Who thought the OPI call on Purdue was correct?

Donate To GopherHole
J

jblass

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
900
Points
113
I have to admit when the OPI call was made it looked questionable based on the angle of the replay camera. Having now seen a better view of what the referee actually saw I now agree it was a good call. Anybody else changed their mind after seeing a different view?
 
Last edited:



It depends. Do you enforce the rules to the letter, or not? Is it a judgement call? I believe it is.

They say the refs could call offensive holding on any and every play, if they chose to. That wouldn't make for a very entertaining viewing experience, in my opinion.

If a guy takes two long strides on his way to the basket, should that be called traveling? If it was called every time, the NBA would look radically different today, I believe.

I often hear football announcers (Troy Aikman is a good example) who always lean toward 'letting them play'. I tend to agree. Fewer flags make for better football.

The folks who brought up Kyle Rudolph vs. New Orleans have it about right. It's a foul... unless they don't call it. In that case... it ain't a foul.
 

It was a clear push off. The not a foul crowd shows the video from the pov of the offense where you can't see the extension of the arm. The ref was looking from the opposite direction and saw the tight end push off and slow down Howard. The worst part is he was probably just extending his arm to prevent Howard from closing in on him not realizing he was that close. If he doesn't extend he probably catches the touchdown anyway
 


I did. In the rules it's OPI, and it clearly influenced the play's outcome. Without that separation it's likely to fall incomplete. It's not like they called it on the receiver on the other side of the field.

People are just used to seeing receivers get away with murder and defenders never getting the benefit of the doubt. So it looked bad.
 

It was correct in terms of it being techincally a penalty by the Purdue TE. I've always disliked the "you can't call that at this point in the game" line of thinking in sports. I feel like the game should be called the same way throughout. If the refs had taken a "let them play" approach through the first 58 minutes, then I would think Purdue had a legit gripe. Earlier in the 2nd half, Nubin was called for (arguably) much less on a play that had much less of a chance to be successful. If you make the call on Nubin, you absolutely make the call on the Purdue TE. BTW, this is why I hate the late game replay in basketball. The refs go to the montitor and see the defender slap the hand/arm of the ball handler (or rebounder) but the ball goes off the offense. For the first 46 minutes of the game the orginal call of out of bounds off the defense stands, but in the last 2 an uncalled foul (which isn't reviewed) ends up giving the defense the ball incorrectly.

Obviously given that it was the last drive of the game and felt like the game deciding play, it's much easier to take this stance as a Minnesota fan than a Purdue fan. Also the casual fan with no/little rooting interest in the game, or those who just watched the highlights, won't remember, or never saw, the Nubin play and only focus on the Purdue TE play which further magnifies the "Purdue got screwed" takes.
 


Offensive pass interference was the correct call in my book. The push created the separation which created a better opportunity to make the catch.
 




fmlizard said:
Watching the slow mo you can really see how the separation doubles (at least) at the moment he pushes the Gopher defender in the chest.
Click to expand...
To me the telling part is the defender's upper body.

It looks to me clearly that offensive player reaches out and pushes him back as you see his upper body shift back.

That's OPI right there.


BTN didn't do anyone any favors with their broadcast that night. Lots of non replays and etc.
 
Last edited:

Fine call either way.
A no call is always going to preferred to a call at the end of the game by the general public
 

I probably wouldn't have thrown my flag if I was the official, but understand why he did. If the shoe was on the other foot, I'd be cross, but we're used to getting the shaft.

The thing I'm kind of chuckling at is the number of people grasping on to the fact that FanDuel's sportsbook refunded Purdue bets as "proof" that it was an awful call. They do that frequently, as they are a small time player in sports books and are trying tl build goodwill and gain sone traction.
 



I only saw the play as it occurred and the replays right after the call.
I thought it was a bad call.
Watching games on Saturday any questionable call by an official was usually accompanied by an announcer comparing it to the "bad call against Purdue".
It is rarely called compared to pass interference by the defense so most of us are not as aware what for and why offensive pass interference is called.
It cost Purdue the game and similar very marginal call in the Rose bowl cost WI the game,
But in a past play off game Notre Dame flagrantly tried to do that against Alabama and was penalized.
A pick is commonly used to free a WR and will be called if not done subtly..
 

As a Gopher fan, on game night I was horrified like Glen Mason. Basically saying, you can’t call that...or there was nothing there.
But, after seeing the replay 38 times, the offensive receiver clearly gains an advantage around the 5 yard line.
Officiating is part of the game. You have to make enough plays to overcome the controversial calls. Purdue did not. Two missed field goals, their easiest remedy.
Definitely, feeling better about it as days go by.
If we wouldn’t try to run four corners at the beginning of fourth quarters I’d feel much, much more deserving.
 

It looks like a textbook offensive pass interference. A lot of people didn't see it, but the official did.
 

60's Guy said:
As a Gopher fan, on game night I was horrified like Glen Mason. Basically saying, you can’t call that...or there was nothing there.
But, after seeing the replay 38 times, the offensive receiver clearly gains an advantage around the 5 yard line.
Officiating is part of the game. You have to make enough plays to overcome the controversial calls. Purdue did not. Two missed field goals, their easiest remedy.
Definitely, feeling better about it as days go by.
If we wouldn’t try to run four corners at the beginning of fourth quarters I’d feel much, much more deserving.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Also, Purdue didn't have to respond to the call by promptly throwing an INT.
 

This call is a perfect example of the limitations involved with trying to officiate games from your living room couch. Fans get all up in arms about a call that is made or not made during a game based on what they can or can't see on the TV copy. Sometimes the TV camera is able to show fans something there is no possible way the ref could have seen. Other times (like the OPI call in question) the TV look tells one story but obviously the trained official down on the field was able to see something the cameras didn't catch live.

As has been proven with the zoomed in video shots it was the right call as the receiver clearly extended his arm to get the separation he needed. Had the ref not called it nobody would have given it a second thought based on the TV angles of the play that were shown live.
 

noamfromm said:
It was a clear push off. The not a foul crowd shows the video from the pov of the offense where you can't see the extension of the arm. The ref was looking from the opposite direction and saw the tight end push off and slow down Howard. The worst part is he was probably just extending his arm to prevent Howard from closing in on him not realizing he was that close. If he doesn't extend he probably catches the touchdown anyway
Click to expand...
My thought exactly.
 

Just like the DPI on the Gophers, it was a flag that should not have been thrown. After seeing different angles, it wasn't nearly as indefensible as it looked live.
 

Clearly a foul that was called consistent with previous plays. The refs were calling it tight throughout the game. As a receiver, you have to be in tune with what the refs are calling and play within that parameter. A full arm extension push-off was going to get called, and it did.
 

Extension of the arm, it created separation... so yes penalty. If you see before the arm was extended, there wasn't much separation, the moment the arm extended, you can see the angle of the TE's body shift from backwards leaning to forward leaning, also you can see a slight lean back of #2.
 

my analogy would be to baseball:

in baseball, every umpire has a slightly different strike zone. some are more different than others.
(if you are a baseball fan, all I have to say is Angel Hernandez....) going into a game, hitters know whether a certain ump likes to call the high strike, or gives the pitcher extra room on the corners.

In football, different officiating crews have different tendencies and preferences. In NFL games, they have stats on how many penalties each crew calls in an average game, and what type of penalties, so going into a game, you know if a crew likes to call holding, or is more likely to call PI.

I wonder if they have that same info in college FB. If, going into a game, you knew that a certain ref liked to call PI, then the coaches should be warning their DB's to be careful.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
To me the telling part is the defender's upper body.

It looks to me clearly that offensive player reaches out and pushes him back as you see his upper body shift back.

That's OPI right there.


BTN didn't do anyone any favors with their broadcast that night. Lots of non replays and etc.
Click to expand...
The inability of the studio guys' to look at, or show, the other angle (bottom one from the Twitter post above) disgusted me. It was offensive pass interference.
And a side note...sure, Rondale Moore is good, but Mike Hall needs to tone his love down a bit lest he sully his undergarments.
 

FredCoxRocks said:
The inability of the studio guys' to look at, or show, the other angle (bottom one from the Twitter post above) disgusted me. It was offensive pass interference.
And a side note...sure, Rondale Moore is good, but Mike Hall needs to tone his love down a bit lest he sully his undergarments.
Click to expand...


Yeah.

Even Mason and the other announcer seemed to talk about replays and such and ... we'd never see them. It was unusual.
 

Just listened to the GG podcast, and Burns indicated that both officials back there threw a flag on this play. I was already convinced by the angles above that it was the correct call, but if both refs saw the same thing that should cement it for everyone.
 

FredCoxRocks said:
And a side note...sure, Rondale Moore is good, but Mike Hall needs to tone his love down a bit lest he sully his undergarments.
Click to expand...
LMAO...agreed. I thought it odd that Minnesota went into half with an 11 point lead, and yet the highlights were dominated by the Rondale Moore show.
 

By definition of the rule it's pass interference but it's a really ticky tack call. If you call this you could call interference on every single route ran probably. It's just really odd that the gophers benefited from something like this.
 

And the one angle we don't see is the one the flag throwing official had. (looking straight down the goal line at ground level and even with the play). As we saw in the slow mo replay, the defenders upper body torqued backwards due to the push-off. I'm sure the backward torque the official saw was even more pronounced than the one we see from above and behind the play.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom