OK i just paused it while the ball was in the air (26 seconds) and the auburn defender is all over early doucet so now can you stop saying the ball had been tipped before contact occurred.
How you feelin' about that "waah" right about now? AU fans have been complaining about a couple calls at this year's game. Karma's a real b%&^$h, ain't it?
My updated question to usafootball: "In my previous question, suppose the tip made by the first Team B defender made the ball uncatchable for the Team A intended receiver, who is being held by the second Team B defender after the tip. Is this still a holding penalty, or is the hold legal in this case?"
Well I thought it was a bad call. But it is understood that if the ball is tipped then it's anything goes, pass interference can not be called. But if contact is made prior to the ball being tipped then it is considered a penalty even if it is uncatchable or tipped afterwards. Or at least that was my opinion on the rule anyways.
BTW, the ppl at usafootball wanted video, so i sent them the link with 2 pics at the instant of the tip. Haven't heard back yet, but here's 2nd response: "Based on your description it "sounds" like there is a hold by the defense which is still a foul. If the tip occurred beyond the line of scrimmage the penalty is 10 yards from the previous spot and an automatic first down."
Bottom line is the SEC and Auburn can put all the lipstick on this pig they want, but the call was blown and the evidence is on Tivo's and DVR's across the South.
The answer above seems to back up my interpretation: tipping/catchability only affect the PI call. A hold is still a hold, and a foul is still a foul while the ball is still live, and should be called as such. You seem to think there's some line (catchability), where one set of rules applies before and another set after. Holding and PF rules ALWAYS apply. (I can ask again for clarification)
You may if you wish. I can alway fall back to, "it doesn't matter anyway." :) I would suggest that you include a link to this or another video and ask if holding should've been called if the ball was uncatchable.
Agreed, besides LSU fans' main beef isn't just with this one play anyway. If LSU had gotten whooped like in last year's SECCG, I can accept that the better team won. In a situation where officiating ineptitude directly took away scoring opportunities, I can't say which team is better.
BTW, I'm not taking anything away from Auburn. They are a great team and played a great game. AU completely shut down LSU's running game, which was critical. AU may very well have won w/o consistent off. errors. We'll never know. Anyway, good luck on the rest of the season.
Thanks, Same to you. BTW I had some fantastic Jambalaya before the game from relatives that are LSU grads. I understand the frustration. It seems like it happens to everyone almost every year in at least one game. Sometimes you manage to play around it, sometimes not.
This from the NCAA's "Football 2006" newsletter, pages 8 and 15: "Uncatchable provisions have no bearing on illegal use of hands or holding by the defense." You may also find the article on "leaping" on page 7 interesting. I can't seem to post the link but you can find it if you look a ncaa.org.
Yeah, youtube won't let you post url's, I found the newsletter anyway. Again, that only seems to back up what I said 4 posts ago. I'm at the point where the correct ruling on this play doesn't make or break the team that won, I just wanna know for my own edification.
Problem is, if this game was vs. Florida, UGA or some other SEC East team, it wouldn't be as bad, but LSU/AU has been a de facto SEC West champ. game every year. LSU could finish in Top 5 but won't have a chance to play in SECCG unless AU loses twice. BTW, if you want the whole spectrum of real La. food, take a road trip to Tiger Stadium next year. You won't be disappointed :)
I agree that my interpretation was incorrect and that newsletter was what I had been looking for . . . I had just hoped it would say I was right. Anyway, I'll make it to Tiger Stadium one of these days. Thanks for the invite. My father-in-law makes all the road trips. AU/LSU is a fantastic rivalry because they're both great programs.
God knows we need a good rivalry in the West. Ole Miss won't be good again for another 20 years when Peyton or Eli crank out a kid. Besides if the Iron Bowl were held today, AU would stomp muddy footprints into Bama.
I don't see that in the rulebook, and it's pretty clear that holding is NEVER legal contact unless you're making a tackle on the ball carrier. If you're right, then there's no point in putting Hail Mary plays in your playbook if DBs can simply mug all WRs in the vicinity of an "uncatchable" ball, but I guess we have to agree to disagree.
The rule only says "legally may contact." There is no specification at all about the type or extent of contact. Section k states "Tackling or running into a receiver when a forward pass obviously is underthrown or overthrown is disregarding the ball and is illegal." This rule prevents intentional muggings.
I'm an AU fan. I don't get to go to many games because of work, but I did make LSU '04 and LSU '06. P.S. ANY kind of contact is legal if the ball is uncatchable, excluding unnecessary roughness.
Ah yes, the '04 game with the most obscure rule in college football that got AU the 2nd shot at the extra point (which was never called in any other game and dropped at the end of the season). I sense a pattern...
The rule concerning the '04 game still stands. 9.1.2q in the 2006 rulebook: "No defensive player who runs forward from beyond the neutral zone and leaps from beyond the neutral zone in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or try may land on any player(s).
Wow, didn't know that. OK, time to put this to bed once and for all. To get an unbiased opinion from a qualified source, I went to usafootballdotcom (can't post URL here) and posted the following officiating question:
Q:Suppose the QB of Team A throws a pass, which is tipped by a defender on Team B outside the neutral zone. Also, suppose that the intended receiver on Team A is immediately held following the tip by a second defender on Team B, but not necessarily fouled. According to NCAA rules, this does not constitute pass interference. However, does this situation constitute defensive holding, or is any defensive non-personal-foul contact legal following the tip?
A:You are correct regarding the tipped pass negating pass interference. By rule, once the ball is tipped, contact interference is ignored. As far as holding or personal fouls go, these fouls are assessed per rule. The only fouls exempted by the tip are offensive and defensive pass interference. (I can forward the email response if you like.)
We're not talking about a tipped pass, we're talking about an uncatchable pass. The rule states clearly in a tipped pass situation, "legally may interfere." In contrast in an uncatchable situation, "legally may contact."
Here's my interpretation, whether it holds water, I don't know. Defensive holding rules are there to enable an offensive player to reasonably run his route. Having done that, defensive pass interference rules are there to enable the receiver to catch the ball. Doucet was able to run his route. He never would've had a chance to catch the ball. The intent of the rules was upheld.
I didn't specifically mention catchability, nor was it specified in the answer. What about offensive holding on o-linemen? Officials look for where the arms are, pulled jersey, etc, and throws the flag, he doesn't do a physics problem to determine whether the o-lineman could have gotten to the qb, it's holding
I've plainly posted the rules and my interpretation. I admit that I'm interpreting the meaning of "legally may contact" as opposed to "legally may interfere." What does "legally may contact" mean to you? The SEC says the call was right. I've posted rules, you've posted emotions.
You are not entirely correct. The leaping rule was amended this year. Under the change, it is not a foul if the leaping player was aligned in a stationary position within one yard of the line of scrimmage when the ball was snapped. The change means that a player who ran toward the line of scrimmage but was within a yard of the line and had stopped before the snap may legally leap in an attempt to block a field-goal attempt.
The ball was never catchable unless, as rwg states, Doucet could've come back to the ball. I don't believe he had any chance of doing that and we could bounce that off each other forever. My opinion is that had the ball been thrown where Doucet could've caught it, Brock could've made and interception, not that he would've wanted to. Hit timing makes no difference if the ball is uncatchable.
Well in any event it's time to move on to the rest of the season, plenty of football to go. What got lost in all this analysis is that it wasn't this ONE bad no-call that changed the outcome, it's a series of 6-7 that ALL went Auburn's way, are all obvious from video and declared as such by CBS crew, and SEC says there was nothing wrong.
If you want to see a real no-brainer PI that was no-called, check out rwgingles's video of the LaFell endzone mugging that should have given LSU a 7-0 lead at halftime. IMO, Tubby saw that the zebras were going to let them get away with murder on defense and told his players to keep it up.
To expand on the ball being uncatchable. Doucet is moving to the right at full speed. Brock is moving to the left. Brock knocks away (not tips) the ball at the 5 yard line while Doucet is moving in the opposite direction at the 3 yard line. There's no way he could've changed direction and moved forward whether or not the second defender made contact. I know everyone is emotionally involved and everyone will see it in their teams light. I was at the game and I still haven't come down.
My point was, even assuming you're 100% right on catchability, it's irrelevant. Holding is holding. Besides, officials throw the yellow hankie for actions not affecting the outcome of the play all the time. Sure, ppl are emotional over their team, but the video evidence doesn't lie. (Are you LSU or AU fan, Bunk? Just curious.)
It wasn't catchable because it was batted down. Surely you're not suggesting that he could've caught that, it landed 10 yards away from him. The rule you've quoted concerns tipped balls, not uncatchable balls. The two are not related. Again look at the capitalized words: LEGALLY MAY CONTACT
That still doesn't address your argument that def. holding doesn't apply. Go back and watch the video again, where Doucet is CLEARLY wrapped up before the tip, which does make it PI since the ball was catchable at the time of the interference. That's why I asked you what made it "uncatchable." The hit timing does count since it happened BEFORE the ball became "uncatchable." It's a flag and automatic 1st any way you slice it.
This is simply untrue. The timing of contact is unimportant with an uncatchable pass. From the rulebook:
Defensive players legally may contact opponents who have crossed the neutral zone if the opponents are not in a position to receive a catchable forward pass.
1. Those infractions that occur during a down when a forward pass crosses the neutral zone are pass interference infractions only if the receiver had the opportunity to receive a catchable forward pass.
The point here is very simple: forget about the timing of the contact, forget about PI altogether. The correct call is defensive holding. A DB simply can't hook the arms and legs of an offensive player during a live play. If they legally could, then defensive coordinators across the country should take notice: have a DT, LB or a DB tip the ball close to the line of scrimmage and have all other DBs tackle every TE and/or WR before the ball hits the ground.
What you find it necessary to do is ignore the rulebook. Read the rule: Defensive players LEGALLY MAY CONTACT opponents who have crossed the neutral zone if the opponents are not in a position to receive a catchable forward pass.
What you're quoting is the rule on pass interference (Rule 7.3.9). See above for my earlier post on what the rulebook says on defensive holding, which is NOT ALLOWABLE AT ANY TIME.
In the rule you quoted, "after the pass has been touched, any player may execute a LEGAL BLOCK during the remaining flight of the pass." Rule 9.3.4 is very clear that holding an offensive player other than a runner IS ILLEGAL and that "continuous contact is illegal". Tipped paases and uncatchable balls ARE NOT RELEVANT to a holding penalty.
So are you saying the pass to Doucet wasn't catchable even before it was tipped? That's interesting, since the SEC ruled that the overturned Landry INT was catchable (and upheld the PI call) even though I'm pretty sure a defensive player's INT makes the ball uncatchable for the offense.
2 inescapable points. 1. (Holding) After passing the neutral zone, a defender cannot grasp or hold a receiver period unless he has the football. 2.(Interference) Without the contact, Doucet would have absolutely come back to the slight short pass and contested the tipping defender. Interference rules say if a ball might be catchable it is assumed catchable.
The Southeastern Conference determined that officials made the right decision in reversing a pass interference call late in the Auburn-LSU game.
SEC coordinator of officials Rogers Redding said Monday the call was correct because the pass was made uncatchable, making the timing of the contact irrelevant.
End of speculation. And no I'm not an Auburn nor am I a LSU fan
Redding in his first interview stated that there was no foul because the ball was tipped first. Evidently after someone explained the rules to him, his second statement to media was there was no foul because the ball was uncatchable. Anyway, LSU awaits a formal answer.
The SEC office is really up the creek on this one, especially in light of the Pac-10 response to the OU/Oregon game. Their first story was the tip negated the PI. Video shows contact before the tip. OK, next excuse: ball was uncatchable. Then why did AU get PI when the Landry interception made the ball uncatchable? (unless Auburn receivers can freeze time) This is why SEC officiating always has and will always be a joke.
Yes, the SEC supported the officials but they overlooked the last sentence of the rule that makes a non-catchable ball negate interference. "Pass interference rules do not apply after the pass has been touched anywhere inbounds by an inbounds player or has touched an official. If an opponent is fouled, the penalty is for the foul and not pass interference."
Are you so naive that you think the head official would admit to a mistake? Noone here is moaning-just stating facts. If it makes you angry, go somewhere else. Had the situation been reversed, you would be "moaning."
The game wasn't decided by the officals and I wish you would quit moaning over it and go on your team is. The head offical reviewed the play today (monday) and said the right call was made. END OF STORY good luck to both teams the rest of the year
I agree, we had opportunities to win. So did Auburn-2 great D's. The game should not be decided by the officials. I know that the refs are saying that the ball was uncatchable due to the tip, but tipped balls can be caught. Anyone remember Kentucky 2002??
Yes, the ball was tipped but the Auburn defender was holding the LSU receiver and according to the NCAA rule, the tip only made a non catchable ball makes interference moot but any other infraction should be called. Defensive Holding should have been called.
I'm making the SEC look bad by citing video evidence and their own rules? (see above) OK dude, if you say so. Calls going either way? Look at the two other videos on this site. Also, maybe the SEC head office is (gasp) circling the wagons to keep their officials from looking bad? But you are somewhat right on the last point, time to move on to the next opponent.
No, Jackass. The correct call is holding on the defense or illegal contact. Automatic first down. Know the rules before you type and try to make a valid point, because if you don't you just sound ignorant.
Right kkille and dolemite. I also have pics showing the defender was holding Doucet for a space of about 5 yards before the tip. Without the contact, who can know if Doucet could have competed with the tipping defender for the ball. The rules on interference state that if catchability is in question, the pass is considered by default catchable. As you said, it was a least a defensive hold (doesn't matter if the ball is in the air or catchable) and a ten-yard penalty/automatic first down.
Your too upset with the game. Those are SEC refs not AU refs. Many calls could have gone back and forth The game is over. Both teams played great. Leave it at that. Instead your trying to make the South Eastern Conference look bad by trying to point out every little thing that you think was a mistake. The head of the SEC said differently today. ITS OVER LSU is a great team and good luck for the rest of the season and can't wait till next year.
The SEC head offical reviewed this play today and said that the call was correct. Get over it. Anyway both teams had there chances and it was a great game. You don't see the LSU players complaining about it. I've read there quotes on the game.
For the record, it was an amazing game, but you can't fight a great team and officials at the same time. This was the last straw in a series of bad/no calls, and the video doesn't lie. Besides, you really think Miles would let his players give their real feelings in a public forum? Give me a break.
the head official is wrong according to the rule book and the indisputable video evidence. it's either pass interference or defensive holding, but not a no call.
Defensive holding should have been the call. Rule 7, Article 4(c): Defensive players may ward off or legally block an eligible pass receiver until that player occupies the same yard line as the defender or until opponent could not possibly block him. Continuous contact is illegal.
Official 2006 NCAA football rulebook: Rule 7, Article 4(b): Defensive players may not use hands and arms to tackle, hold, or otherwise illegally obstruct an opponent other than a runner.
I'm going to be bitter about that one for a while, i have never seen a flag picked up like that and not even video reviewed, that's like a baseball umpire calling strike 3 and then taking it back.
I don't know, why don't you ask the Pac-10 who said that the officicals screwed up the Oregon/Okie game. Said officials (including the replay offical) were suspended a week. What kind of precedent did that set?
So, are you saying he would have caught it? Don't think so. Blame LSU's missed opportunities and average starting point of the 17 yard line as their downfall.
Hey, dipstick, it doesn't matter if he would have caught it! It was at worst, defensive pass interference and at best defensive holding, which wouls have give LSU a 1st down (4th down conversion) with nearly 3 minutes to go.
I guess we won't mention when LSU intercepted the ball and was flagged for pass interference in the same situation. Guess what, If we intercepted the ball It would have been hard for Auburns reciever to catch it.
i fucking hate auburn.
tigerbait134 5 months ago in playlist 2006 LSU vs Auburn Bad Calls
HI! chck me out pls!
wanna see some pics of my pussy? go2 my profile! xg
aishaalanna 3 years ago
OK i just paused it while the ball was in the air (26 seconds) and the auburn defender is all over early doucet so now can you stop saying the ball had been tipped before contact occurred.
LSUbeatnd912 4 years ago
Every time LSU plays auburn we(LSU) Get horrible calls because the refs are not neutral
skatepunk677 4 years ago
To all you LSboo fans... waa.
Naterg 4 years ago
How you feelin' about that "waah" right about now? AU fans have been complaining about a couple calls at this year's game. Karma's a real b%&^$h, ain't it?
lasigmaman 4 years ago
the 3rd video ive seen at Auburn that the refs have been absolutley horrible on, and noone in the big chairs of the sec can see this????
SECRulesNCAA 4 years ago
fuck all you das who think this was a flag
How would he catch a ball tipped away from him anyway he was diving the other way
gunnerdapimp1 5 years ago
chew my butt u fag! ur CB was raping our WR
likemikevick 5 years ago
ur just mad cuz ur the one gettin raped by the long cock of auburn
CaffinatedMonkey 2 years ago
i just thought he could of caught it or atleast tried if he was not being held so i am mad
thechampoin 5 years ago
My updated question to usafootball: "In my previous question, suppose the tip made by the first Team B defender made the ball uncatchable for the Team A intended receiver, who is being held by the second Team B defender after the tip. Is this still a holding penalty, or is the hold legal in this case?"
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Well I thought it was a bad call. But it is understood that if the ball is tipped then it's anything goes, pass interference can not be called. But if contact is made prior to the ball being tipped then it is considered a penalty even if it is uncatchable or tipped afterwards. Or at least that was my opinion on the rule anyways.
mixtapemessiah13 5 years ago
BTW, the ppl at usafootball wanted video, so i sent them the link with 2 pics at the instant of the tip. Haven't heard back yet, but here's 2nd response: "Based on your description it "sounds" like there is a hold by the defense which is still a foul. If the tip occurred beyond the line of scrimmage the penalty is 10 yards from the previous spot and an automatic first down."
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Bottom line is the SEC and Auburn can put all the lipstick on this pig they want, but the call was blown and the evidence is on Tivo's and DVR's across the South.
rwgingles 5 years ago
The answer above seems to back up my interpretation: tipping/catchability only affect the PI call. A hold is still a hold, and a foul is still a foul while the ball is still live, and should be called as such. You seem to think there's some line (catchability), where one set of rules applies before and another set after. Holding and PF rules ALWAYS apply. (I can ask again for clarification)
lsudolemite 5 years ago
You may if you wish. I can alway fall back to, "it doesn't matter anyway." :) I would suggest that you include a link to this or another video and ask if holding should've been called if the ball was uncatchable.
Bunk336 5 years ago
Agreed, besides LSU fans' main beef isn't just with this one play anyway. If LSU had gotten whooped like in last year's SECCG, I can accept that the better team won. In a situation where officiating ineptitude directly took away scoring opportunities, I can't say which team is better.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
BTW, I'm not taking anything away from Auburn. They are a great team and played a great game. AU completely shut down LSU's running game, which was critical. AU may very well have won w/o consistent off. errors. We'll never know. Anyway, good luck on the rest of the season.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Thanks, Same to you. BTW I had some fantastic Jambalaya before the game from relatives that are LSU grads. I understand the frustration. It seems like it happens to everyone almost every year in at least one game. Sometimes you manage to play around it, sometimes not.
Bunk336 5 years ago
This from the NCAA's "Football 2006" newsletter, pages 8 and 15: "Uncatchable provisions have no bearing on illegal use of hands or holding by the defense." You may also find the article on "leaping" on page 7 interesting. I can't seem to post the link but you can find it if you look a ncaa.org.
Bunk336 5 years ago
I still can't seem to post a link. ncaa.org, then sports (fall), then football, then rules and officiating page, then 2006 Newsletter.
Bunk336 5 years ago
Yeah, youtube won't let you post url's, I found the newsletter anyway. Again, that only seems to back up what I said 4 posts ago. I'm at the point where the correct ruling on this play doesn't make or break the team that won, I just wanna know for my own edification.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Problem is, if this game was vs. Florida, UGA or some other SEC East team, it wouldn't be as bad, but LSU/AU has been a de facto SEC West champ. game every year. LSU could finish in Top 5 but won't have a chance to play in SECCG unless AU loses twice. BTW, if you want the whole spectrum of real La. food, take a road trip to Tiger Stadium next year. You won't be disappointed :)
lsudolemite 5 years ago
I agree that my interpretation was incorrect and that newsletter was what I had been looking for . . . I had just hoped it would say I was right. Anyway, I'll make it to Tiger Stadium one of these days. Thanks for the invite. My father-in-law makes all the road trips. AU/LSU is a fantastic rivalry because they're both great programs.
Bunk336 5 years ago
God knows we need a good rivalry in the West. Ole Miss won't be good again for another 20 years when Peyton or Eli crank out a kid. Besides if the Iron Bowl were held today, AU would stomp muddy footprints into Bama.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
We'd love to have you over, just don't bring cigars. We students have long memories. :)
lsudolemite 5 years ago
correction: defender got to qb w/o being held
lsudolemite 5 years ago
I don't see that in the rulebook, and it's pretty clear that holding is NEVER legal contact unless you're making a tackle on the ball carrier. If you're right, then there's no point in putting Hail Mary plays in your playbook if DBs can simply mug all WRs in the vicinity of an "uncatchable" ball, but I guess we have to agree to disagree.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
The rule only says "legally may contact." There is no specification at all about the type or extent of contact. Section k states "Tackling or running into a receiver when a forward pass obviously is underthrown or overthrown is disregarding the ball and is illegal." This rule prevents intentional muggings.
Bunk336 5 years ago
I'm an AU fan. I don't get to go to many games because of work, but I did make LSU '04 and LSU '06. P.S. ANY kind of contact is legal if the ball is uncatchable, excluding unnecessary roughness.
Bunk336 5 years ago
Ah yes, the '04 game with the most obscure rule in college football that got AU the 2nd shot at the extra point (which was never called in any other game and dropped at the end of the season). I sense a pattern...
lsudolemite 5 years ago
The rule concerning the '04 game still stands. 9.1.2q in the 2006 rulebook: "No defensive player who runs forward from beyond the neutral zone and leaps from beyond the neutral zone in an obvious attempt to block a field goal or try may land on any player(s).
Bunk336 5 years ago
Wow, didn't know that. OK, time to put this to bed once and for all. To get an unbiased opinion from a qualified source, I went to usafootballdotcom (can't post URL here) and posted the following officiating question:
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Q:Suppose the QB of Team A throws a pass, which is tipped by a defender on Team B outside the neutral zone. Also, suppose that the intended receiver on Team A is immediately held following the tip by a second defender on Team B, but not necessarily fouled. According to NCAA rules, this does not constitute pass interference. However, does this situation constitute defensive holding, or is any defensive non-personal-foul contact legal following the tip?
lsudolemite 5 years ago
A:You are correct regarding the tipped pass negating pass interference. By rule, once the ball is tipped, contact interference is ignored. As far as holding or personal fouls go, these fouls are assessed per rule. The only fouls exempted by the tip are offensive and defensive pass interference. (I can forward the email response if you like.)
lsudolemite 5 years ago
We're not talking about a tipped pass, we're talking about an uncatchable pass. The rule states clearly in a tipped pass situation, "legally may interfere." In contrast in an uncatchable situation, "legally may contact."
Bunk336 5 years ago
Here's my interpretation, whether it holds water, I don't know. Defensive holding rules are there to enable an offensive player to reasonably run his route. Having done that, defensive pass interference rules are there to enable the receiver to catch the ball. Doucet was able to run his route. He never would've had a chance to catch the ball. The intent of the rules was upheld.
Bunk336 5 years ago
I didn't specifically mention catchability, nor was it specified in the answer. What about offensive holding on o-linemen? Officials look for where the arms are, pulled jersey, etc, and throws the flag, he doesn't do a physics problem to determine whether the o-lineman could have gotten to the qb, it's holding
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Bullshit, you're quoting stuff out of your head. You can't tackle a receiver while he's running his route. Period!
rwgingles 5 years ago
I've plainly posted the rules and my interpretation. I admit that I'm interpreting the meaning of "legally may contact" as opposed to "legally may interfere." What does "legally may contact" mean to you? The SEC says the call was right. I've posted rules, you've posted emotions.
Bunk336 5 years ago
rwgingles 5 years ago
"That's Rule 7 Article 9 c, by the way."
LOL, good to see you're not nitpicking, Bunk. :)
lsudolemite 5 years ago
hehe. Actually Rule 7 Sec. 3 Art. 9c
The ball was never catchable unless, as rwg states, Doucet could've come back to the ball. I don't believe he had any chance of doing that and we could bounce that off each other forever. My opinion is that had the ball been thrown where Doucet could've caught it, Brock could've made and interception, not that he would've wanted to. Hit timing makes no difference if the ball is uncatchable.
Bunk336 5 years ago
Well in any event it's time to move on to the rest of the season, plenty of football to go. What got lost in all this analysis is that it wasn't this ONE bad no-call that changed the outcome, it's a series of 6-7 that ALL went Auburn's way, are all obvious from video and declared as such by CBS crew, and SEC says there was nothing wrong.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
If you want to see a real no-brainer PI that was no-called, check out rwgingles's video of the LaFell endzone mugging that should have given LSU a 7-0 lead at halftime. IMO, Tubby saw that the zebras were going to let them get away with murder on defense and told his players to keep it up.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
correction: at least 1st and goal at the 2.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
To expand on the ball being uncatchable. Doucet is moving to the right at full speed. Brock is moving to the left. Brock knocks away (not tips) the ball at the 5 yard line while Doucet is moving in the opposite direction at the 3 yard line. There's no way he could've changed direction and moved forward whether or not the second defender made contact. I know everyone is emotionally involved and everyone will see it in their teams light. I was at the game and I still haven't come down.
Bunk336 5 years ago
My point was, even assuming you're 100% right on catchability, it's irrelevant. Holding is holding. Besides, officials throw the yellow hankie for actions not affecting the outcome of the play all the time. Sure, ppl are emotional over their team, but the video evidence doesn't lie. (Are you LSU or AU fan, Bunk? Just curious.)
lsudolemite 5 years ago
That's Rule 7 Article 9 c., by the way
Bunk336 5 years ago
It wasn't catchable because it was batted down. Surely you're not suggesting that he could've caught that, it landed 10 yards away from him. The rule you've quoted concerns tipped balls, not uncatchable balls. The two are not related. Again look at the capitalized words: LEGALLY MAY CONTACT
Bunk336 5 years ago
That still doesn't address your argument that def. holding doesn't apply. Go back and watch the video again, where Doucet is CLEARLY wrapped up before the tip, which does make it PI since the ball was catchable at the time of the interference. That's why I asked you what made it "uncatchable." The hit timing does count since it happened BEFORE the ball became "uncatchable." It's a flag and automatic 1st any way you slice it.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
This is simply untrue. The timing of contact is unimportant with an uncatchable pass. From the rulebook:
Defensive players legally may contact opponents who have crossed the neutral zone if the opponents are not in a position to receive a catchable forward pass.
1. Those infractions that occur during a down when a forward pass crosses the neutral zone are pass interference infractions only if the receiver had the opportunity to receive a catchable forward pass.
Bunk336 5 years ago
The point here is very simple: forget about the timing of the contact, forget about PI altogether. The correct call is defensive holding. A DB simply can't hook the arms and legs of an offensive player during a live play. If they legally could, then defensive coordinators across the country should take notice: have a DT, LB or a DB tip the ball close to the line of scrimmage and have all other DBs tackle every TE and/or WR before the ball hits the ground.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
What you find it necessary to do is ignore the rulebook. Read the rule: Defensive players LEGALLY MAY CONTACT opponents who have crossed the neutral zone if the opponents are not in a position to receive a catchable forward pass.
Defensive holding does not apply.
Bunk336 5 years ago
What you're quoting is the rule on pass interference (Rule 7.3.9). See above for my earlier post on what the rulebook says on defensive holding, which is NOT ALLOWABLE AT ANY TIME.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
In the rule you quoted, "after the pass has been touched, any player may execute a LEGAL BLOCK during the remaining flight of the pass." Rule 9.3.4 is very clear that holding an offensive player other than a runner IS ILLEGAL and that "continuous contact is illegal". Tipped paases and uncatchable balls ARE NOT RELEVANT to a holding penalty.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
So are you saying the pass to Doucet wasn't catchable even before it was tipped? That's interesting, since the SEC ruled that the overturned Landry INT was catchable (and upheld the PI call) even though I'm pretty sure a defensive player's INT makes the ball uncatchable for the offense.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
2 inescapable points. 1. (Holding) After passing the neutral zone, a defender cannot grasp or hold a receiver period unless he has the football. 2.(Interference) Without the contact, Doucet would have absolutely come back to the slight short pass and contested the tipping defender. Interference rules say if a ball might be catchable it is assumed catchable.
rwgingles 5 years ago
Quoted from espn:
The Southeastern Conference determined that officials made the right decision in reversing a pass interference call late in the Auburn-LSU game.
SEC coordinator of officials Rogers Redding said Monday the call was correct because the pass was made uncatchable, making the timing of the contact irrelevant.
End of speculation. And no I'm not an Auburn nor am I a LSU fan
Kureni 5 years ago
Redding in his first interview stated that there was no foul because the ball was tipped first. Evidently after someone explained the rules to him, his second statement to media was there was no foul because the ball was uncatchable. Anyway, LSU awaits a formal answer.
rwgingles 5 years ago
The SEC office is really up the creek on this one, especially in light of the Pac-10 response to the OU/Oregon game. Their first story was the tip negated the PI. Video shows contact before the tip. OK, next excuse: ball was uncatchable. Then why did AU get PI when the Landry interception made the ball uncatchable? (unless Auburn receivers can freeze time) This is why SEC officiating always has and will always be a joke.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Yes, the SEC supported the officials but they overlooked the last sentence of the rule that makes a non-catchable ball negate interference. "Pass interference rules do not apply after the pass has been touched anywhere inbounds by an inbounds player or has touched an official. If an opponent is fouled, the penalty is for the foul and not pass interference."
dfm1981 5 years ago
Are you so naive that you think the head official would admit to a mistake? Noone here is moaning-just stating facts. If it makes you angry, go somewhere else. Had the situation been reversed, you would be "moaning."
BPM 5 years ago
The game wasn't decided by the officals and I wish you would quit moaning over it and go on your team is. The head offical reviewed the play today (monday) and said the right call was made. END OF STORY good luck to both teams the rest of the year
jet7111 5 years ago
I agree, we had opportunities to win. So did Auburn-2 great D's. The game should not be decided by the officials. I know that the refs are saying that the ball was uncatchable due to the tip, but tipped balls can be caught. Anyone remember Kentucky 2002??
BPM 5 years ago
Yes, the ball was tipped but the Auburn defender was holding the LSU receiver and according to the NCAA rule, the tip only made a non catchable ball makes interference moot but any other infraction should be called. Defensive Holding should have been called.
dfm1981 5 years ago
God, I feel sorry for Tulane this Saturday.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
I'm making the SEC look bad by citing video evidence and their own rules? (see above) OK dude, if you say so. Calls going either way? Look at the two other videos on this site. Also, maybe the SEC head office is (gasp) circling the wagons to keep their officials from looking bad? But you are somewhat right on the last point, time to move on to the next opponent.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
even if contact was made the tip made the ball uncatchalbe end of story
jet7111 5 years ago
No, Jackass. The correct call is holding on the defense or illegal contact. Automatic first down. Know the rules before you type and try to make a valid point, because if you don't you just sound ignorant.
kkille1lsu 5 years ago
Right kkille and dolemite. I also have pics showing the defender was holding Doucet for a space of about 5 yards before the tip. Without the contact, who can know if Doucet could have competed with the tipping defender for the ball. The rules on interference state that if catchability is in question, the pass is considered by default catchable. As you said, it was a least a defensive hold (doesn't matter if the ball is in the air or catchable) and a ten-yard penalty/automatic first down.
rwgingles 5 years ago
Your too upset with the game. Those are SEC refs not AU refs. Many calls could have gone back and forth The game is over. Both teams played great. Leave it at that. Instead your trying to make the South Eastern Conference look bad by trying to point out every little thing that you think was a mistake. The head of the SEC said differently today. ITS OVER LSU is a great team and good luck for the rest of the season and can't wait till next year.
jet7111 5 years ago
1. you don't know that those weren't AU refs
2. there were no less than 4 egregious errors made by the refs, all of which would have significantly changed the game
3. it's not that someone "thinks" it was a mistake. it's indisputable video evidence
bfniii 5 years ago
The SEC head offical reviewed this play today and said that the call was correct. Get over it. Anyway both teams had there chances and it was a great game. You don't see the LSU players complaining about it. I've read there quotes on the game.
jet7111 5 years ago
For the record, it was an amazing game, but you can't fight a great team and officials at the same time. This was the last straw in a series of bad/no calls, and the video doesn't lie. Besides, you really think Miles would let his players give their real feelings in a public forum? Give me a break.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
the head official is wrong according to the rule book and the indisputable video evidence. it's either pass interference or defensive holding, but not a no call.
bfniii 5 years ago
Defensive holding should have been the call. Rule 7, Article 4(c): Defensive players may ward off or legally block an eligible pass receiver until that player occupies the same yard line as the defender or until opponent could not possibly block him. Continuous contact is illegal.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Official 2006 NCAA football rulebook: Rule 7, Article 4(b): Defensive players may not use hands and arms to tackle, hold, or otherwise illegally obstruct an opponent other than a runner.
lsudolemite 5 years ago
Notice the announcer saying "i didn't know they could do that."
BabaRamDass 5 years ago
I'm going to be bitter about that one for a while, i have never seen a flag picked up like that and not even video reviewed, that's like a baseball umpire calling strike 3 and then taking it back.
BabaRamDass 5 years ago
The SEC Office seems to agree with the officials.
barrettaub 5 years ago
what do you expect them to do, disagree? of course not. what kind of precedent would that set?
bfniii 5 years ago
I don't know, why don't you ask the Pac-10 who said that the officicals screwed up the Oregon/Okie game. Said officials (including the replay offical) were suspended a week. What kind of precedent did that set?
barrettaub 5 years ago
1. miles sent the calls in question to the sec office. it's possible the sec will do the same as the pac-10
2. either way it doesn't matter. the point i was making was that the sec isn't going to rescind the game. that's what i meant by precedent.
bfniii 5 years ago
So, are you saying he would have caught it? Don't think so. Blame LSU's missed opportunities and average starting point of the 17 yard line as their downfall.
baddagettabah 5 years ago
Hey, dipstick, it doesn't matter if he would have caught it! It was at worst, defensive pass interference and at best defensive holding, which wouls have give LSU a 1st down (4th down conversion) with nearly 3 minutes to go.
rwgingles 5 years ago
I guess we won't mention when LSU intercepted the ball and was flagged for pass interference in the same situation. Guess what, If we intercepted the ball It would have been hard for Auburns reciever to catch it.
khounba 5 years ago