Rewatching the game has made one thing clear
- Thread starter PurpleBlood87
- Start date
froglash88
Full Member
Officiating was very good Saturday
How was the official explanation wrong? He wasn't down yet because only his hand had hit the ground (not his elbow, forearm, knee, etc.) and he dropped the ball. Fumble.
Ron Swanson
Full Member
It was a very bad face mask, but to the refs credit I didn’t see it live either. It looked egregious on the replay, but for whatever reason it must have been somewhat missable in live* action.
Last edited:
Hoosierfrog
Tier 1
Is love action even allowed on live tv!?!:0
Peacefrog
Degenerate
Story of my life.
The Frog to be Named Later
Active Member
I can watch it on my phone
flyfishingfrog
Active Member
The coordinator of officials for the B12 said in the statement that addressed the replay that it did not adhere to the concept that the ground can't cause a fumble because the ball never hit the ground.
There is no "ground can't cause a fumble rule" and it would not have mattered if the ball had it the ground evidently.
Zebra Frog
KMA
The hand being down does not count towards the runner being down. The call was correct.
Horny4TCU
Active Member
Thank you for clarifying. To follow up though, if the forearm was down, would that count as being down?
Dogfrog
Active Member
I haven’t watched this play on replay yet but if it’s the one I think it is, it looked like the first thing to hit the ground was the ball while he still controlled it. If so, the question becomes are you down when the ball touches the ground? If so it looked like he was down first. If not it’s a fumble.
Zebra Frog
KMA
Yes.
If you need a good laugh this week, watch "Texas Rewind with Tom Hermann" on the Longhorn network. They make him sit through a replay of last weeks highlights and give play by play commentary. Quite hilarious listening to the excuses how they couldn't get a pass interference call, but he glossed over the facemask on Max in the endzone pretty quick.
Right, doesn't matter if the ball hits the ground or not. The "ground can't cause a fumble" misnomer (not an actual rule) is just another way of saying that if the player hits the ground with a part of his body that would make him down, and the ball pops out as a result of that force with the ground (i.e. hard fall and the ball comes out when his shoulder hits the ground), that it's not a fumble.
In Reagor's case, it was the back of his hand/wrist that hit the ground. Since that part of the body touching the ground doesn't make him down, when the ball popped out it was a fumble.
Last edited:
Yes
You are not down when the ball hits the ground. If you were, it would be really hard to recover a fumble and not be down immediately.
Also, the back of his wrist/hand hit the ground first, which knocked the ball loose. Since the back of your wrist doesn't = being "down," it was correctly ruled a fumble. It was REALLY clear on the jumbotron replay. I assume on the TV broadcast as well.
Best thing about the LHN is if you miss this showing of the Rewind, you can catch one of the 107 replays of the same episode the rest of the week, in between replays of the 2005 national championship of course.
Dogfrog
Active Member
OK, But theoretically if a guy is running with the ball, and goes down controlling the ball in his hands and the nose of the ball is the first thing to hit the ground, causing a fumble, it’s a fumble and not down. Right?
