That would have been a TD or at least very good field position if the ref wouldn't had blown his whistle.
I gotta know: ISU-NEB game
- Thread starter Matt92x
- Start date
If that same play happened in 2007, it wouldn't have even been reviewable. NU would have kept the ball at the spot the runner was declared down.
They changed the replay rules in 2008 to allow for a review and for "immediate recovery" of a loose ball by the defense.
The play was whistled dead. But if you listen carefully we really got away with one on this because if i understand the rule correctly a play that is blown dead is not reviewable. Thats why usually on fumbles the refs let the play continue then go back to review if it was actually a fumble or not.
As soon as Helu goes down the whistle is blowing and then our player picks it up after the whistle had started blowing. No one had actually recovered the ball by the time the whistle started blowing. So I guess I am confused as how they determined we recovered it if the play was officially over. Either way it worked out for us.
As soon as Helu goes down the whistle is blowing and then our player picks it up after the whistle had started blowing. No one had actually recovered the ball by the time the whistle started blowing. So I guess I am confused as how they determined we recovered it if the play was officially over. Either way it worked out for us.
College Football Season Preview, 2008 NCAA Rules Changes
I would have to see it again, but I thought the whistle was because the official thought the ball was recovered while the recovering player had a knee on the ground. If not, it certainly appears that if the whistle was blown before the recovery it could be reviewed but not overturned.
Even if that were the case the refs would have been able to see on the replay they blew the whistle before anyone recovered it, therefore it would have been ruled a dead play and NU should have kept possession. I think the refs really screwed the pooch on that call, but its about time one of those went our way. Nothing angers me more than a terrible call with the advent of instant replay whether it is agianst us or agianst a team we are playing. There really shouldnt be any reason refs are still missing calls in this day and age, yet we see it every year in multiple games across the NCAA.
The whistle was blown because the official ruled the runner down.
The 2008 rule change allowed that play to be reviewed. (Prior to that, it was not a reviewable play.) Because the ball was immediately recovered by the defense, ISU was awarded the ball at the spot of recovery -- in the end zone, which resulted in a touchback.
Here's the review rule in question:
d. Live ball ruled dead in possession of a ball carrier when the clear recovery of a loose ball occurs in the immediate continuing action after the loose ball.
1. If the ball is ruled dead and the replay official does not have indisputable video evidence as to which team recovers, the dead-ball ruling stands.
2. If the replay official rules that the ball was not dead, it belongs to the recovering team at the spot of the recovery and any advance is nullified.
And the approved ruling from the 2010 rule book:
VII. First and 10 on the A-20. A22 carries to the A-25 where he loses possession of the ball which is quickly recovered by B79. The line judge rules A22 down. RULING: Reviewable because of the immediate recovery.
I guess I have to take issue with this rule then. How can an official blow the whistle signaling the play is done then determine an action after the whistle still occured during the play? The whistle is the ultimate decider to when play is stopped.
This is from the link provided:
Ball Carrier Ruled Down (Rule 12-3-3-b). When a ball carrier is judged down by rule and the ball is fumbled, the play may be reviewed if the recovery of the ball occurs in the immediate action following the fumble and is prior to any official signaling that the ball is dead. However, if the replay official does not have indisputable video evidence as to which player recovers the fumble, the ruling of down-by-rule stands. If the call of down-by-rule is reversed, the ball belongs to the recovering player at the spot of the recovery and no advance is allowed.
The key to me is the bolded part. The recovery by our player would have had to happen prior to any official signaling the ball is dead. The whistle blowing while the ball is rolling on the turf is signaling the play is dead before our player actually recovers it. While our player did recover it "immediatley" it was still after the whistle had started to blow signaling the end of the play.
I love Williams reaction at 2:35!
Why can't any of these lovely ladies be the Cheerleader of the Week at 3:35, especially the brunette on the right????
Why can't any of these lovely ladies be the Cheerleader of the Week at 3:35, especially the brunette on the right????
Your link was for 2008. It was tweaked in 2009 to read:
ARTICLE 3. Reviewable plays involving potential dead balls and loose balls include:
d. Live ball ruled dead in possession of a ball carrier when the clear recovery of a loose ball occurs in the immediate continuing action after the loose ball.
1. If the ball is ruled dead and the replay official does not have indisputable video evidence as to which team recovers, the dead-ball ruling stands.
2. If the replay official rules that the ball was not dead, it belongs to the recovering team at the spot of the recovery and any advance is nullified.
WOW. I guess I cant believe they can use actions that happen after the whistle has blown to determine the outcome of a play. It just doesnt seem like a good idea. Players are taught to quit when the whistle blows, it would seem this rule is in direct competition of that teaching.
Guess you learn something everyday.
Look at it this way: If the ball is loose when the whistle blows (as it was in our scenario), what is the most effective way to determine (a) possession and (b) spot, since you have neither at that moment in time?
In a loose ball situation when is the last time you have seen any player who had an immediate chance at the ball stop? Even when whistles are blowing left and right, the scrum around a recovered football continues until the officials are able to pry the players apart.
Seriously, I think the key is the part about immediate recovery is key. Players are expected to stop play when a whistle is blown. I don't think there is an expectation that they will be able to stop instantaneously. If a recovery occurs immediately play has reasonably stopped with the whistle.
I guess I would choose the last team to have possession. Reason being once the whistle blows players begin to quite or let down. The whistle is the END of the play if there is no possession at the end of the play it should revert back to the last known spot of possession. I would view it similarly to a ball being fumbled out of bounds. The ball would be given to the team that last had possession before going out, not the team that recovers it out of bounds. I just dont understand how the NCAA could make a rule that allows for a play to be determined by actions that come after a play is ruled over.
I assumed that is why refs are supposed to swallow their whistles on potential fumbles. Let the play go on then once a player is clearly tackled or play has ended blow the whistle then go back to determine if it was actually a fumble. Blowing the whistle then determining ownership based on who recovered the ball after the whistle is blown seems pretty shady.
In all likely hood the ref blowing the whistle in this instance cost us a touchdown, because that was going back to the house.
You don't know that because as soon as the whistle was blown players immediately stopped playing.:wink:
This is where I really take issue with this rule. How do you define immediate recovery? I will be willing to bet in the near future there will be a time when immediate recovery becomes questionable on a play call. The fairest way to determine this is to take the officials discrection out of it. Once the whistle blows, the play is dead and nothing after that point should be allowed to determine the outcome of the play.
BTW, this is a good conversation.
True you can see it on the replay that once he got out to the 10 most players were jogging, but he was well to the outside and on his way.
