PDA

View Full Version : A 1-point safety?


tk13
11-26-2004, 03:43 PM
Did anyone see that during the Texas/Texas A&M game just now? Texas missed an extra point on a botched snap, the kicker basically kicked the ball and it skidded across the ground into the endzone, A&M fell onto it in the endzone and they called it a "1-point safety", allowing Texas to tie the game, bizarre...

Ultra Peanut
11-26-2004, 03:44 PM
How much money is Mack Brown paying these Big XII refs? First the Kansas "pass interference," now this.

Horseshit.

Skip Towne
11-26-2004, 03:45 PM
I've never heard of such a thing in 50 years of watching football. But if it was a 1 point safety, it appears they gave the wrong team the point.

Saggysack
11-26-2004, 03:46 PM
How did Texas tie the game when A&M scored the 1 point safety? :spock:

tk13
11-26-2004, 03:48 PM
I still don't understand it... I guess some official tried to explain it to Lynn Swann on the sidelines but I still don't get it.... even the announcers don't understand it and Bob Griese's been doing this stuff for a long time.

Ultra Peanut
11-26-2004, 03:49 PM
How did Texas tie the game when A&M scored the 1 point safety? :spock:Texas blocked a punt and returned it to make it 13-12 in aTM's favor. They then missed the extra point due to a bad hold, and it skidded along the ground through the legs of the linemen. It went into the end zone (how is it still a live ball at that point?) and TAMU fell on it.

Result? A one-point safety against TAMU, 13-all. :spock:

Ultra Peanut
11-26-2004, 03:50 PM
Mangino was right.

Skip Towne
11-26-2004, 03:56 PM
Mangino was right.
Yes, yes he was. They appear to be making up the rules as they go along.

MGRS13
11-26-2004, 03:59 PM
Worst call ever.

ZootedGranny
11-26-2004, 04:07 PM
They must have considered the muffed kick as more of a blocked kick, which is returnable for 2 the other way in college. An A&M defender picked it up to advance it and fumbled it back into the endzone. When an A&M player fell on it and was down in the endzone, it was a safety. Since it was an extra point attempt, Texas is only awarded 1 point.

I've seen it called several years ago, but obviously it rarely happens.

jettio
11-26-2004, 04:31 PM
Must have something to do with the fact that in college a team defending against a conversion can get two points for returning it the other way.

That must have been a corollary to that rule change.

There have been some wild plays due to that rule.

Soon after changing the rule, Nebraska and Colorado had a tie when one of the teams scored by returning a conversion attempt.

There also was a game in the Southern Conference recently where a team scored in the last minute to take a 1-point lead. Coach decided to go for two in hopes that a three-point lead would be insurance against losing to a last second FG.

Conversion attempt was returned all of the way and the team ended up losing by one.

Frankie
11-26-2004, 05:08 PM
Yes, yes he was. They appear to be making up the rules as they go along.

Then I propose this one:

How's about 4 points for FGs over 50 yards?

chief52
11-26-2004, 05:18 PM
Must have something to do with the fact that in college a team defending against a conversion can get two points for returning it the other way.

That must have been a corollary to that rule change.

.

Yes, exactly. This is part of the rule change that allows the defense to return a PAT for 2 points.

The reason it was ruled as safety is...

- The defense gained possession in the field of play and then fumbled the ball into its own end zone before recovering. Had Texas recovered the fumble it would have been a 2 point PAT for Texas.

Had the defense only touched the ball and not possessed it, it would have been ruled a touchback and therefore the point no good.

The play was ruled perfectly.

HolmeZz
11-26-2004, 06:05 PM
You got to watch the tape again. One of the players for A&M picked up the ball around the 2 and tried to run with it, but one of the Texas players tackled him and the ball flew into the end zone. Another A&M player then fell on the ball for a safety. It was the right call.

Logical
11-26-2004, 06:32 PM
You got to watch the tape again. One of the players for A&M picked up the ball around the 2 and tried to run with it, but one of the Texas players tackled him and the ball flew into the end zone. Another A&M player then fell on the ball for a safety. It was the right call.

So if a Texas player had jumped on it wouldn't it still have been a 1 point conversion or would have it been a two point conversion.


I say this is another silly ass rule.

HolmeZz
11-26-2004, 06:43 PM
So if a Texas player had jumped on it wouldn't it still have been a 1 point conversion or would have it been a two point conversion.

Now that I'm not sure of.

Phobia
11-26-2004, 06:56 PM
Whatever it is, it's not anywhere near as bad as that dreaded halo rule. Thank God somebody wised up to that garbage.

ZootedGranny
11-26-2004, 08:02 PM
So if a Texas player had jumped on it wouldn't it still have been a 1 point conversion or would have it been a two point conversion.


I say this is another silly ass rule.

I believe it would have been a 2 point conversion only if a Texas player had jumped on it after the A&M player fumbled it into the endzone.

The main thing is that the A&M player tried advancing the ball forward. Had he just dove on it or let it roll into the endzone untouched, the play would've been over with.

jettio
11-26-2004, 08:09 PM
So if a Texas player had jumped on it wouldn't it still have been a 1 point conversion or would have it been a two point conversion.


I say this is another silly ass rule.

There was an Ivy League Game a couple of years ago where Brown scored a TD in the final seconds and lined up to kick the extra point that would have tied the game for OT.

Yale blocked the extra point kick seemingly to win by 1 Point, but Brown picked up the blocked kick behind the line of scrimmage and advanced it into the endzone for a two point conversion and a 1-point win.

Does that answer your question?

Logical
11-26-2004, 10:34 PM
There was an Ivy League Game a couple of years ago where Brown scored a TD in the final seconds and lined up to kick the extra point that would have tied the game for OT.

Yale blocked the extra point kick seemingly to win by 1 Point, but Brown picked up the blocked kick behind the line of scrimmage and advanced it into the endzone for a two point conversion and a 1-point win.

Does that answer your question?

Yup. A stupid rule is confirmed.

HolmeZz
11-27-2004, 12:37 AM
There was an Ivy League Game a couple of years ago where Brown scored a TD in the final seconds and lined up to kick the extra point that would have tied the game for OT.

Yale blocked the extra point kick seemingly to win by 1 Point, but Brown picked up the blocked kick behind the line of scrimmage and advanced it into the endzone for a two point conversion and a 1-point win.

I was at that game. :shake:

Demonpenz
11-27-2004, 01:34 AM
i want to see a drop kick for 2 points or a play where a guy punts it from his own endzone and you call for a free kick and a guy try to kick a 63 yarder at the end of a half

jettio
11-27-2004, 07:45 AM
I was at that game. :shake:

Oh really.

Did you think the game was over when the kick was blocked or did you wait to see who recovered the ball?

Skip Towne
11-27-2004, 07:52 AM
I was at that game. :shake:
I didn't know people actually attended Ivy League games. I thought it was kinda like the WNBA.

Mojo Rising
11-27-2004, 09:01 AM
A bigger travesty will occur if Cal doesn't make the Rose Bowl because of the Texas good 'ol boy network and their control of the coaches poll voting. Cal won decisevely last weekend while Texas was off and they lost ground to Texas. Word is that the Big 12 is voting Tex up and Cal down so they get a share of the Rose Bowl $.

Calcountry
11-27-2004, 09:40 AM
Then I propose this one:

How's about 4 points for FGs over 50 yards?
I agree, and they should award one poing for all touchbacks not returned out of the endzone like they do in Canada.

Calcountry
11-27-2004, 09:41 AM
I didn't know people actually attended Ivy League games. I thought it was kinda like the WNBA.
Ahh yes, haven't you heard. Sushi and football go well together.

HolmeZz
11-27-2004, 11:24 AM
I didn't know people actually attended Ivy League games. I thought it was kinda like the WNBA.

It's really the only kind of football around here. It's grown increasingly less popular recently though.

Did you think the game was over when the kick was blocked or did you wait to see who recovered the ball?

Thought it was over.

chief52
11-27-2004, 02:58 PM
i want to see a drop kick for 2 points or a play where a guy punts it from his own endzone and you call for a free kick and a guy try to kick a 63 yarder at the end of a half

I have seen the free kick at the end of the half in a local football game. It was really windy and they fair caught it and tried the free kick but missed.

Drop kick for 2 points? Not sure where you are coming from there. A drop kick is just like a regular field goal. 3 points for a FG or 1 for a PAT.

Frankie
11-27-2004, 03:08 PM
I agree, and they should award one poing for all touchbacks not returned out of the endzone like they do in Canada.

That sounds good too. The only argument I can see about this idea and the 4 point 50 yard+ FG, is that a 4 point 50+ yarder with the wind in your back may be easier than a 40 yarder against the wind. Same argument for kickoff touchbacks.

chief52
11-27-2004, 03:49 PM
That sounds good too. The only argument I can see about this idea and the 4 point 50 yard+ FG, is that a 4 point 50+ yarder with the wind in your back may be easier than a 40 yarder against the wind. Same argument for kickoff touchbacks.

That and the fact that a team may intentionally take a loss in order to set up a 4 point kick depending on the score. That would suck to take a long loss.

I personally hate any rule change that encourages FG in any manner. I wish they could be de-emphasized.

jettio
11-27-2004, 03:57 PM
That and the fact that a team may intentionally take a loss in order to set up a 4 point kick depending on the score. That would suck to take a long loss.

I personally hate any rule change that encourages FG in any manner. I wish they could be de-emphasized.

I doubt that you would ever see differential points for FGs. Football is about territory and giving additional points for distance in some way rewards a failure to gain territory.

As to other rule changes:

Remember the XFL mano a mano fumble recovery instead of a coin toss. It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt.

Frankie
11-27-2004, 06:53 PM
That and the fact that a team may intentionally take a loss in order to set up a 4 point kick depending on the score. That would suck to take a long loss.

I personally hate any rule change that encourages FG in any manner. I wish they could be de-emphasized.

I doubt that you would ever see differential points for FGs. Football is about territory and giving additional points for distance in some way rewards a failure to gain territory.

Good arguments. Added to my own "wind" factor argument. I now think the 3 point FG is the correct rule.