***New Year's Day Bowl Games Thread

[Old Dog]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Wrong, as usual. That was running into the kicker, not roughing.

Wrong, it was roughing, I heard the ref say so.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by truebigdog

Wrong, it was roughing, I heard the ref say so.

Refs are never wrong?

[Old Dog]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Refs are never wrong?

Inasmuch as they are the judges, and it's a judgement call I would say that in THIS case they clearly were not.

*Well, that and it was pretty clear to anyone impartial that it should have been roughing. I didn't have a dog in that fight, but it sure looked like a 15 yarder to me.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by truebigdog

Inasmuch as they are the judges, and it's a judgement call I would say that in THIS case they clearly were not.

*Well, that and it was pretty clear to anyone impartial that it should have been roughing. I didn't have a dog in that fight, but it sure looked like a 15 yarder to me.

I DVR'd it and the kicker never put his kicking leg down before the Auburn defender rolled over his other leg. Here's the rule:

While the kicker is in the act of kicking, he is govern the most protection under the rule. Therefore, if a player is in the area occupied by the kicker (i.e. under the leg of the kicker whose leg is extended) the defensive player has the duty to vacate the area and to avoid any contact if he (defensive player) has not touched the ball. This contact is deemed roughing. It is roughing because the kicker must be given a chance to regain his footing. While one foot is in the air he is most vulnerable.

This is one rule that does not require the official to interpret the "intent" of the player, unless it was a flagrant roughing foul which results in an ejection.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Refs are never wrong?

Looked to me like the kicker's leg was still in the air and he was in an unprotected state.

You are right about one thing, the Big Ten sucks.