ball gets below about shoulder level with the ball still in the hand of the QB, it becomes a judgment call on the official's part as to whether he has intended to throw the ball or hold onto it.

And the off-sides call was simply brutal. Gary Pinkel got an official apology from the conference the day after a hold was correctly called in 2006 in Dan's last game. We don't know if our athletic department sent an official complaint to the conference about that off-sides call, but I would like to think they did.

[Cybyassociation]

On the field they called offsides on Grant. Rhoads went berserk knowing that it is impossible for the kicker to be offsides. The officials talked it over and decided it wasnt actually 21...it was um, someone else I guess (quick pick a number)? Rhoads was pretty chapped.

[Doc]

On the field they called offsides on Grant. Rhoads went berserk knowing that it is impossible for the kicker to be offsides. The officials talked it over and decided it wasnt actually 21...it was um, someone else I guess (quick pick a number)? Rhoads was pretty chapped.

Are you kidding me??? I suppose the refs never fessed up to calling it on Grant originally? They ended up calling it on #7, George.

[Cycsk]

Are you kidding me??? I suppose the refs never fessed up to calling it on Grant originally? They ended up calling it on #7, George.

I remember the announcers saying that it was the kicker, but the official said #7 and I don't recall the official ever saying it was on the kicker.

[Cybyassociation]

I remember the announcers saying that it was the kicker, but the official said #7 and I don't recall the official ever saying it was on the kicker.

When they originally called it on the field, before the field judge announced it, they called it on the kicker. Thats when Rhoads freaked. I thought it was on Reeves? Either way, it was a horse **** call.

[wright4cy]

It was a ghost call just like when RG111 fumbled and they made up a rule that is not a college rule to give Baylor ball again ... But that is over they were wrong and need to go to ref school again ..

[NATEizKING]

Yes, the tuck rule call could've changed the flow of the game. But when the onsides kick occured, there were only a few minutes left and we were down by something like 21. It was all but over at that point.

More like 16 point, two possession game with almost 10 minutes to play.