Jump to content

  • USF Bulls fans join us at The Bulls Pen

    It's simple, free and connects you to other South Florida Bulls fans!

  • Members do not see this ad, Register

Horsecollar???

cptkid570

Recommended Posts

Guest nybullsfan

Guest nybullsfan

Posted
Posted

The unsportsman penalty that was called was announced as 57 in the stadium. That was weak because all he was doing was waving his arms.

That is the play I was referencing....very frustrating call at the time. 

It was on 97 for removing his helmet.  Which may or may not have been to make adjustments to it and may or may not have coincided with some taunting.  It wasn't shown on TV or in any replays.

The announcers on TV also thought the ref said 57, but they meant 97 whether they said 57 or not.

My old ears very clearly heard the ref say 97

I was surprised when the TV guys were talking about 41 and then 57

If ESPN actually did catch it on one of the cameras, they never showed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply
IncrediBULL Toro Magnifico

IncrediBULL

Posted
  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  7,201
  • Reputation:   43
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  01/02/2002
Posted

Stadium showed a replay and it looked like he grabed the shirt and pulled him down.  He clearly did not have the pad because the shirt was pulling away as he took him down.

It happened in front of me.  When I saw it the first time, it looked like jersey to me.  Then on the stadium reply, it also looked like Jersey.  I thought the call was bogus.

Hearing from some of you who have seen it on ESPN in highlights, sounds like it wasn't just jersey.  But at the stadium, it sure looked like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reliable Source Toro Magnifico

Reliable Source

Posted
  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  10,367
  • Reputation:   170
  • Days Won:  40
  • Joined:  09/15/2008
Posted

It was an obvious horsecollar penalty. The refs got it right.

That was no where close to a "horse collar". Even the TV announcers scoffed at it after watching the replay. His jersey was grabbed mid numbers, nowhere near his neck, go look at the replays. It wasn't even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DELdaBull Toro Magnifico

DELdaBull

Posted
  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  17,061
  • Reputation:   1,429
  • Days Won:  19
  • Joined:  09/15/2005
Posted

It was an obvious horsecollar penalty. The refs got it right.

That was no where close to a "horse collar". Even the TV announcers scoffed at it after watching the replay. His jersey was grabbed mid numbers, nowhere near his neck, go look at the replays. It wasn't even close.

Bill,

You just wanna start something?  The announcers were scoffing at the personal foul.  The horse collar was a no doubter

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Triple B Toro Magnifico

Triple B

Posted
  • Group:  Moderator
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  74,608
  • Reputation:   10,866
  • Days Won:  424
  • Joined:  11/25/2005
Posted

It was an obvious horsecollar penalty. The refs got it right.

That was no where close to a "horse collar". Even the TV announcers scoffed at it after watching the replay. His jersey was grabbed mid numbers, nowhere near his neck, go look at the replays. It wasn't even close.

Bill,

You just wanna start something?  The announcers were scoffing at the personal foul.  The horse collar was a no doubter

It was **** obvious from 214 without the replay ... I'm not even sure how you would grab a jersey mid numbers, with one hand no less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cptkid570 Rising Star

cptkid570

Posted
  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  403
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/01/2005
  • Author
Posted

Thank you for all of the responses everyone.. Glad to see that others saw what I did.... And I'm still upset that there were only a few replays on the jumbotron... the lack of replays really hurt my experience..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Reliable Source Toro Magnifico

Reliable Source

Posted
  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  10,367
  • Reputation:   170
  • Days Won:  40
  • Joined:  09/15/2008
Posted

It was an obvious horsecollar penalty. The refs got it right.

That was no where close to a "horse collar". Even the TV announcers scoffed at it after watching the replay. His jersey was grabbed mid numbers, nowhere near his neck, go look at the replays. It wasn't even close.

Bill,

You just wanna start something?  The announcers were scoffing at the personal foul.  The horse collar was a no doubter

Yes, they were, I have seen this replay 8-10 times. It was still nowhere close to being a horse collar foul. The Television coverage at the time said that they could understand how it was called because it was very deceptive, but it was definitely "not" a horse collar. Rewind the tape.I watched the late replay of the game and they said the same thing, go figure. I'm not starting anything but I'm sure watching 10 times in High Def is a little more definitive than watching it once from the 2nd deck.

The rule is as follows:

RULE 9

9-1-2-p (FR-119)

All players are prohibited from grabbing the inside back collar of the shoulder pads

or jersey, or the inside collar of the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, and

immediately pulling the runner down. This does not apply to a runner who is inside

the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

Didn't happen, here is the replay for anyone who cares to educate themselves.

http://espn.go.com/espn3/player?id=65707&league=NCAAF

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest nybullsfan

Guest nybullsfan

Posted
Posted

Yes, they were, I have seen this replay 8-10 times. It was still nowhere close to being a horse collar foul. The Television coverage at the time said that they could understand how it was called because it was very deceptive, but it was definitely "not" a horse collar. Rewind the tape.I watched the late replay of the game and they said the same thing, go figure. I'm not starting anything but I'm sure watching 10 times in High Def is a little more definitive than watching it once from the 2nd deck.

The rule is as follows:

RULE 9

9-1-2-p (FR-119)

All players are prohibited from grabbing the inside back collar of the shoulder pads

or jersey, or the inside collar of the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, and

immediately pulling the runner down. This does not apply to a runner who is inside

the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

Didn't happen, here is the replay for anyone who cares to educate themselves.

http://espn.go.com/espn3/player?id=65707&league=NCAAF

If you (as a partisan Bulls fan) had to rewind it 8-10 times (in HD no less!) to determine that it actually was NOT a horsecollar, then maybe we can give the refs a pass for calling it one in real time.

And for not overturning it, since they're probably not going to rewind it 8-10 times and view it 1 frame at a time in an attempt to find enough proof to overturn the call on the field. They probably took 1 quick look, said "yup, he got the pads," and let them play on.

Just sayin...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
8u11`o3 Proficient

8u11`o3

Posted
  • Group:  Member
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Content Count:  444
  • Reputation:   22
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/08/2005
Posted

Yes, they were, I have seen this replay 8-10 times. It was still nowhere close to being a horse collar foul. The Television coverage at the time said that they could understand how it was called because it was very deceptive, but it was definitely "not" a horse collar. Rewind the tape.I watched the late replay of the game and they said the same thing, go figure. I'm not starting anything but I'm sure watching 10 times in High Def is a little more definitive than watching it once from the 2nd deck.

The rule is as follows:

RULE 9

9-1-2-p (FR-119)

All players are prohibited from grabbing the inside back collar of the shoulder pads

or jersey, or the inside collar of the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, and

immediately pulling the runner down. This does not apply to a runner who is inside

the tackle box or to a quarterback who is in the pocket.

Didn't happen, here is the replay for anyone who cares to educate themselves.

http://espn.go.com/espn3/player?id=65707&league=NCAAF

If you (as a partisan Bulls fan) had to rewind it 8-10 times (in HD no less!) to determine that it actually was NOT a horsecollar, then maybe we can give the refs a pass for calling it one in real time.

And for not overturning it, since they're probably not going to rewind it 8-10 times and view it 1 frame at a time in an attempt to find enough proof to overturn the call on the field. They probably took 1 quick look, said "yup, he got the pads," and let them play on.

Just sayin...

Penalties are not reviewable/overturnable, but I agree with your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

It appears you are using ad blocking tools.  This site is supported through ads.  Please disable in order to enjoy full access to The Bulls Pen.  Registration is free and reduces ads.

Got it!
Dismiss