"After the play"

EG#9

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,495
Reaction score
192
Points
63
This should be the focus, not PJ running on the field. If that's ruled part of the play, the Gophers still have the ball and have a chance at points. That was an enormous call and I don't remember ever seeing it ruled that way before.
 

GoldenGophers7

The 1 The only
Joined
Sep 7, 2017
Messages
114
Reaction score
6
Points
18
This should be the focus, not PJ running on the field. If that's ruled part of the play, the Gophers still have the ball and have a chance at points. That was an enormous call and I don't remember ever seeing it ruled that way before.
It was a dead ball foul and either way it’s Iowa’s ball


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Face The Facts

Fleck Superfan
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
7,682
Reaction score
428
Points
83
It was going to be Iowa's ball either way.

It was after the play.

Ball was dropped.
Hit ground.
Play over.
Hit occurred.

Even if the hit occurred in a closer timeframe, refs may have decided to just screw us instead.

The roughness definitely didn't happen before the dropped ball.
So therefore it was after the dropped ball.

It would have been Iowa's ball either way.
Or we would have been screwed over by the refs regardless.
 

VACTERL

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
270
Reaction score
8
Points
18
I don’t think you can light someone up like that - a receiver, during the play - especially after five yards.
 

Plato

Active member
Joined
Oct 14, 2019
Messages
297
Reaction score
83
Points
28
PJ is wired. He had no business running onto the field. In the first half when the spot of the ball was disputed he gave the line judge a hearty pay on the back.
Touching an official is usually a penalty. He got away with that one but not the second infraction.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
102
Points
63
So next time we see a QB nailed after the ball hits the ground, it is not an automatic first down?
Okay.
 

60's Guy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
120
Points
63
The question is if the rules are somehow different on 4th down? If it is any other down it’s a penalty for late hit, defenseless receiver whatever and it is a penalty resulting in a first down.

Why would be different on 4th down? That argument makes no sense to me. The difference has to be PJs odd never before seen penalty that caused them to huddle and all participate in the discussion.

Somehow they got the result they did. But take PJ out of it and it’s always been a penalty marched off resulting in a first down if it isn’t automatic.

Confusing to me and I have a decent background of the rules.
 

60's Guy

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
4,695
Reaction score
120
Points
63
It was a dead ball foul and either way it’s Iowa’s ball


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I disagree, it’s a late hit. We have/had the ball. The penalty results in that play earning a first down. Makes no sense based on how it’s officiated every other time.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
102
Points
63
I disagree, it’s a late hit. We have/had the ball. The penalty results in that play earning a first down. Makes no sense based on how it’s officiated every other time.
Correct.
Pittsburgh would have gotten a first down after Garrett hit Rudolph regardless of when the ball hit the ground. We got effed. Much like the spot that was six feet off.
 

Governor Sibley

Section 109 Row 21
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
3,634
Reaction score
68
Points
48
I've never see a roughing penalty on 4th down not result in a first down.
 

GopherVotary

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,303
Reaction score
219
Points
63
On 4th down, it hinges on whether the penalty occurred during the play or after the play (post-possession).
 

Face The Facts

Fleck Superfan
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
7,682
Reaction score
428
Points
83
On 4th down, it hinges on whether the penalty occurred during the play or after the play (post-possession).
So if a QB is hit late, and the ball is still fluttering through the air, it would be a late hit?
I wonder what the point is where it's the next play and where it would be okay to hit a QB after a play is done and not have the offensive team get the first down after a 4th down incompletion.
 

GopherinPhilly

Active member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
4,431
Reaction score
22
Points
38
Should have been a personal foul on IA and a first down, then a Unsportsmanlike on PJ and march us 15 back. MN first down at the 22. We made many many mistakes but that one is on them.
 

otter

New member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
14
Reaction score
8
Points
3
The officials ruled both fouls were post-possession, which in this case meant it was after the whistle on a fourth down incompletion. Think of an illegal block on a QB after an interception, that is no longer a roughing the passer penalty, penalty is enforced but possession change still stands.

Sent from my SM-S902L using Tapatalk
 

HoustonTXGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2014
Messages
1,659
Reaction score
115
Points
63
Should have been a personal foul on IA and a first down, then a Unsportsmanlike on PJ and march us 15 back. MN first down at the 22. We made many many mistakes but that one is on them.
This exactly how I assumed it would have been called, but what the hell do I know? I thought the expired time clock against Penn State should have been reviewed.

Cant believe a late hit like that is a dead ball foul.
 

McGopherFan

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
14
Points
38
Please see my apology thread. There is a rulebook link in the game thread and my thread to a relatively recent NCAA rulebook.

This type of late hit does not carry an automatic 1st down. The rulebook provides definitions of instances that do. Because none of those seem to apply, this remains a simple post play dead ball foul.
 

Panthadad2

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2015
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
336
Points
83
The officials ruled both fouls were post-possession, which in this case meant it was after the whistle on a fourth down incompletion. Think of an illegal block on a QB after an interception, that is no longer a roughing the passer penalty, penalty is enforced but possession change still stands.

Sent from my SM-S902L using Tapatalk
If they're both post possession, why weren't the two penalties offsetting? Why sequential? I'm still befuddled on that one.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
102
Points
63
Then we should suplex every player on the opposing team once the play is whistled dead.
 

fippled

Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2016
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Points
6
I would wonder if a late hit out of bounds on 4th down where the runner is out of bounds before the line to gain would result in a first down or turn over on downs then asses the penalty.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk
 

McGopherFan

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
14
Points
38
Correct.
Pittsburgh would have gotten a first down after Garrett hit Rudolph regardless of when the ball hit the ground. We got effed. Much like the spot that was six feet off.
If the first play falls under roughing the passer, then it would be auto 1st down.
 

MGGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
3,686
Reaction score
218
Points
63
I was at the game, so this confused me. The official called unsportsmanlike conduct on both teams, not a personal foul on Iowa. I figured it was because the DB taunted or said something to Johnson, not because of the hit (which was clearly egregious). Did the announcers talk about this at all?
 

McGopherFan

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
14
Points
38
I would wonder if a late hit out of bounds on 4th down where the runner is out of bounds before the line to gain would result in a first down or turn over on downs then asses the penalty.

Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk
That is actually the example in the NCAA rulebook. Ball turnover then the penalty is assessed.
 

Panthadad2

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2015
Messages
2,012
Reaction score
336
Points
83
I still haven't heard a good explantion why the two penalties weren't offsetting instead of Iowa getting a net benefit from a dirty hit on one of our top players.
 

Replacement Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
1,482
Reaction score
102
Points
63
I was at the game, so this confused me. The official called unsportsmanlike conduct on both teams, not a personal foul on Iowa. I figured it was because the DB taunted or said something to Johnson, not because of the hit (which was clearly egregious). Did the announcers talk about this at all?
The announcers were Aggie Vision on ESPN
 

McGopherFan

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
14
Points
38
If they're both post possession, why weren't the two penalties offsetting? Why sequential? I'm still befuddled on that one.
In this case, the two fouls occurred in a clearly distinguished order. They were separated by significant time. In most cases, the distance of the penalty enforced was different. The Iowa yards were half the distance to the goal. The Minnesota penalty was the standard 15 yards. Location of the foul determined length.

If it were two players engaged immediately after the play the penalties would offset, if the yard marked off are equal the distance off set. (Vaguely recall that the official s used to match off the penalty both directions even when they were equal, but I am old now.
 
Top Bottom