Chip: Fair catch or no fair catch? Regardless, football gods smiled on Gophers

[BleedGopher]

Per Chip:

ooper DeJean waved his left arm. That fact is indisputable. Three times in a circular motion, as if he were a school crossing guard waving traffic through the line.

His arm stayed shoulder height as he waved, not straight up above his head.

Does that constitute a fair catch?

Depends on whether the person answering that question lives in Minnesota or Iowa.

Ultimately, the officiating crew ruled that DeJean's waving motion met the standard of an invalid fair catch, and the 117th battle for the bronzed pig was guaranteed a finish that will be debated for eternity.

The football gods smiled on the Gophers in a place that normally torments them.

Fair catch or no fair catch? Regardless, football gods smiled on Gophers

Saturday's Gophers victory at Iowa was many layers of ugly. But it will be remembered for one play.

www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!

 

[RodentRampage]

Chip ought to actually read the rules.

 

[Word]

Chip ought to actually read the rules.

Yeah, that's frivolous writing by Chip. He's usually better than that.

 

[RememberMurray]

Sadly, Chip's flat-out dishonest here.

In one sentence, he makes the ridiculous claim that the any view of the call is dependent on whether or not you're an Iowa fan or a Minnesota fan.

In the very next sentence he points out that the officiating crew made the call.

He also neglects to mention (at least in this quoted portion of his column) that the play was actually reviewed via video.

There's no 'debate', Chip. The correct call was made, after review.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

I’m a retired lawyer. Really sad to see such a lazy article by a sportswriter. Football is rules based. Try parsing the rule itself rather than writing a gossip column that is based on ignorance of the rule. The rule on invalid fair catch is clear. Isn’t based on arm being above shoulder. It is about ambiguous arm movements that are designed to place coverage team in a quandary as to fair catch signal or not.

Given Iowa’s style, it might be that DeJean was coached to do what he did with his arms, hoping for a non-call. Now, it is too bad that our punt coverage was so bad that DeJean could escape from a sideline trap and waltz across the field for a TD, making this whole thing an issue. And it is too bad that our ST coach didn’t call for the punt to be sent out of bounds, depriving DeJean of a return opportunity in the first place. The Gophers were damn lucky that DeJean broke a rule. But it wasn’t a gift. DeJean broke a clear rule.

 

[RememberMurray]

I’m a retired lawyer. Really sad to see such a lazy article by a sportswriter. Football is rules based. Try parsing the rule itself rather than writing a gossip column that is based on ignorance of the rule. The rule on invalid fair catch is clear. Isn’t based on arm being above shoulder. It is about ambiguous arm movements that are designed to place coverage team in a quandary as to fair catch signal or not.

Given Iowa’s style, it might be that DeJean was coached to do what he did with his arms, hoping for a non-call. Now, it is too bad that our put coverage was so bad that DeJean could escape from a sideline trap and waltz across the field for a TD, making this whole thing an issue. And it is too bad that our ST coach didn’t call for the punt to be sent out of bounds, depriving DeJean of a return opportunity in the first place. The Gophers were damn lucky that DeJean broke a rule. But it wasn’t a gift. DeJean broke a clear rule.

Yeah, exactly.

People want to pretend that the rule is ambiguous or vague. It isn't.

People are entitled to disagree with the rule itself, and/or the purpose of the rule, etc. But the rule itself is clear.

 

[Spaulding!No!]

Sadly, Chip's flat-out dishonest here.

In one sentence, he makes the ridiculous claim that the any view of the call is dependent on whether or not you're an Iowa fan or a Minnesota fan.

In the very next sentence he points out that the officiating crew made the call.

He also neglects to mention (at least in this quoted portion of his column) that the play was actually reviewed via video.

There's no 'debate', Chip. The correct call was made, after review.

He lives his badgers and vols. Tc media is full of outta town clowns.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

GopherinIowa hit the nail on the head yesterday.

People see returners waive their hands for "poison" all the time and it's never an issue (we don't think of it as a fair catch). However, it's not an issue because they never return the ball after doing it.

It became an invalid fair catch because he claims to have been waiving his hands for "poison" and then returned it.

The football gods did not smile on us. We beat the hell out of Iowa yesterday despite the refs giftwrapping their only TD.

 

[MNVCGUY]

GopherinIowa hit the nail on the head yesterday.

People see returners waive their hands for "poison" all the time and it's never an issue (we don't think of it as a fair catch). However, it's not an issue because they never return the ball after doing it.

It became an invalid fair catch because he claims to have been waiving his hands for "poison" and then returned it.

The football gods did not smile on us. We beat the hell out of Iowa yesterday despite the refs giftwrapping their only TD.

Exactly.....there was zero issue with DeJean fielding the ball. The issue came when he went to advance it.

Pretty lazy piece by Chip and definitely below his usual standards where he tends to be one of if not the best of the local media guys.

 

[TwistingMyMelon]

Chip ought to actually read the rules.

If you read his words, I think he has. One can be acquainted with rules but ignore them and believe what they want anyway.

 

[50PoundHead]

I’m a retired lawyer. Really sad to see such a lazy article by a sportswriter. Football is rules based. Try parsing the rule itself rather than writing a gossip column that is based on ignorance of the rule. The rule on invalid fair catch is clear. Isn’t based on arm being above shoulder. It is about ambiguous arm movements that are designed to place coverage team in a quandary as to fair catch signal or not.

Given Iowa’s style, it might be that DeJean was coached to do what he did with his arms, hoping for a non-call. Now, it is too bad that our punt coverage was so bad that DeJean could escape from a sideline trap and waltz across the field for a TD, making this whole thing an issue. And it is too bad that our ST coach didn’t call for the punt to be sent out of bounds, depriving DeJean of a return opportunity in the first place. The Gophers were damn lucky that DeJean broke a rule. But it wasn’t a gift. DeJean broke a clear rule.

As a totally off-the-wall anecdote, I once asked a lawyer after I was given a ticket for going 42 in the 30 that what if I commissioned a study by having someone sit on that stretch of road with a speed gun monitoring the speeds of all the drivers and the study showed that over 90% of the drivers were violating the speed limit in the same way, could I present that as evidence in court to exonerate myself. Needless to say, the lawyer laughed. The law is what the law is regardless of its application.

 

[TwistingMyMelon]

Pretty lazy piece by Chip and definitely below his usual standards where he tends to be one of if not the best of the local media guys.

I'm not sure what you find problematic about what was posted above. He was simply saying whether you agree with this ruling will correlate with whether you are an Iowa or Minnesota fan. I don't know why that conclusion would even be controversial. Although many Iowa fans will conclude that the call was correct just as many or more never will. For a similar phenomena, see the 2020 presidential election.

 

[FanSinceTheFifties]

GopherinIowa hit the nail on the head yesterday.

People see returners waive their hands for "poison" all the time and it's never an issue (we don't think of it as a fair catch). However, it's not an issue because they never return the ball after doing it.

It became an invalid fair catch because he claims to have been waiving his hands for "poison" and then returned it.

The football gods did not smile on us. We beat the hell out of Iowa yesterday despite the refs giftwrapping their only TD.

I don't know if the refs gift-wrapped that TD. Seems the Gophers temporarily lost their poise and focus much like quarter 4+ of the NW game. This time, however, they had more time to recover from the blackout.

 

[FanSinceTheFifties]

Ex

As a totally off-the-wall anecdote, I once asked a lawyer after I was given a ticket for going 42 in the 30 that what if I commissioned a study by having someone sit on that stretch of road with a speed gun monitoring the speeds of all the drivers and the study showed that over 90% of the drivers were violating the speed limit in the same way, could I present that as evidence in court to exonerate myself. Needless to say, the lawyer laughed. The law is what the law is regardless of its application.

Except in baseball where an 0-2 pitch down the middle is ball one. And a 3-0 pitch that the catcher has to dive for is strike one.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

I don't know if the refs gift-wrapped that TD. Seems the Gophers temporarily lost their poise and focus much like quarter 4+ of the NW game. This time, however, they had more time to recover from the blackout.

I've seen people do what Tyler Nubin did on just about every single play.

If you see an offensive player try to nudge the ball up after the whistle - it's the same.
If you see any extracurricular activities, whatsoever - it's the same.

In fact, the only reason he was able to swat the ball is because the Iowa player was still pushing it forward. Those little things happen on every single play.

If Nubin would have hit someone late, sure. If he would have kicked the ball or through it way out of the way, sure. Calling that penalty on 4th and goal from the 1 was egregious.

 

[Some guy]

Per Chip:

ooper DeJean waved his left arm. That fact is indisputable. Three times in a circular motion, as if he were a school crossing guard waving traffic through the line.

His arm stayed shoulder height as he waved, not straight up above his head.

Does that constitute a fair catch?

Depends on whether the person answering that question lives in Minnesota or Iowa.

Ultimately, the officiating crew ruled that DeJean's waving motion met the standard of an invalid fair catch, and the 117th battle for the bronzed pig was guaranteed a finish that will be debated for eternity.

The football gods smiled on the Gophers in a place that normally torments them.

Fair catch or no fair catch? Regardless, football gods smiled on Gophers

Saturday's Gophers victory at Iowa was many layers of ugly. But it will be remembered for one play.

www.startribune.com

Go Gophers!!

This is pretty terrible analysis
As no one, including the call, argued he made a valid fair catch signal

 

[Gophergrandpa]

As a totally off-the-wall anecdote, I once asked a lawyer after I was given a ticket for going 42 in the 30 that what if I commissioned a study by having someone sit on that stretch of road with a speed gun monitoring the speeds of all the drivers and the study showed that over 90% of the drivers were violating the speed limit in the same way, could I present that as evidence in court to exonerate myself. Needless to say, the lawyer laughed. The law is what the law is regardless of its application.

It is impossible, as you know, for one highway patrolman to arrest the 50 speeders who pass him each minute. But the law is the law and no speeder has a defense based on "you don't catch enough guys." The issue, as you found, is that if you get caught, you are caught. Cooper DeJean and Ferentz (I am sure Ferentz coached DeJean to make all kinds of below the shoulder waving motions, in this desperate situation) got caught.

 

[FanSinceTheFifties]

I've seen people do what Tyler Nubin did on just about every single play.

If you see an offensive player try to nudge the ball up after the whistle - it's the same.
If you see any extracurricular activities, whatsoever - it's the same.

In fact, the only reason he was able to swat the ball is because the Iowa player was still pushing it forward. Those little things happen on every single play.

If Nubin would have hit someone late, sure. If he would have kicked the ball or through it way out of the way, sure. Calling that penalty on 4th and goal from the 1 was egregious.

That was one of, what, four penalties on the Gophers on that drive? Looked to me like Nubin swatted it pretty decisively. If the rules forbid it, it doesn't matter how many times it's not called, they can call it any time the rule is violated. The play was dead, nothing the ball carrier could do to advance the ball. I wish he hadn't done it and am glad it didn't affect the result.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

I'm not sure what you find problematic about what was posted above. He was simply saying whether you agree with this ruling will correlate with whether you are an Iowa or Minnesota fan. I don't know why that conclusion would even be controversial. Although many Iowa fans will conclude that the call was correct just as many or more never will. For a similar phenomena, see the 2020 presidential election.

The "ruling" is one thing. It followed the clear language of the rule about flailing your arms ((creating an unfair quandary for the punt coverage team). Iowa fans disagree with the rule itself--apparently believe that, contrary to the rule, you should be able to give fake arm movements and then advance the ball.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

That was one of, what, four penalties on the Gophers on that drive? Looked to me like Nubin swatted it pretty decisively. If the rules forbid it, it doesn't matter how many times it's not called, they can call it any time the rule is violated. The play was dead, nothing the ball carrier could do to advance the ball. I wish he hadn't done it and am glad it didn't affect the result.

Sure and that one was on 4th and 1 at the goal line.

It absolutely matters if it's never called. If you want it called by the letter of the law, then the Iowa player also should have been called for moving the ball after the whistle and the penalties should have been offsetting.

That call at that time was egregious.

 

[TwistingMyMelon]

The "ruling" is one thing. It followed the clear language of the rule about flailing your arms ((creating an unfair quandary for the punt coverage team). Iowa fans disagree with the rule itself--apparently believe that, contrary to the rule, you should be able to give fake arm movements and then advance the ball.

I don't think most of them have a clearly established and well-formed logic to refute the ruling and many will dispute the ruling even in face of the rules and facts. All I'm saying is why is anyone surprised that people will believe what they want to believe even if what they believe is contrary to the rules and facts? I'm sure that 10 years from now many Iowa fans still will mention how they were screwed by the refs in this game. These kinds of things are just part and parcel of another day of living on earth.

 

[MNVCGUY]

I've seen people do what Tyler Nubin did on just about every single play.

If you see an offensive player try to nudge the ball up after the whistle - it's the same.
If you see any extracurricular activities, whatsoever - it's the same.

In fact, the only reason he was able to swat the ball is because the Iowa player was still pushing it forward. Those little things happen on every single play.

If Nubin would have hit someone late, sure. If he would have kicked the ball or through it way out of the way, sure. Calling that penalty on 4th and goal from the 1 was egregious.

It was maybe borderline for a flag but Nubin has to be smarter there. There was no reason for him to swat the ball out of the players hand, and it was well after the whistle. As far as fouls go it was a minor one but I can see why it was called.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

It was maybe borderline for a flag but Nubin has to be smarter there. There was no reason for him to swat the ball out of the players hand, and it was well after the whistle. As far as fouls go it was a minor one but I can see why it was called.

100%. I think it was a dumb play by him. I just think making that call in that situation is absolutely insane.

 

[RememberMurray]

Nubin swatted the ball out of an Iowa player's hand: personal foul, automatic first down.

Iowa guy swats ball out of Minnesota center's hand before the snap: 5 yards, delay of game, no automatic first down.

I think the second one should also be a personal foul and an automatic first down. I'm not saying it is, under the rules, but I think it should be.

 

[Dakota2]

I’m a retired lawyer. Really sad to see such a lazy article by a sportswriter. Football is rules based. Try parsing the rule itself rather than writing a gossip column that is based on ignorance of the rule. The rule on invalid fair catch is clear. Isn’t based on arm being above shoulder. It is about ambiguous arm movements that are designed to place coverage team in a quandary as to fair catch signal or not.

Given Iowa’s style, it might be that DeJean was coached to do what he did with his arms, hoping for a non-call. Now, it is too bad that our punt coverage was so bad that DeJean could escape from a sideline trap and waltz across the field for a TD, making this whole thing an issue. And it is too bad that our ST coach didn’t call for the punt to be sent out of bounds, depriving DeJean of a return opportunity in the first place. The Gophers were damn lucky that DeJean broke a rule. But it wasn’t a gift. DeJean broke a clear rule.

All clear points and correct. The obvious point going forward is did no one think to instruct Crawford to kick it out of bounds or did Crawford simply fail to execute that?There is no way in the world an invalid fair catch signal should ever be discussed in that situation.

 

[stocker08]

It was maybe borderline for a flag but Nubin has to be smarter there. There was no reason for him to swat the ball out of the players hand, and it was well after the whistle. As far as fouls go it was a minor one but I can see why it was called.

My position too. I'll just say that I wasn't mad at the refs for that one. Nubin was 100% at fault. No need to swat the ball like that. None.

 

[Dakota2]

I don't think most of them have a clearly established and well-formed logic to refute the ruling and many will dispute the ruling even in face of the rules and facts. All I'm saying is why is anyone surprised that people will believe what they want to believe even if what they believe is contrary to the rules and facts? I'm sure that 10 years from now many Iowa fans still will mention how they were screwed by the refs in this game. These kinds of things are just part and parcel of another day of living on earth.

Probably one could question why a flag wasn’t thrown as soon as he illegally advanced the ball? Ideally it would not have gone to review. One or more officials could have called it immediately.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Chip and his high voice southern accent.

There is a growing spat between Luke Buer and the Pair and a Spare cohosts (not Burns). Buer, I think rightly, finding his voice and confidence this year and dunking on them for having the lesser pod. Maybe an inside joke, maybe not. Can’t tell. He’s right, the Gaard/Chip pod is pretty brutal. Gaard must be a talk radio guy. Chip with the hot takes. GG pod is far more entertaining

 

[Ope3]

I'm not getting the critiques of Chip's article. I think he sums it up on pretty well, IMO.

I disagree with him on 1 point, his statement that the call decided the game. Hawkeyes still had plenty of time to maneuver into FG range or score an offensive TD.

Walley's INT decided the game.

 

[TwistingMyMelon]

Probably one could question why a flag wasn’t thrown as soon as he illegally advanced the ball? Ideally it would not have gone to review. One or more officials could have called it immediately.

True, but as I'm sure you realize, none of that makes it the wrong call.

How many touchdowns have you seen nullified because of a holding call or some other infraction that occurred well before the touchdown? Plenty I would think. This incident wasn't much different except there were no penalty yards tacked on.