This is gonna be fun.
This one isn't as bad as initally thought.
This one isn't as bad as initally thought.
Big 12 Rule Changes
- Thread starter CoachHines3
- Start date
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
Yeah, the explanation is much more reasonable. It used to be a rule in the NFL that the refs had to decide if a receiver would have come down in bounds, had the defender not pushed them. And if so, it could still be a TD. It was always controversial when they invoked that rule and they were right to do away with it
When I first read it, I was trying to understand how a rule that complex could be only for the Big 12-- I suppose the explanation makes it a bit more reasonably.
Ah ok.
I'm not watching him speak or anything. The tweets made it sound like a Big 12 rule.
For a guy who works for "The Football Brainiacs," he's a ******* idiot.
Not a fan of the automatic first down for holding a gunner on a punt. That is the type of rule that will completely hose ISU at a critical point in a game.
It's a risky enough penalty that in very crucial late-game situations you may just automatically call for a fair catch and and not risk blocking the gunners.
It's a risky enough penalty that in very crucial late-game situations you may just automatically call for a fair catch and and not risk blocking the gunners.
gunners are going to be selling getting held the whole way down the field
Shouldn't being pushed out of bounds while attempting to make a catch be pass interference?
- Mar 27, 2006
- 40,829
- 28,324
- 113
Not if the contact occurs after the receiver has touched the ball.
Picture a situation where a receiver runs a fade and leaps up to highpoint the ball, and the defender waits until they touched it, then gives them a shove while in the air, so they come down out of bounds. The old NFL rule allowed the refs to make a judgement call on if the player would have come down in bounds if they hadn't been shoved, and call it a completion if they determine they would have.
He went on to clarify in his next tweet that it's only going to be a first down for the punting team if the hold occurs basically immediately at the line of scrimmage.
Someone needed to be more detailed somewhere in this process lol. Whether it was the dude tweeting or the dude talking
That's a better rule. With it being so inconsequential it makes me question why even make the change at all?
The big change was for consistency on "regular" (non-special teams) plays. Before, defensive holding could either be an automatic first down or not, depending on the type of offensive play. Making it consistent there just ended up having a trickle-down effect to special teams, which then needed to be clarified.
Interesting detail from new 'horns down' penalty
"If a team is assessed a penalty for flashing a 'horns down' symbol, the offending player and head coach of their team must offer an apology to the officiating crew, as well as the coaches and players of Texas before resuming play."
"If a team is assessed a penalty for flashing a 'horns down' symbol, the offending player and head coach of their team must offer an apology to the officiating crew, as well as the coaches and players of Texas before resuming play."
Eventually, that applies to almost any rule. Even some rules you don't realize exist until it happens.