That is a horrible call. The guy caught the ball and you see the Auburn players stop and give him a chance to catch it and one he caught they tackled him. I love that Tommy got that animated. Good for him! War Damn Eagle! We won anyways!!
just found this video, read some of the comments, and anyone who says the call is correct is just plain wrong. The announcers are incorrect by saying a clean catch would negate a KCI penalty, but.... no Auburn player touched the florida return man before or during the moment he caught the ball. There is no Halo rule either. That should clear up all confusion.
Your blind, he caught the ball. Therefore it shouldn't have been a penalty. Also another 15 yards on Tuberville? Even with the refs help Florida didnt win.
@gvmartin That was an awful call. It's not quite like pass interference, where you can still be called even if the receiver makes the catch; you either interfere, or you don't. Brandon James WAS NOT TOUCHED until he secured the ball. Additionally, you can't be ejected for being pissed at a stupid call.
except when they are right. he caught it, then got hit. easily seen in the reply. in fact, you can pause it at 59 seconds, and he has the ball in his hands and still hasn't been hit. perfect play.
Those commentators are definitely showing their ignorance of the rules. Why can't they put someone with knowledge of the rules in the booth. Anyone that knows even a tiny bit of the rules knows that catching of the punt doesn't absovle a player from committing Kick catch interference.
There's no such thing as a "halo" anymore. Which therefore makes "catch interference" identical to "pass interference". If that were a pass, would you have called that "pass interference" because the AU player was too close to him? No. Therefore it's not "catch interference" either.
Exactly, there's no halo rule. He wasn't touched until after he caught the ball, and he made a perfectly clean catch. Standing too close is NOT interference. It was a bullshit call, so this moron going on about "learning the rules" needs to crack them open himself a time or two.
That is a horrible call. The guy caught the ball and you see the Auburn players stop and give him a chance to catch it and one he caught they tackled him. I love that Tommy got that animated. Good for him! War Damn Eagle! We won anyways!!
GoodieDMB 7 months ago
kci and 15 yd penalty...still didn't help ya! WDE
AUDEFheismankillers 1 year ago
just found this video, read some of the comments, and anyone who says the call is correct is just plain wrong. The announcers are incorrect by saying a clean catch would negate a KCI penalty, but.... no Auburn player touched the florida return man before or during the moment he caught the ball. There is no Halo rule either. That should clear up all confusion.
SamBooby123 2 years ago
what a good call. officials were correct. even the commentator says he doesn't understand the rule. since when do they understand rules.
also why didnt the coach get ejected?
gvmartin 4 years ago
Your blind, he caught the ball. Therefore it shouldn't have been a penalty. Also another 15 yards on Tuberville? Even with the refs help Florida didnt win.
RunescapeMoneyMan 1 year ago
@gvmartin That was an awful call. It's not quite like pass interference, where you can still be called even if the receiver makes the catch; you either interfere, or you don't. Brandon James WAS NOT TOUCHED until he secured the ball. Additionally, you can't be ejected for being pissed at a stupid call.
89plainsman 1 year ago
Quit complaining you got a penelty it dosent matter yall won the game.
PS: TO HELL WITH NICK SABAN
lsufootball2oo7 4 years ago
@lsufootball2oo7 it's still a bad call but i agree about the Saban part he's gone to the schools i hate most
War Eagle
warboy42 1 year ago
horrible call. the announcers said it best "made a CLEAN catch."
adamryan1121 4 years ago
The call is great! See Rule in NCAA 9-4-1-c which states:
"c. It is an interference foul if the kicking team contacts the potential
receiver before, or simultaneous to, his first touching the ball (A.R. 6-4-
1-II, III, VII and IX). When in question, it is an interference foul."
Never believe TV announcers ;-)
cappal 4 years ago
except when they are right. he caught it, then got hit. easily seen in the reply. in fact, you can pause it at 59 seconds, and he has the ball in his hands and still hasn't been hit. perfect play.
adamryan1121 4 years ago
doesnt matter. we won either way
seacowluvinchic 4 years ago
Seriously. That's complete bullshit.
KriegerDesHasses 4 years ago
Those commentators are definitely showing their ignorance of the rules. Why can't they put someone with knowledge of the rules in the booth. Anyone that knows even a tiny bit of the rules knows that catching of the punt doesn't absovle a player from committing Kick catch interference.
jch1993 4 years ago
There's no such thing as a "halo" anymore. Which therefore makes "catch interference" identical to "pass interference". If that were a pass, would you have called that "pass interference" because the AU player was too close to him? No. Therefore it's not "catch interference" either.
wicketr 4 years ago
Exactly, there's no halo rule. He wasn't touched until after he caught the ball, and he made a perfectly clean catch. Standing too close is NOT interference. It was a bullshit call, so this moron going on about "learning the rules" needs to crack them open himself a time or two.
sagemc 4 years ago