(09-26-2022 08:08 AM)ragin4u Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:02 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:00 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:48 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:40 AM)Meathead Wrote:  Lot of chirping on here from a team that would have almost certainly lost had they not benefited from the worst fair catch interference call in history. The video is very clear what happened there. App would have had the ball at midfield and the game would have been completely different. Look, you guys played fine, you have a good defense and App always struggles against mobile QBs... you get the Dub this time around but win with class.

Call the waaambulance.

Yes, the video is clear. The penalty was not for running into the receiver. It was because the App player did not provide the punt receiver room to make the fair catch unimpeded. It was the right call. Read the rule book.

Please don't. Many here are congratulating JMU on the win.

But in no world can two players get blocked in the back and pushed into the PR.

We can debate how important or not that call was to the outcome of the game, but anyone that understands football would agree that was a bad call. In fact I bet we get an email from the league office today acknowledging that.

Read the rule book. It’s clear. Those who want to believe differently because they want to ignore the rule are free to do so, but the rule was fairly applied. End of debate.

I have no dog in this fight and of course, I have zero idea if the call changed the game, etc BUT there is no way that was not a blown call. The reason the returner did not have space to make the catch is because the cover guy was being pushed/blocked into him.
All in all and entertaining game. Welcome to the FunBelt, JMU

Makes no difference. The App cover guy impeded the receiver.

The rule isn’t nuanced. It’s not like “running into the kicker” or “roughing the kicker”…if a player on the kicking team impedes the receiver it’s a foul. End of story.

(09-26-2022 08:02 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:00 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:48 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:40 AM)Meathead Wrote:  Lot of chirping on here from a team that would have almost certainly lost had they not benefited from the worst fair catch interference call in history. The video is very clear what happened there. App would have had the ball at midfield and the game would have been completely different. Look, you guys played fine, you have a good defense and App always struggles against mobile QBs... you get the Dub this time around but win with class.

Call the waaambulance.

Yes, the video is clear. The penalty was not for running into the receiver. It was because the App player did not provide the punt receiver room to make the fair catch unimpeded. It was the right call. Read the rule book.

Please don't. Many here are congratulating JMU on the win.

But in no world can two players get blocked in the back and pushed into the PR.

We can debate how important or not that call was to the outcome of the game, but anyone that understands football would agree that was a bad call. In fact I bet we get an email from the league office today acknowledging that.

Read the rule book. It’s clear. Those who want to believe differently because they want to ignore the rule are free to do so, but the rule was fairly applied. End of debate.

Nothing in that article suggests it shouldn't have been a penalty. Accept the gift and be glad for the win.

(09-26-2022 08:09 AM)Meathead Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:04 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:01 AM)Meathead Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:48 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:40 AM)Meathead Wrote:  Lot of chirping on here from a team that would have almost certainly lost had they not benefited from the worst fair catch interference call in history. The video is very clear what happened there. App would have had the ball at midfield and the game would have been completely different. Look, you guys played fine, you have a good defense and App always struggles against mobile QBs... you get the Dub this time around but win with class.

Call the waaambulance.

Yes, the video is clear. The penalty was not for running into the receiver. It was because the App player did not provide the punt receiver room to make the fair catch unimpeded. It was the right call. Read the rule book.

The App player had pulled up his run and was allowing plenty of room before your boy creamed him into the return guy. Look at the video again. I can live with a bad call costing us the game but not some revisionist history that ignores the fact that it was a bad call.

Good one.

Your player barreled through the block and impeded the receiver. The App player’s enthusiasm to force his way to the receiver’s path was the foul. Again, read the rule book.

Uh, no... live in denial if you want. Watch the video again. Enjoy the win but don't be such a jerk.

Okay, you’re entitled to live in denial. But the only jerks are those who don’t like the way the rule was applied.

(09-26-2022 08:13 AM)Appvette Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:02 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:00 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:48 AM)Longhorn Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 07:40 AM)Meathead Wrote:  Lot of chirping on here from a team that would have almost certainly lost had they not benefited from the worst fair catch interference call in history. The video is very clear what happened there. App would have had the ball at midfield and the game would have been completely different. Look, you guys played fine, you have a good defense and App always struggles against mobile QBs... you get the Dub this time around but win with class.

Call the waaambulance.

Yes, the video is clear. The penalty was not for running into the receiver. It was because the App player did not provide the punt receiver room to make the fair catch unimpeded. It was the right call. Read the rule book.

Please don't. Many here are congratulating JMU on the win.

But in no world can two players get blocked in the back and pushed into the PR.

We can debate how important or not that call was to the outcome of the game, but anyone that understands football would agree that was a bad call. In fact I bet we get an email from the league office today acknowledging that.

Read the rule book. It’s clear. Those who want to believe differently because they want to ignore the rule are free to do so, but the rule was fairly applied. End of debate.

Nothing in that article suggests it shouldn't have been a penalty. Accept the gift and be glad for the win.

Apparently you can’t comprehend the written word. That may just be…just a suggestion here…the reason you’re unable to grasp why it was a foul on the App player.

(09-24-2022 04:53 PM)T-Dog Wrote:  This was called kick-catch interference on App.

I'm not sure you've watched this replay.

#45 was clearly blocked in the back.

#0 clearly is pulling up three yards from the PR.

#0 was blocked into the PR and one could even argue that JMU #26 ran into the PR first.

The rule states that the kicking team can't push a PR blocking member into the PR, you may be confused by this portion of the rule.

Leave how that call impacted the game out of the discussion, but any objective poster would agree it was a poor call by that crew on Saturday.

(09-26-2022 08:18 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(09-24-2022 04:53 PM)T-Dog Wrote:  This was called kick-catch interference on App.

I'm not sure you've watched this replay.

#45 was clearly blocked in the back.

#0 was blocked into the PR and one could even argue that JMU #26 ran into the PR first.

The rule states that the kicking team can't push a PR blocking member into the PR, you may be confused by portion of the rule.

Leave how that call impacted the game out of the discussion, but any objective poster would agree it was a poor call by that crew on Saturday.

The foul was on player #0. He ran into the space where the receiver was trying to catch the ball. The fact #0 was blocked and then fell into the receiver’s space was unfortunate (for App fans), however, it does not negate or change the fact player #0 impeded the receiver. The rule is actually very simple. It’s there to protect the receiver.

About the other claim about #45 being blocked in the back…I’ve seen similar blocks called illegal, but I’ve also seen them considered a block on the side. Or, perhaps it was just missed by the refs. In any case, nothing was called so it’s inconsequential to the issue that App fans want to litigate.

JMU already gifted App 14 points off fumbles and you guys are complaining cause you needed more? 28-3 wasn't enough of a lead for you guys?

Those few who are clinging to a "blown call" for losing this game, it makes you look like petty. You didn't lose because of a blown call.

(09-26-2022 08:18 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(09-24-2022 04:53 PM)T-Dog Wrote:  This was called kick-catch interference on App.

I'm not sure you've watched this replay.

#45 was clearly blocked in the back.

#0 clearly is pulling up three yards from the PR.

#0 was blocked into the PR and one could even argue that JMU #26 ran into the PR first.

The rule states that the kicking team can't push a PR blocking member into the PR, you may be confused by this portion of the rule.

Leave how that call impacted the game out of the discussion, but any objective poster would agree it was a poor call by that crew on Saturday.

I like seeing this video over and over. Reminds me how the big guys got knocked around by the little guys

C'mon App! Use this as fuel for the rivalry and move on!

We've moved on from the result, it's the lack of understanding of basic rules that is troubling. Even after watching the review and not recognizing that #0 clearly pulled up 3 yards in front of the PR is bias that can't be underestimated for any future discussions of this nature.

App has won and lost games in which I can admit we've been on the good end of a bad call, the SBC refs are known to have a few per game. There were a ton of them in SoCon era.

Not sure the score of the game or not when that call happened. The JMU and App player seem to be simultaneously hitting the PR.

I can understand why it was called the way it did, but at same time, if ruled the other way, JMU fans would be upset also.

With that stated, no way that one play was the reason App State lost. The lead at one point was 28-3, then 28-10 at the half.

JMU defense stepped up to stop Brice and the App offense.

JMU offense made plays and had a great running attack that fueled the comeback win.

App defense allowed big runs and big plays. Allowed the JMU QB all day to throw at times. Credit to JMU OL.

While the PR call could have slowed down the comeback, it was no guarantee that App would have held on for the win or even scored on that hypothetical drive.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

hburg I'm not debating the impact on the game, way too may variable to get into there.

I'm surprised not one Duke fan has had the objectivity and understanding of the rules to admit it was a poor call.

(09-26-2022 08:39 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  We've moved on from the result, it's the lack of understanding of basic rules that is troubling. Even after watching the review and not recognizing that #0 clearly pulled up 3 yards in front of the PR is bias that can't be underestimated for any future discussions of this nature.

App has won and lost games in which I can admit we've been on the good end of a bad call, the SBC refs are known to have a few per game. There were a ton of them in SoCon era.

From the stands at least, there were some suspect PI calls/non-calls against JMU. I'm sure there's video out there that could be scrutinized.

But even if App got that fumble call. There is NO WAY you can project that App would still win the game. Could have been a pick 6 or sack/fumble right after that. Not like there wasn't a demonstrated history of JMU getting to Brice and wreaking havoc.

Again, I get the loss was a tough pill to swallow. I sat there distraught in the first half because I KNEW that wasn't reflective of this JMU team. Like I said on another post, the script got flipped from one half to the other, but no one can say with any certainty that that one play was the cause or catalyst. It may have come on the next play or the next series. But it was coming.

Looking forward to this type of game every year. Would hate to see it turned into a b!tchfest, which by the way many JMU fans are great at so be prepared

(09-26-2022 08:42 AM)hburg Wrote:  Not sure the score of the game or not when that call happened. The JMU and App player seem to be simultaneously hitting the PR.

I can understand why it was called the way it did, but at same time, if ruled the other way, JMU fans would be upset also.

With that stated, no way that one play was the reason App State lost. The lead at one point was 28-3, then 28-10 at the half.

JMU defense stepped up to stop Brice and the App offense.

JMU offense made plays and had a great running attack that fueled the comeback win.

App defense allowed big runs and big plays. Allowed the JMU QB all day to throw at times. Credit to JMU OL.

While the PR call could have slowed down the comeback, it was no guarantee that App would have held on for the win or even scored on that hypothetical drive.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

no certainly not. We may have gone on to score and retake the momentum, or JMU could have stuffed us on our typical 2nd half offering of run/run/long 3rd down sack/incomplete that we were offering up anyway.

You can simultaneously admit that it was a bad call that clearly affected the game and also that JMU earned their comeback and victory.

Bad calls happen, sometimes you benefit, sometimes to your detriment.

(09-26-2022 08:30 AM)2Buck Wrote:  JMU already gifted App 14 points off fumbles and you guys are complaining cause you needed more? 28-3 wasn't enough of a lead for you guys?

Those few who are clinging to a "blown call" for losing this game, it makes you look like petty. You didn't lose because of a blown call.

this right here.

(09-26-2022 08:51 AM)2Buck Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:39 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  We've moved on from the result, it's the lack of understanding of basic rules that is troubling. Even after watching the review and not recognizing that #0 clearly pulled up 3 yards in front of the PR is bias that can't be underestimated for any future discussions of this nature.

App has won and lost games in which I can admit we've been on the good end of a bad call, the SBC refs are known to have a few per game. There were a ton of them in SoCon era.

From the stands at least, there were some suspect PI calls/non-calls against JMU. I'm sure there's video out there that could be scrutinized.

But even if App got that fumble call. There is NO WAY you can project that App would still win the game. Could have been a pick 6 or sack/fumble right after that. Not like there wasn't a demonstrated history of JMU getting to Brice and wreaking havoc.

Again, I get the loss was a tough pill to swallow. I sat there distraught in the first half because I KNEW that wasn't reflective of this JMU team. Like I said on another post, the script got flipped from one half to the other, but no one can say with any certainty that that one play was the cause or catalyst. It may have come on the next play or the next series. But it was coming.

Looking forward to this type of game every year. Would hate to see it turned into a b!tchfest, which by the way many JMU fans are great at so be prepared

You seem to be struggling with the concept of separating a comment that it was a bad call and it costing App the game. You can admit the former without conceding the latter.

(09-26-2022 08:42 AM)hburg Wrote:  Not sure the score of the game or not when that call happened. The JMU and App player seem to be simultaneously hitting the PR.

I can understand why it was called the way it did, but at same time, if ruled the other way, JMU fans would be upset also.

With that stated, no way that one play was the reason App State lost. The lead at one point was 28-3, then 28-10 at the half.

JMU defense stepped up to stop Brice and the App offense.

JMU offense made plays and had a great running attack that fueled the comeback win.

App defense allowed big runs and big plays. Allowed the JMU QB all day to throw at times. Credit to JMU OL.

While the PR call could have slowed down the comeback, it was no guarantee that App would have held on for the win or even scored on that hypothetical drive.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

I agree with a lot of what you've said here, and credit to JMU OL and DL, they played great. Holding App to 68 yards rushing is no small feat. I do believe this play changed the momentum of the game and likely affected the outcome... even had App not scored there, JMU would have had a longer field on the next drive and time remaining would have eventually been a factor. Instead, JMU had momentum and the ball on the App side of midfield. This was the definition of game changing in my opinion. Still, congrats on the comeback and the win.

(09-26-2022 07:40 AM)Meathead Wrote:  Lot of chirping on here from a team that would have almost certainly lost had they not benefited from the worst fair catch interference call in history. The video is very clear what happened there. App would have had the ball at midfield and the game would have been completely different. Look, you guys played fine, you have a good defense and App always struggles against mobile QBs... you get the Dub this time around but win with class.

lose with class.

Every time I refresh the page this thread has new replies. When will this game end?

(09-26-2022 08:57 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:51 AM)2Buck Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:39 AM)Saint3333 Wrote:  We've moved on from the result, it's the lack of understanding of basic rules that is troubling. Even after watching the review and not recognizing that #0 clearly pulled up 3 yards in front of the PR is bias that can't be underestimated for any future discussions of this nature.

App has won and lost games in which I can admit we've been on the good end of a bad call, the SBC refs are known to have a few per game. There were a ton of them in SoCon era.

From the stands at least, there were some suspect PI calls/non-calls against JMU. I'm sure there's video out there that could be scrutinized.

But even if App got that fumble call. There is NO WAY you can project that App would still win the game. Could have been a pick 6 or sack/fumble right after that. Not like there wasn't a demonstrated history of JMU getting to Brice and wreaking havoc.

Again, I get the loss was a tough pill to swallow. I sat there distraught in the first half because I KNEW that wasn't reflective of this JMU team. Like I said on another post, the script got flipped from one half to the other, but no one can say with any certainty that that one play was the cause or catalyst. It may have come on the next play or the next series. But it was coming.

Looking forward to this type of game every year. Would hate to see it turned into a b!tchfest, which by the way many JMU fans are great at so be prepared

You seem to be struggling with the concept of separating a comment that it was a bad call and it costing App the game. You can admit the former without conceding the latter.

True. And I haven't been reading through every post. The issue is, the way this has generally been served up by some is this is the only impactful blown call and App likely suffered the loss as a result. JMU fans are trying to enjoy the victory and some are seeing this constant point as a slight. We're a touchy bunch (not in a pervy way like ODU fans).

(09-26-2022 08:57 AM)Meathead Wrote:  

(09-26-2022 08:42 AM)hburg Wrote:  Not sure the score of the game or not when that call happened. The JMU and App player seem to be simultaneously hitting the PR.

I can understand why it was called the way it did, but at same time, if ruled the other way, JMU fans would be upset also.

With that stated, no way that one play was the reason App State lost. The lead at one point was 28-3, then 28-10 at the half.

JMU defense stepped up to stop Brice and the App offense.

JMU offense made plays and had a great running attack that fueled the comeback win.

App defense allowed big runs and big plays. Allowed the JMU QB all day to throw at times. Credit to JMU OL.

While the PR call could have slowed down the comeback, it was no guarantee that App would have held on for the win or even scored on that hypothetical drive.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

I agree with a lot of what you've said here, and credit to JMU OL and DL, they played great. Holding App to 68 yards rushing is no small feat. I do believe this play changed the momentum of the game and likely affected the outcome... even had App not scored there, JMU would have had a longer field on the next drive and time remaining would have eventually been a factor. Instead, JMU had momentum and the ball on the App side of midfield. This was the definition of game changing in my opinion. Still, congrats on the comeback and the win.

A fair assessment for sure. The interference call is interesting because it happened at a pivotal time in the game even with JMU being down quite a bit. The call for me seems to be a grey area and could have easily gone either way. It would be intriguing to have a reponse from the refs of why they called it the way they did. What we see and interpret and what they see and interpret are different.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk