Dang, The Play of the Game, really was a

[grengadgy]

a legal pop kick.

 

[ThreatMatrix]

I heard it was illegal

 

[NVGator]

 

[Gatorphan]

Barely Legal

 

[RocketCityGator]

Not a Bama fan but I am a Saban fan. Damm gutsy call.

 

[TN G8tr]

Took some Kahunas on that one. Changed the game entirely.

 

[gatormandan]

That touchdown pass reminded me of someone.....

 

[GatorRaz]

How ironic that the game was changed on a "onside" kick since UNC was hosed in the ACC Championship game on a horrible offside call on an onside kick that gave clemson the ball and the game!

 

[URGatorBait]

a legal pop kick.

The editing on that is terrible. They have a graphic up right as he kicks it.

This one is a little better, and slowed down, it does appear that it was indeed a popped up kick.

 

[grengadgy]

The editing on that is terrible. They have a graphic up right as he kicks it.

This one is a little better, and slowed down, it does appear that it was indeed a popped up kick.

Thanks, that was what was available at 1:30 this mourning.

 

[URGatorBait]

Thanks, that was what was available at 1:30 this mourning.

No problem. That wasn't a shot at you, it was more directed at whomever made that clip.

But it does appear that the ball never hit the ground, at least not from those two clips.

 

[GatorJ]

I don't think that it's required to hit the ground.

 

[Captain Sasquatch]

I'm going off a rule that was enforced in a game I played in. And Dabo was sure as sh*t flipping out about something. It's not like we haven't seen refs misinterpret rules all year. Doesn't matter now anyway.

 

[GatorJ]

I'm going off a rule that was enforced in a game I played in. And Dabo was sure as sh*t flipping out about something. It's not like we haven't seen refs misinterpret rules all year. Doesn't matter now anyway.

I think he was flipping out because he thought somebody was offsides.

 

[Captain Sasquatch]

I think he was flipping out because he thought somebody was offsides.

Perhaps. But from reading the comments section, it looks like Clemson was penalized for doing basically that very same thing against South Carolina last year. Only difference was, a South Carolina player had called for a fair catch. Maybe he was trying to argue that his player (#1) was close enough to the ball to make an attempt to catch it, so Bama should have given him space to catch it (like a punt). That's a stretch to argue, but it's Dabo we're talking about here.

Regardless, like I said, I've still seen that called as a penalty. Granted, it was high school, but it's not like I conjured the rule out of thin air. And judging from the comments section in the video, I'm not the only one who thought it had to hit the ground first.

 

[grengadgy]

Rules are updated every year, not saying that this ruled changed this year. Aren't you forty, that's over twenty years since you played HS football. Shoot they don't wear leather helmets anymore. ;)

 

[rogdochar]

Perhaps. But from reading the comments section, it looks like Clemson was penalized for doing basically that very same thing against South Carolina last year. Only difference was, a South Carolina player had called for a fair catch. Maybe he was trying to argue that his player (#1) was close enough to the ball to make an attempt to catch it, so Bama should have given him space to catch it (like a punt). That's a stretch to argue, but it's Dabo we're talking about here.

Regardless, like I said, I've still seen that called as a penalty. Granted, it was high school, but it's not like I conjured the rule out of thin air. And judging from the comments section in the video, I'm not the only one who thought it had to hit the ground first.

Sas, a player signaling fair-catch sounds like a brilliant counteraction. I guess since that would
exclude all on-side kick opportunities, it wouldn't be allowable. Good thinking though … would
those short-minded refs have confusion over that ploy?

 

[Durty South Swamp]

Fair catch signal or not, if someone else catches the ball, doesn't touch the individual signaling fair catch, and isn't in that little space around the player, it's hard to argue for a penalty. When the bama player caught the ball he had plenty of space between him and the Clemson players, hence why he was able to run a bit and the refs had to bring the ball back to where contact was made.

 

[Captain Sasquatch]

Rules are updated every year, not saying that this ruled changed this year. Aren't you forty, that's over twenty years since you played HS football. Shoot they don't wear leather helmets anymore. ;)

My senior year of HS football was 2002.

Sas, a player signaling fair-catch sounds like a brilliant counteraction. I guess since that would
exclude all on-side kick opportunities, it wouldn't be allowable. Good thinking though … would
those short-minded refs have confusion over that ploy?

If a Clemson player had been standing where that ball was coming down, he could have called for a fair catch since the ball didn't bounce.

 

[grengadgy]

Fair catch signal or not, if someone else catches the ball, doesn't touch the individual signaling fair catch, and isn't in that little space around the player, it's hard to argue for a penalty. When the bama player caught the ball he had plenty of space between him and the Clemson players, hence why he was able to run a bit and the refs had to bring the ball back to where contact was made.

The rule makes it a dead ball. Why it dead doesn't sense but neither does the muff rule.