Why are the vast majority of sports people focusing upon the extra play that should not have been awarded to CMU, rather than the flawed rule that would have negated it?

Many so called experts have called for the refs to be suspended or fired. Others have suggested for CMU to do the "right" thing and forfeit the game. Almost no one has pointed out the fallacy of the rule.

I was at the game. When the Chippewas were awarded that final play, no one; not the OSU coaches, players, or fans complained. They all basically grudgingly accepted the fact that intentional grounding occurred on fourth down and assumed the game wouldn't end on a penalty and CMU would be awarded an untimed play.

During the Hail May, imagine if OSU would have illegally interfered with the Central receiver. A penalty would have been called and CMU would have had yet one more play because the game cannot end on a penalty by the defense.

Why then should a game be ended despite a penalty on the offense? Especially on 4th down? More attention needs to be placed upon modifying the flawed rule for games in the future.

Otherwise savvy coaches on 4th down with seconds remaining will have their players hold, cut block, and so forth when they think it will win the game.

(09-11-2016 04:16 PM)Okie Chippewa Wrote:  Why are the vast majority of sports people focusing upon the extra play that should not have been awarded to CMU, rather than the flawed rule that would have negated it?

Many so called experts have called for the refs to be suspended or fired. Others have suggested for CMU to do the "right" thing and forfeit the game. Almost no one has pointed out the fallacy of the rule.

I was at the game. When the Chippewas were awarded that final play, no one; not the OSU coaches, players, or fans complained. They all basically grudgingly accepted the fact that intentional grounding occurred on fourth down and assumed the game wouldn't end on a penalty and CMU would be awarded an untimed play.

During the Hail May, imagine if OSU would have illegally interfered with the Central receiver. A penalty would have been called and CMU would have had yet one more play because the game cannot end on a penalty by the defense.

Why then should a game be ended despite a penalty on the offense? Especially on 4th down? More attention needs to be placed upon modifying the flawed rule for games in the future.

Otherwise savvy coaches on 4th down with seconds remaining will have their players hold, cut block, and so forth when they think it will win the game.

Because the rule is perfect the way it is. CMU did not have the ball, so there is no reason for them to get an extra play.

The rule needs to be changed so that the games can not end under an offense penalty either. That to me is cheating just to win, and be unsportsmanlike on the winning team. Even Gundy said he do not blamed the refs. it was his fault that it happened.

Like I've said- the rule is going to get changed this off season- to what the refs did do.

I compare this to a few years ago- bowl game with UNC/Tennessee. UNC I think had an offensive player commit a false start with 1 second to go with them trailing. They got to kick the game winning field goal- as a result. The offense benefitted from committing a penalty. What happened that offseason? They put in the 10 second run off. Teams shouldn't benefit from committing a penalty.

(09-11-2016 04:35 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The rule needs to be changed so that the games can not end under an offense penalty either. That to me is cheating just to win, and be unsportsmanlike on the winning team. Even Gundy said he do not blamed the refs. it was his fault that it happened.

He said it was a stupid playcall, not that he didn't blame the refs. He just didn't press the issue with the refs because it shouldn't have come down to that.

What's really stupid is that he should have had the QB throw the ball out of the back of the end zone, as there is no penalty for that and time would have run out.

It is worth pointing out that blaming the refs is sort of silly, because at the time it happened, no one knew it was a bad ruling, not TV, not anyone, until quite a bit later when someone pointed it out, then everyone acted like they knew it was a mistake all along, and why didn't the refs ask someone: no one knew they were wrong.

That said, the reason they threw the ball to run out the clock instead of punting it, was precisely because there was a better chance CMU never gets a chance to score, and part of that is because if there is a penalty on you, the game is still over, vs. if you punt it, then you do get an untimed down.

No game should end on a penalty.

That should be the overriding rule that governs these situations.

(09-11-2016 05:19 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  No game should end on a penalty.

That should be the overriding rule that governs these situations.

The only thing would be- if offense is leading and were to commit say a holding penalty, I'd have no issue with the game ending then- because there's no loss of down component. But if it's 4th down, and you have a loss of down penalty, the game shouldn't end.

(09-11-2016 04:44 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Like I've said- the rule is going to get changed this off season- to what the refs did do.

I compare this to a few years ago- bowl game with UNC/Tennessee. UNC I think had an offensive player commit a false start with 1 second to go with them trailing. They got to kick the game winning field goal- as a result. The offense benefitted from committing a penalty. What happened that offseason? They put in the 10 second run off. Teams shouldn't benefit from committing a penalty.

I think the 10 second runoff is one of the dumbest rules in football. It very, very rarely is the offense going to benefit. Its penalizing the team twice.

(09-11-2016 05:19 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  No game should end on a penalty.

That should be the overriding rule that governs these situations.

No half should end on an accepted penalty.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using CSNbbs mobile app

Stipulating offense or defense misses the point and may create loopholes. The best way to prevent cheaters from benefitting would be to simply state:

Quote:"the game cannot end with a penalty against the team that is ahead on the scoreboard, or against the defense in case the score is tied".

[BOOM!]

That way the team that's ahead can't commit a penalty on offense (e.g. intential grounding) with the purpose of running out the clock.

(09-11-2016 06:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 04:44 PM)stever20 Wrote:  Like I've said- the rule is going to get changed this off season- to what the refs did do.

I compare this to a few years ago- bowl game with UNC/Tennessee. UNC I think had an offensive player commit a false start with 1 second to go with them trailing. They got to kick the game winning field goal- as a result. The offense benefitted from committing a penalty. What happened that offseason? They put in the 10 second run off. Teams shouldn't benefit from committing a penalty.

I think the 10 second runoff is one of the dumbest rules in football. It very, very rarely is the offense going to benefit. Its penalizing the team twice.

But there should be no time EVER where you commit a penalty and it is to your advantage. And there was a game that a team won a game because they committed a penalty.

(09-11-2016 07:00 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Stipulating offense or defense misses the point and may create loopholes. The best way to prevent cheaters from benefitting would be to simply state:

Quote:"the game cannot end with a penalty against the team that is ahead on the scoreboard, or against the defense in case the score is tied".

[BOOM!]

That way the team that's ahead can't commit a penalty on offense (e.g. intential grounding) with the purpose of running out the clock.

The thing with that is if I'm leading on offense and commit a holding penalty the last play of the game, in that case the game should be over. Why? Because there's no loss of down in that situation, and the offensive team could just kneel down.

(09-11-2016 07:09 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 07:00 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Stipulating offense or defense misses the point and may create loopholes. The best way to prevent cheaters from benefitting would be to simply state:

Quote:"the game cannot end with a penalty against the team that is ahead on the scoreboard, or against the defense in case the score is tied".

[BOOM!]

That way the team that's ahead can't commit a penalty on offense (e.g. intential grounding) with the purpose of running out the clock.

The thing with that is if I'm leading on offense and commit a holding penalty the last play of the game, in that case the game should be over. Why? Because there's no loss of down in that situation, and the offensive team could just kneel down.

While it would be an extremely unlikely series of events, the team on offense still COULD fumble the snap, defense recovers (going with 16 laterals) and scores a touchdown. Like I said, extremely unlikely but the potential for a mishandled snap exists. Games shouldn't end on a penalty.

(09-11-2016 05:21 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 05:19 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  No game should end on a penalty.

That should be the overriding rule that governs these situations.

The only thing would be- if offense is leading and were to commit say a holding penalty, I'd have no issue with the game ending then- because there's no loss of down component. But if it's 4th down, and you have a loss of down penalty, the game shouldn't end.

The game should still end in that situation if the clock is at 0:00 and the team committing the penalty is still in possession of the ball when the penalty is committed.

(09-11-2016 04:57 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 04:35 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The rule needs to be changed so that the games can not end under an offense penalty either. That to me is cheating just to win, and be unsportsmanlike on the winning team. Even Gundy said he do not blamed the refs. it was his fault that it happened.

He said it was a stupid playcall, not that he didn't blame the refs. He just didn't press the issue with the refs because it shouldn't have come down to that.

What's really stupid is that he should have had the QB throw the ball out of the back of the end zone, as there is no penalty for that and time would have run out.

Honestly he didn't want to affect his team stats, so it didn't seem like a viable option to him.

All this whining from mcmurphy and folks in stoolwater could have been avoided if osu had just taken care of business and scored more points. Bad calls have been part of the game forever. 5th down anyone?

(09-11-2016 06:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think the 10 second runoff is one of the dumbest rules in football. It very, very rarely is the offense going to benefit. Its penalizing the team twice.

While it does present that possibility, it was put in because teams could use it as a way to stop the clock without losing a down by clocking it, and some did. It also makes it a little harder to come back in the last minute, which is probably fair.

(09-11-2016 09:58 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(09-11-2016 06:44 PM)bullet Wrote:  I think the 10 second runoff is one of the dumbest rules in football. It very, very rarely is the offense going to benefit. Its penalizing the team twice.

While it does present that possibility, it was put in because teams could use it as a way to stop the clock without losing a down by clocking it, and some did. It also makes it a little harder to come back in the last minute, which is probably fair.

Right. And remember, a team on offense that commits a dead-ball foul can still avoid the 10-second runoff by taking a timeout -- BYU did that just before kicking the winning FG against Arizona last week.

Plus, there could have still been 1 second left on the clock when the refs blow the play dead. that could be a reason to used an untimed set of down for CMU.