The onside Kick (no-call)???

[crimsonaudio]

OK, so was the penalty an illegal block on Julio or catch interference that kept Julio from catching the ball?

I think it's an illegal block - once it'***** the ground there's no interference, iirc.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Thats some good info we need to get this to PTI so they can talk about this now and kill this conspiracy about us getting all the calls.

Correct. Instead of criticizing the refs, they should be thanking them for keeping them in the game and giving them a chance to win...

 

[RTR_UA#1]

From these rules it should have been a penalty.

When Rogan blocked Jones he was not eligible to do so. Because...

At the time of the block, the ball was still in the air (1. It had not touchced a UA (team B) player).

And at the time of the block, the ball was at the 38 yard line (2. Had not broken UA's (Team B's) restraining line which was the 40).

Also, at the time of the block it had not yet passed the 40 which was UA's restraining line and was still in the air(3. So it couldn't have touched anything passed the restraining line including the ground, a player, or an official)

Therefore, at the time Rogan blocked Julio, no UT (TEAM A) player was eligible to touch the free-kicked ball. And according to the rules, if they weren't yet eligible to touch the ball, they weren't yet eligible to block a UA player (Team B).

Obviously the officials had no idea what the rules are for the onside kick. There are 3 officials standing right there looking at the play and no flags are coming out. One is even marking the line!
Back to school zebras!

 

[RamJamHam]

I agree with Crimson Mapper. If we had blocked those guys Julio likely catches the ball and it's a non-issue all around.

If you know the home plate umpire is wildly inconsistent, do you take a close pitch with two strikes and leave it in his hands? Here, we should have executed properly and we would have simply run the clock out.

Now, what's the spread on hell freezing over before Kiffin ever mentions this tasty morsel in one of his screeds on officiating?

 

[BamaFlum]

WOW! Three obvious blown calls (PI, holding, and this) and UT thinks the refs had it in for THEM?

 

[Rasputin]

What If:
Tennessee lined up for an onside kick, but instead of Alabama having the sure hands people on the line, Alabama backed up to a conventional kick receiving line up. What does Tennessee do? Squib it and hope to recover? (That would have taken away part of their plan)

Sometimes I think of weird things...
(I have a bucket of water if I get flamed)

Not really following the strategy there...:conf3:

 

[CapitalTider]

Just to be fair, I have to wonder why our coaching staff didn't raise this issue at the time. Did they and it wasn't obvious on the telecast and not publicized or did they miss it to? I don't see a whole lot of fault in missing it, since it took an extremely careful reading of the rule to get to the conclusion that the kick was illegal.

 

[stuck-n-TN]

Wow, thanks for all of the explaining on this one! I have a ton of info to use tonight when I call into the radio show!!

 

[Bama Addiction]

I think it's an illegal block - once it'***** the ground there's no interference, iirc.

Just to be sure...spent some time on the NCAA rule book page....and my interpretation is that it was an illegal block only because Julio was withn the "neutral" zone as a receiver and the kicking team can not block within the neutral zone???

 

[crimsonaudio]

Just to be sure...spent some time on the NCAA rule book page....and my interpretation is that it was an illegal block only because Julio was withn the "neutral" zone as a receiver and the kicking team can not block within the neutral zone???

Sort of - I believe it was an illegal block because the ball was not yet live for (recoverable by) the kicking team. If JJ had touched it in the neutral zone before he was blocked, the ball would then have been live and the block would have been legal.

Rule 6, Section 1, Article 2:
g. No Team A player may block an opponent until Team A is eligible to touch a
free-kicked ball [S19].

ARTICLE 3. a. No Team A player may touch a free-kicked ball until after:
1. It touches a Team B player (Exception: Rules 6-1-4 and 6-5-1-b);
2. It breaks the plane of and remains beyond Team B’s restraining line
(Exception: Rule 6-4-1) (A.R. 2-11-2-I); or
3. It touches any player, the ground, an official or anything beyond Team B’s
restraining line.
Thereafter, all players of Team A become eligible to touch, recover or catch the
kick.
b. Any other touching by Team A is illegal touching, a violation that, when
the ball becomes dead, gives the receiving team the privilege of taking
the ball at the spot of the violation.

IOW, since the ball had not been touched by anyone and had not crossed the restraining line (the 40 yard line), it was not a 'live' ball for the kicking team, and under Rule 6, Section 1, Article 2, g: above, that means the kicking team may not block.

 

[CircleCity334]

I wonder if we practice this much. Im trying to figure out why we seem to only have 2 guys going for the ball.. We had 3 guys standing about 5 yards back just looking at it.. Why did they make no effort in going for it? Maybe its just me but i think CNS will have them running onside kicks over and over this week..