Please explain the onside kick

[ajk4st8]

This should be sent to the Big 12 for further review. Just so the Big 12 can say that they got the call right.

 

[cybsball20]

The replay on the jumbotron at the game clearly showed it hit his hand but the ones they had on FCS you couldn't see anything. I imagine they use the FCS cameras for replay...

 

[Benny34]

This should be sent to the Big 12 for further review. Just so the Big 12 can say that they got the call right.

Like the holding call against Mizzou in 2006? :skeptical:

 

[ISUFan22]

So far, as long as we're not getting hosed, we're 2-2 in onside kicks on the season.

Seems clearly obvious to me our best chance to win is every single time we score, onside kick. The opposing offense can't score if they never touch the ball...

 

[Benny34]

The replay on the jumbotron at the game clearly showed it hit his hand but the ones they had on FCS you couldn't see anything. I imagine they use the FCS cameras for replay...

This would be correct. The video going to the jumbotron is not the same video used for referee replays. It is two seperate camera crews and everything. The TV cameras are used for replays.

 

[ISUFan22]

It's not surprising the hose-job came with FCS. Their cameras and camera angles do suck.

 

[theshadow]

Two of the FCS angles showed that both the direction AND rotation of the ball changed. Apparently that wasn't enough.

 

[ceeboe]

So far, as long as we're not getting hosed, we're 2-2 in onside kicks on the season.

Seems clearly obvious to me our best chance to win is every single time we score, onside kick. The opposing offense can't score if they never touch the ball...

You know I was thinking the same think after I thought we recovered the ball.

Really when it comes down to it it's just bad explaining of the call that makes everything else look even worse. I do agree there should have been a flag thrown indicating illegal procedure since it was rule A&M's ball. But what made them overturn the line judge to make it A&M's ball. Did they think A&M recovered it? Or by assuming the illegal procedure did they just give A&M the ball? Since there was no flag throw then I got to think they thought A&M recovered the onside kick? Which then is blatantly obvious that didn't happen. The order of events, procedure of doing their job, makes the call even that more controversial.

Regarding the intentional grounding. I wasn't so much upset that we got called on it, but more curious as to why A&M didn't get that called on them earlier in the game.

 

[TykeClone]

Two of the FCS angles showed that both the direction AND rotation of the ball changed. Apparently that wasn't enough.

Physics don't count in football officiating :wink:

 

[TykeClone]

Regarding the intentional grounding. I wasn't so much upset that we got called on it, but more curious as to why A&M didn't get that called on them earlier in the game.

I thought that official took way too long to throw the intentional grounding flag. They called the play dead and he waited for the aTm bench to complain before throwing it. :no:

I don't really disagree with the call if it's called consitently.

 

[DaddyMac]

I thought that official took way too long to throw the intentional grounding flag. They called the play dead and he waited for the aTm bench to complain before throwing it. :no:

I don't really disagree with the call if it's called consitently.

I thought the exact same thing. In fact, it was so long after the play, I thought it was roughing the passer or something.

 

[ceeboe]

I thought that official took way too long to throw the intentional grounding flag. They called the play dead and he waited for the aTm bench to complain before throwing it. :no:

I don't really disagree with the call if it's called consitently.

I don't recall, but certainly could've been late.

I did really like how we constantly booed the refs after the play. Not exactly in a positive way, but good support from the fans I think.

 

[MidwestZest]

I thought that official took way too long to throw the intentional grounding flag. They called the play dead and he waited for the aTm bench to complain before throwing it. :no:

I don't really disagree with the call if it's called consitently.

well, yes and no. not exactly. the side judge immediately ran over to the white cap to discuss it with him. Basically, i imagine, ran over and said "if it was all intentional grounding on your end (ie, if he was in the tackle box), it was on my end as well. There was no reciever in the area and the ball didn't make it past the line of scrimmage."

I had a pretty good view from front row upper deck...and IMO this was a textbook intentional grounding call in all facets of penalty. Multiple criteria were all present

 

[Flag Guy]

I did really like how we constantly booed the refs after the play. Not exactly in a positive way, but good support from the fans I think.

Yeah we weren't letting that one go... if nothing else it got us engaged in the game again for a while

 

[cybsball20]

well, yes and no. not exactly. the side judge immediately ran over to the white cap to discuss it with him. Basically, i imagine, ran over and said "if it was all intentional grounding on your end (ie, if he was in the tackle box), it was on my end as well. There was no reciever in the area and the ball didn't make it past the line of scrimmage."

I had a pretty good view from front row upper deck...and IMO this was a textbook intentional grounding call in all facets of penalty. Multiple criteria were all present

I think thats exactly what happened. I originally thought it was illegal man downfield though since the tackle was the only one in the area.

 

[cmoneyr]

The intentional grounding was handled well, the side judge ran over, they discussed, I'm assuming just confirming if there was an eligible receiver in the area, there wasn't so they threw the flag.

 

[im4iast8]

could you imagine how nuts the fans would have went if when they came out of the review and said since the play stands, (throws flag) there is an illegal procedure call on Iowa State for illegal touching of the ball prior to it going ten yards? that would of probably set some people off enough to attack them right there on the field!! i dont no if thats even possible, just hypothetically speaking...

 

[ceeboe]

Yeah we weren't letting that one go... if nothing else it got us engaged in the game again for a while

I did see you and Superfan at the game. I was going to say hello, but then thought you would think I'm some stalker. Glad you could make the trip.

Isn't there usually a formal explaination of these types of plays after the game?

 

[ceeboe]

could you imagine how nuts the fans would have went if when they came out of the review and said since the play stands, (throws flag) there is an illegal procedure call on Iowa State for illegal touching of the ball prior to it going ten yards? that would of probably set some people off enough to attack them right there on the field!! i dont no if thats even possible, just hypothetically speaking...

Actually I think that would be better than what actually happened. Right now the way I see it, nothing makes any sense.

 

[Flag Guy]

I did see you and Superfan at the game. I was going to say hello, but then thought you would think I'm some stalker. Glad you could make the trip.

Ehh I'm kind of used to random people saying hi to me at the games Good to be there... I miss it :no:


And being in Ames was a helluva lot better than being in Waco... we tailgate like no one else in the conference and it was good to be back in the Jack