Burt B at Illini

[CJFisJoePaII]

Here is the rule.

---

ARTICLE 8. a. During a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutral
zone, illegal contact by Team A and Team B players is prohibited from the
time the ball is snapped until it is touched by any player or an official (A.R.
7-3-8-II).
b. Offensive pass interference is contact by a Team A player beyond the
neutral zone that interferes with a Team B player during a legal forward
pass play in which the forward pass crosses the neutral zone. It is the
responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents. It is not
offensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-IV, V, X, XV and XVI):
1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges
and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond
the neutral zone and maintains the contact for no more than three
yards beyond the neutral zone. (A.R. 7-3-10-II)
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and
bona fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of
either team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When the pass is in flight and two or more eligible players are in the
area where they might receive or intercept the pass and an offensive
player in that area impedes an opponent, and the pass is not catchable.

---

Sounds more like you disagree with the rule than with me.

Once the ball crossed the line of scrimmage, the contact was completely illegal. It's on the Michigan player to get around the defender to run his route.

Note that he is also WRONG about the INTENTIONAL contact within a yard of the LOS by an "eligible receiver" on a forward pass play being "legal" as well..

The Rule CLEARLY states that it is only "legal" for an INELEGIBLE OFFENSIVE PLAYER to intentionally engage a player within 1-yard of the LOS on a Forward Pass play ("It is not Offensive Pass Intereference under following circumstances......: 1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond the neutral zone and maintains the contact for no more than three yards beyond the neutral zone."). In this case, the INTENTIONAL CONTACT was made by an ELIGIBLE RECEIVER, making it automatically ILLEGAL under the rule as only INELIGBLE Offensive Players are exempted from this type of INTENTIONAL CONTACT (and even then, it would have been deemed illegal as it was maintained for more than 3 yards downfield).

This laughable twit us wrong about multiple items under the Rule in question but persists in telling us how right he is despite being so totally wrong he isn't even in the same zipcode as the actual rule - what's that tell you???

 

[lazydave841]

persists in telling us how right he is despite being so totally wrong he isn't even in the same zipcode as the actual rule - what's that tell you???

He doesn't like to be wrong? Lol

 

[LandoComando]

Or you could all listen to the former officials explaining it last night but that doesn't work for the "anti-Big Ten other than Penn State" crew

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Fair but the eligible receivers are also allowed to have contact within that first yard. Same reason defenders can bump and run. Literally the concept that the receiver can't make contact means if the defense plays bump and run the receiver literally can't do anything if he's directly across from him.

And it wasn't deemed that the receiver was blocking because at the end he demonstrates a route. I understand you hadn't seen the play prior so you didn't watch former officials explain that countless times last night--many here did and still refuse to acknowledge it.

You're full of shit dumbass - an eligible receiver is NOT PERMITTED to initiate contact like that under the ACTUAL RULE despite your inane claims to the contrary - this is especially true when the INTENTIONAL CONTACT is maintained 100% of the time the ball is in the air AND directly in the area the Forward Pass is being thrown to!

The fact this twit is still claiming he is right despite everything he is claiming to be legal is in DIRECT DIAMETRIC VARIANCE to the ACTUAL NCAA Rule tells you exactly what this dumbass troll shill is......

 

[LandoComando]

You're full of shit dumbass - an eligible receiver is NOT PERMITTED to initiate contact like that under the ACTUAL RULE despite your inane claims to the contrary - this is especially true when the INTENTIONAL CONTACT is maintained 100% of the time the ball is in the air AND directly in the area the Forward Pass is being thrown to!

The fact this twit is still claiming he is right despite everything he is claiming to be legal is in DIRECT DIAMETRIC VARIANCE to the ACTUAL NCAA Rule tells you exactly what this dumbass troll shill is......

Next week on the gameday thread when you pretend you aren't there I'll be glad to point out the 12+ times that happens without it being called like in every single game yesterday as teams literally run their offense via "legal picks"

 

[KCLion]

He pushed him 6 yards downfield, if that happened after the catch the announcers would have commented on the great blocking by the wide receiver that allowed 41 to get the first down.

Watch at 11:50 mark as to why PSU fans would think the the “judgement” call on the MI receiver should have been pass interference.

Edit - meant for Lando.

Preface - I was pulling for MI hoping PSU could catch a Rose Bowl bid. But was shaking my head on this play.

 

[LandoComando]

Watch

View embedded media

at 11:50 mark as to why PSU fans would think the the “judgement” call on the MI receiver should have been pass interference.

Edit - meant for Lando.

Preface - I was pulling for MI hoping PSU could catch a Rose Bowl bid. But was shaking my head on this play.

That's exactly what I'm saying--Penn State fans who thought that call was wrong simply want this one called even though they disagreed with that one

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

That's exactly what I'm saying--Penn State fans who thought that call was wrong simply want this one called even though they disagreed with that one

Good Lord you're pathetic - the Rule is BEYOND UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR that it was an OFFENSIVE PI, but you're still arguing that BEYOND BLATANT Offensive PI actually wasn't because the b1g cheating was done to help scUM - who'dve thunk it. LMFAO.

 

[LandoComando]

Good Lord you're pathetic - the Rule is BEYOND UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR that it was an OFFENSIVE PI, but you're still arguing that BEYOND BLATANT Offensive PI actually wasn't because the b1g cheating was done to help scUM - who'dve think it. LMFAO.

Was the call correct against us vs Minnesota in 2019?

 

[Lion84]

Good Lord you're pathetic - the Rule is BEYOND UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR that it was an OFFENSIVE PI, but you're still arguing that BEYOND BLATANT Offensive PI actually wasn't because the b1g cheating was done to help scUM - who'dve thunk it. LMFAO.

I wouldn't waste my time with this guy - if you mention anything that doesn't get called you are a PSU homer and he is never wrong and an official never has any ulterior motives - they aren't really human you know - it just seem odd how many missed calls and blown calls go one way - not to say it happens all the time but it seems pretty unbalanced it total - but this guy will set you straight because he sees all and know all - lol.

 

[CbusLion10]

Calls are missed in every game. The hold call was legit, the DPI was obviously, the ruling of a catch was "Stands" and Michigan would have been better off if it was ruled incomplete. The only complaint that's even decent is the potential OPI not called on Michigan but if you watch it without being biased and assuming that the refs want Michigan to win the receiver did not block prior to the ball being called. Clear pick but from both angles I've seen legal.

People that say referines aren't able to make honest observations. Same with people that say scUM or O$U or PedState. You're not better than the idiots saying that.

Normally I'd agree that officiating is not as lopsided as it seems, due to fans' bias, but your memory of the pick play is inaccurate, #18's block came well before the catch or even the throw. That is an easy call and undeniably a penalty. Given the down and distance, and the situation, it seemed very sketchy.

 

[CJFisJoePaII]

Normally I'd agree that officiating is not as lopsided as it seems, due to fans' bias, but your memory of the pick play is inaccurate, #18's block came well before the catch or even the throw. That is an easy call and undeniably a penalty. Given the down and distance, and the situation, it seemed very sketchy.

The non-call was beyond "sketchy" - it was obvious cheating in favor of scUM. There is no way an Official can miss that call when the Illegal Contact is directly at the "point of attack" of the Forward Pass and not only in the precise area of where the ball was thrown, but the BLATANTLY Illegal Contact was maintained 100% of the time the ball was in the air. This play was so Illegal on multiple sections of the Offensive PI Rule (and not in a minor way of one section, but in an obviously blatant way of multiple sections), an Official couldn't have just "missed it". The cheating b1g Officials just ignored a PATENTLY BLATANT ILLEGAL PLAY on 4th-&-3 with only 53 seconds and no timeouts remaining to assist scUM in winning.

 

[LandoComando]

it was obvious cheating in favor of scUM

This--right here--this is the problem with many on this board

 

[CbusLion10]

The Michigan WR is allowed to run a run--contact by the DB can occur within 5 yards. It comes down to a judgment call on if he was blocking for fighting through contact.

Honestly if you watch the play until the end and forget you hate Michigan watch the WR let go of the contact and continue as though he's running a route. Had he stayed locked up with the defender it may have been called. That's actually good coaching right now as much as I agree with you all that Harbaugh a bastard.
The objective of an illegal puck play is not to lock onto the defender

Do you believe the 2019 call was correct?
And the disengage part is huge with this. When you don't disengage it doesn't demonstrate a route was being run when you do it says otherwise
Also, how many times do players not look at the QB when it's a decoy route? We've seen balls thrown to receivers who never looked.
We all know the intent of the play which was the same as Charles in 2019--this was executed better because of the disengagement but neither was OPI

You're not allowed to block for 2 seconds, then disengage, and pretend it wasn't a block.

Legal rub routes are when the receiver intentionally gets in the way of the dB without putting his hands up on the db like he's blocking. Michigan did that to Penn State last year on their go-ahead TD and it was legal. Annoying to Penn State fans but legal. Yesterday Michigan #18 runs straight out to the defender, grabs him with both hands and blocks him down the field. That's not a little hand checking while trying to run your route.

I didn't watch any commentary after that games yesterday, am interested in hearing a professional official arguing it was a legal play if you could post it. Not very interested in a sports writers opinion, my ability to interpret the rules is strong enough to not be influenced by Steve McBlog

 

[Ski]

Calls are missed in every game. The hold call was legit, the DPI was obviously, the ruling of a catch was "Stands" and Michigan would have been better off if it was ruled incomplete. The only complaint that's even decent is the potential OPI not called on Michigan but if you watch it without being biased and assuming that the refs want Michigan to win the receiver did not block prior to the ball being called. Clear pick but from both angles I've seen legal.

People that say referines aren't able to make honest observations. Same with people that say scUM or O$U or PedState. You're not better than the idiots saying that.

It isn't even always a question of what they call a penalty for being illegal. It is letting it go all game and then calling it at a key time against an opponent.

It is like a police officer allowing cars to drive by going 10 over the speed limit all day and then at the end of the shift stopping someone with out of state plates for going 2 miles over the limit. Yes, technically it is illegal, but.............

It is as predictable as the sun coming up from the East.

 

[DandyDonII]

So clearly a penalty. He wasn't even making an attempt to run a route, he straight blocks the guy

And that is clearly shown by the fact that the receiver, err blocker never looked for the ball, instead he immediately looked over his left shoulder to where the throw was always designed to go.

 

[DandyDonII]

1. The PI called against Illinois was totally legit
2) PI not called against UM was probably a legit noncall due to offensive guy initiating the contact, but it is very often called anyway
3) The holding call on Illinois, yes it was holding, but it is almost never called in the BIG....Rutgers was called for what one holding call against us, and our dudes were being strangled...This is the norm in the BIG.... It was the timing of the call that was so outlandish. BIG refs understand timing, hell, UM ran through us all game without issue. It was only when the game was out of hand, that UM got called for two holding calls within a span of about 10 plays after they hadn't been called the entire first half...
4) That pick was clearly OPI, there is no argument against it. He cleared out the guy so he couldn't switch. Dude never looked for the ball, and looked over his left shoulder to see if the play worked. I

 

[DUNNELLONFLBUCK]

I've thought Penn State should go to the ACC for the last 10 years. Since they joined the BIG 10, I always thought Penn State was the best in the league. Every time that you played the Buckeyes or Michigan, you would have won if it weren't for the rotten stinking cheater refs. If I were you, I would start a drive to get PSU out of the Big 10 and into the ACC. Think you would stand a much better chance of becoming the beast of the East again. Good luck and god bless.

 

[LandoComando]

I've thought Penn State should go to the ACC for the last 10 years. Since they joined the BIG 10, I always thought Penn State was the best in the league. Every time that you played the Buckeyes or Michigan, you would have won if it weren't for the rotten stinking cheater refs. If I were you, I would start a drive to get PSU out of the Big 10 and into the ACC. Think you would stand a much better chance of becoming the beast of the East again. Good luck and god bless.

This--this is why I make the comments I do

 

[lazydave841]

This--this is why I make the comments I do

Because a Buckeye fan think PSU should go to the ACC?

 

[LandoComando]

Because a Buckeye fan think PSU should go to the ACC?

Buckeyes fans, Michigan fans and even more sadly Penn State fans
You realize what the Ohio State fan is really saying, right?
He's mocking us and he's right--that's how we sound

 

[KCLion]

Buckeyes fans, Michigan fans and even more sadly Penn State fans
You realize what the Ohio State fan is really saying, right?
He's mocking us and he's right--that's how we sound

And he’s an ass, so there is that as well. They complain just as much as anyone else if they are on the wrong side of the call.

 

[LandoComando]

And he’s an ass, so there is that as well. They complain just as much as anyone else if they are on the wrong side of the call.

But what other fan base talks about leaving a conference for one that brings in less revenue because they believe we're not "the favorite" in the league.

People can complain about whatever but when you reach "referines" and other nonsense it has to stop because we look foolish

 

[KCLion]

But what other fan base talks about leaving a conference for one that brings in less revenue because they believe we're not "the favorite" in the league.

People can complain about whatever but when you reach "referines" and other nonsense it has to stop because we look foolish

Any fans of teams playing out of their typical /traditional geographic region has some of the same feelings about different conferences. Just think how the USC and UCLA fans will feel about the Big after the “newness” wears off. Heck, there are a lot that are already complaining about it.

Now, regarding the “referines”, nearly every fan base in the Big complains about the bias of this league. Illinois isn’t the first and won’t be the last.

Why is it that the Michigan and OSU fans complain when they go to Bowl games? I’m not going to do the research, but I’m pretty sure they end up with a lot fewer “beneficial” calls in those games.

 

[lazydave841]

Buckeyes fans, Michigan fans and even more sadly Penn State fans
You realize what the Ohio State fan is really saying, right?
He's mocking us and he's right--that's how we sound

No, he isn't right.

There has never been a time to leave the Big 10. Once the decision was made, it's been all in.

If we were going to the ACC, it should have been in '92 when FSU did. No stupid Rose Bowl commitment and had we beaten them, we play Nebraska for the title.

The biggest thing is probably our schools commitment to football. Somebody smarter than me should study what the big 3 do and emulate it here until we are in the playoff every other year.

 

[Roar More]

The one thing the NCAA should do is supply referees. The idea of conference referees is absurd.

As for Lando, I have had him on ignore since shortly after his initial appearance on this board. Don't feed the troll.

 

[LandoComando]

No, he isn't right.

There has never been a time to leave the Big 10. Once the decision was made, it's been all in.

If we were going to the ACC, it should have been in '92 when FSU did. No stupid Rose Bowl commitment and had we beaten them, we play Nebraska for the title.

The biggest thing is probably our schools commitment to football. Somebody smarter than me should study what the big 3 do and emulate it here until we are in the playoff every other year.

You realize many posters want to go to the ACC, right?
I agree with this but we have idiots that want to go to the ACC

 

[maypole]

You realize many posters want to go to the ACC, right?
I agree with this but we have idiots that want to go to the ACC

We would be Clemson in the ACC.

 

[LandoComando]

We would be Clemson in the ACC.

Who cares? It's like being the smartest kid on the short bus. Don't be afraid of competition. We need to be better.

 

[lazydave841]

You realize many posters want to go to the ACC, right?
I agree with this but we have idiots that want to go to the ACC

I wouldn't say many, but sure. We have posters unhappy about parts of a 55-10 win as well.

 

[LandoComando]

I wouldn't say many, but sure. We have posters unhappy about parts of a 55-10 win as well.

We have more than a few in that first group

 

[bdgan]

I'd have to see the replay before commenting on bad call. That said Bielema has himself to blame for the loss. ILL could have won that game with a 1st down but he called 3 conservative runs and a punt. On 3rd down the ILL QB rolled left but didn't even consider throwing to a wide open TE. Then they punted just past mid field.