Tweet
I don't think I've ever seen a team try to ice a kicker on the kickoff.
-
"I think we'll be OK" -
No worries, this is a crack refereeing crew.Originally posted by jakejc795 View Post
Or, a refereeing crew on crack.
Or whatever."I think we'll be OK"Comment
-
-
17-10 Jackrabbits. Final.If you think nobody cares about you, try missing a couple of payments.
- Steven Wright
Comment
-
-
SIU defense legit. This ref crew is not. Ugly win is an an ugly win.Comment
-
I’ll be interested to see the final penalty yardage we had. Just insane
Answer, 13-125Comment
-
I think there was a PI called on us in their last drive to score a td and it seemed questionable at best. But hard to tell from the camera angles and such. Plus annoucers didnt mention it."The most rewarding things you do in life, are often the ones that look like they cannot be done.” Arnold Palmer
Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.Comment
-
Not to mention Salukis getting four 1st downs from penalties to Jacks' zeroOriginally posted by SteelSD View PostComment
-
toward the end of the game i was guessing probably 15 flags on us but more curious how many on them?? 2? 3?Originally posted by SteelSD View Post
not to mention the flags on us that were questionable at best or blatantly WRONG
the unsportsmanlike for tackling the punt returner when the play was not whistled dead after the invisible fair catch signal
the invisible PI on the last scoring drive for them
targeting call for a d lineman being pulled into the qb
and apparently the memo says flag the jacks AND SWALLOW your effing whistle when the other team commits a penalty:
to name a few critical non calls:
no call on holding our D end on final saluki TD
tackling Gronowski, NOT just out of bounds but on the out of bound side of the thick white border. he was more than two steps off the field
and i would like to see a replay of the INT in the endzone with some actual decent camera work. maybe i am wrong but i feel like Zach had some help NOT being able to go up for that catch and therefore just being able to tip it into the air for the defender
i admit i am largely guessing on that because the camera work was terrible but it is very hard to understand why it appeared that Zach barely jumped at all for that ball
BEYOND OBVIOUSLY the jacks can play better and will be upset with themselves!!!
and credit to SIU!!!
their particular version of the 3 front D caused real trouble for the jacks!! we had a LOT of difficulty picking up the LBs slashing in from the second level. we definitely made some plays but never consistently got them blocked.
i felt like we needed to run more overload of one side and if they overplayed from the backside run Mark on some bootlegs off of it or just have him read the backside D end, or run some weakside counters. we had a couple good plays overloading one side but nothing really worked consistently. AGAIN credit to SIU for that
but that all said the officials definitely did everything they could to assist the salukis and give them more than every opportunity to stay in the gameComment
-
i agree with you! i really thought he was going out of his way to be fair. often times sounded like a big fan of the jacks. but the comment about Grono getting hit out of bounds. i mean that was much less incidental than Johnson hitting their QB- which again to his credit he seemed to not really agree with. for the most part, i enjoyed Stone as an announcer but totally disagree with his thoughts on that playOriginally posted by jakejc795 View Post
Stone says it was in incidental
Honestly, I think he's been decent as an announcer otherwise, even indicating that Caden Johnson's roughing penalty seemed questionableComment
-
i replayed and slow mo-d that one and i would say from ZERO angles was that good. but it seems like there must have been some kind of visual trickery because as far as i could see not a single SDSU player or coach questioned the call in the slightest way???Originally posted by jakejc795 View PostComment
-
Maybe Jacks figured arguing would be a lost causeOriginally posted by LetsGoRabbits View PostComment
-
yeah i thought maybe that or they were just so disgusted with themselves for the things that they were able to control that they did not and they were just immediately turning attention to the next playOriginally posted by jakejc795 View Post
but that was wild!!!!!!!!!! honestly it did not seem at ANY point that ball was between the uprights so it is really impossible for me to see how somehow it was between them long enough to be a successful attempt??? i am baffled!!!Comment
-
The Iowa Minnesota game just ended under controversy on a not dissimilar play. With less than two to go and up 12-10, Minnesota punted and the Iowa returner at first appeared to waive his team off, then fielded the kick on the bounce and returned it for a TD. The return was called back because the refs said the returner called for a fair catch and the ball was dead upon fielding the kick. It doesn't appear that the returner intended to call for a fair catch but as he ran towards the kick he extended his right hand and was pointing (at something) and extended his left hand out and up and rotated his left arm.Originally posted by LetsGoRabbits View Post
The rule states that a fair catch is signaled by extending the arm overhead and waiving from side to side. The replay was not clear - was his arm over his head? There was a long replay and presumably the refs had an angle TV didn't show and brought the kick back. Iowa's garbage WB promptly threw an INT and Minnesota won for the first time in I.C. since 1999.
In Carbondale, it wasn't clear to me that the returner got the arm above his head. The defenders obviously couldn't see it and refs didn't blow the whistle. The receiver didn't even know if the play was dead.
The MVFC definately needs to do some remedial work with its refs and rescind the "flag the Jacks" memo.Comment
Comment