Ask A Back Judge: Virginia Tech vs. Vanderbilt

Tristan Raisch

September 03, 2024 33

Virginia Tech — How did the refs do on Saturday? (Ivan Morozov)

Welcome back, Hokies, to the first Ask a Back Judge of 2024. For those unfamiliar, this is a column where I, a real-life football official (primarily at the high school level), answer your questions about officiating the game of football. If you’re new, I’d encourage you to go check out my fundamentals of officiating piece from last August, and maybe check out some of the other reviews I put out last year.

This article is for TSL Pass subscribers

Get full access to premium articles, recruiting intel, and analysis from the team that's covered Virginia Tech sports since 1996.

Subscribe Now Already a subscriber? Log in

Article Virginia Tech Football Subscription Content

Ask A Back Judge 2024 VT-Vanderbilt football

Share This Article

Twitter/X Facebook

33 Comments

92Hokie14 September 5, 2024 at 4:05 PM

Care to explain how a 54 yard field goal turned into a 53 yard field goal? I know it was good from like 60 so it doesn't matter for this game.... But how does a 54 yarder plus a delay of game (5 yard penalty so now 59 yarder) followed by that epic double zero call (five yard penalty, now back to the original 54 yarder) actually turn into a 53 yard field goal? Seems pretty incompetent with spotting the ball unless I'm missing something blatant here.
TechHokie13 September 4, 2024 at 6:54 AM

I've held off on responding to individual comments about the last play, but you all have made some great observations and arguments, and I'm stoked to write the follow-up!
Gobbler`s Roost Hokie September 3, 2024 at 4:27 PM

On the pass that Jennings scored the TD, one of Vandy's DBs laid out Thomas. It got lost in all the replays of the TD, but is clearly visible in the shot from the endzone. Thomas was VERY slow to get up and had to be helped off the field. No penalty was called. Does this mean that it's legal to blow up a guy for no reason when he's a receiver, especially when the ball wasn't thrown in his direction?
1. Sloth September 3, 2024 at 5:23 PM
  
  On a replay I noticed that late hit on the Jennings pass too. Very cheap shot I thought. Was wondering if it had been called if we’d have had the option to take the PAT from the one and maybe go for 2?
2. TechHokie13 September 3, 2024 at 6:46 PM
  
  Now there's one I'm interested in taking a second look at!
  1. HokieEngineer September 3, 2024 at 7:30 PM
    
    On the Jennings TD, I thought it was a cheap shot. It was more dangerous than most of the targeting plays, because there was no reason for Thomas to expect to get hammered. In my opinion, it deserves a "dirty play" rather than "hardnose football" label.
Hokieville September 3, 2024 at 12:59 PM

A flag would have been way too questionable for an ACC crew to make on the last play in OT. No call was the right call with the pass being so high. Bad call was VT’s mishandling the QB substitution in OT.
DangerousCrowd September 3, 2024 at 12:36 PM

Great article (as always). I re-watched the game yesterday (for my sins). One play I'd love to hear your take on was the second to last play of the game. 3rd down pass play that resulted in a sack on Schlee. The receiver (0, Jennings) at the top of the TV screen looked like they were held (at least to my amateur eyes). Looks like Jennings is trying to break to the inside but is inhibited by the defender. The defender jammed at the line of scrimmage, but he was all over him past 5 yards. Any chance you saw this play? Would love any thoughts if you did. Many thanks.
HokieEngineer September 3, 2024 at 12:35 PM

I'd like to go with choice (d). Personal foul (but not targeting). The pass was obviously not catchable. (In fact, the Tech receiver had already dropped his arms when contact occurred.) That contact was initiated before the ball hit anything out of play, so the ball was still live and hence the half had not ended. In my opinion, if it occurred on any play other than the last play of the game, it's an easy personal foul call.
1. VT Trainman September 3, 2024 at 3:17 PM
  
  This is how I feel. Is the "defenseless receiver" still a thing? I felt that he was unnecessarily hit high but I understand not throwing the flag and possibly changing the outcome. As a fan I was yelling at the TV but my head said "they shouldn't throw a flag there." The sad part is that there was a window and he could have made the throw.
  1. HokieEngineer September 3, 2024 at 7:24 PM
    
    Yeah, I thought it was a great read given the situation and he had a chance to make a big play. Alas, I guess there's a reason he's the backup QB.
2. HokieFanDC September 3, 2024 at 4:32 PM
  
  That's what it looks like to me. Defenseless player, ball well beyond the receiver. PF.
VBHokieman September 3, 2024 at 11:59 AM

I am still confused about what happened on the first play where Vandy had a big gain called back for holding. Instead of 1st and 20 it was 1st and 10. Anyone know why that was?
1. Chris Coleman September 3, 2024 at 12:16 PM
  
  I assume because the hold took plays past the line of scrimmage. Holding is a spot foul.
2. jagerhokie September 3, 2024 at 12:17 PM
  
  He could have run for the touchdown ?
  1. VTtwins September 3, 2024 at 1:41 PM
    
    Does look like he could have, middle of field open and a blocker near by
3. TechHokie13 September 3, 2024 at 12:18 PM
  
  CC is correct, spot of the foul was around the first-down line.
Hokies93 September 3, 2024 at 11:58 AM

I don't see anyone touching the ball on the last play. It was too high and already past the WR, and thus not called.
CapeCodHokie September 3, 2024 at 11:55 AM

While I'm sure we've benefitted from it on the other side, it would seem to be fair to consider it a fumble as soon as a backward pass is touched. I just hated seeing about 7 yards of field position gained on a play we defended well. Question for you on another play, 3rd and 6, 12:43 to go in the 2nd quarter, and Lane is tackled in the backfield, seemingly before the ball arrived on a screen (forward pass), but while still behind the line of scrimmage. Can you hit a player before the ball arrives on a forward pass if/when they are still behind the original LOS? I am guessing if receivers are allowed to block behind the line, then defenders are allowed to tackle behind the line.
1. TechHokie13 September 3, 2024 at 12:21 PM
  
  Yep, you nailed it. Essentially, pass interference only applies to passes that are thrown forward and pass the neutral zone. Holding, targeting, personal fouls, etc. all still apply (you can tackle the intended receiver, but you can't pin him down and keep him out of the play, for example), but pass interference is off the table.
xhokiehurler19 September 3, 2024 at 11:43 AM

Tristan, do you have an explanation for why the rules are different between a fumbled ball and a backward pass with regard to how it’s spotted if it goes out of bounds further downfield? Like you said, they’re essentially the same play.
1. TechHokie13 September 3, 2024 at 11:55 AM
  
  Yes! The rule I posted for backwards passes was just the first half of the rule (I left off the fumble section to keep it concise). Essentially, a fumble comes back to the spot of the fumble if the ball goes out of bounds beyond the spot of the fumble (it's spotted at the out of bounds spot if that's behind the spot of the fumble). The rule gets wonkier if another offensive player recovers in bounds. In that case, the ball comes back to the spot of the fumble on 4th down only, or a try down.
  1. xhokiehurler19 September 3, 2024 at 12:30 PM
    
    Yeah I got that, I was just wondering why they’re treated differently in the rules. I see no logical explanation.
Bugle76 September 3, 2024 at 11:43 AM

I voted for targeting as i felt the DB wasn’t playing the ball and was hitting a defenseless receiver. i don’t know if that falls under category of targeting but I believe there’s a rule (maybe NFL only?) about leaving your feet and hitting a defenseless player.
1. TechHokie13 September 3, 2024 at 12:22 PM
  
  In college, the defender leaving his feet/launching is considered an indicator, but is not inherently illegal. So using the defender's path as justification for a targeting call is completely valid.
11hokie September 3, 2024 at 11:37 AM

Bottom line that last play QB should have tucked and run for it. Had a blocker in front of him with green grass all the way to the endzone. Drones never should have been put in on that drive either. Wasted a play.
1. TechHokie13 September 3, 2024 at 12:23 PM
  
  Beyond the scope of my expertise, but I wouldn't say you were wrong one little bit ?
2. Hokie67 September 3, 2024 at 3:19 PM
  
  Absolutely - the QB should have run straight up the middle - with a fake to his left and into the endzone.
selhini September 3, 2024 at 11:31 AM

If you go frame by frame using . key, it looks to me like the defender makes contact with Felton. Felton is still trying to make the catch as they are both going down and ball hits his hands. Frame by frame definitely looks like PI to me.
1. Chris Coleman September 3, 2024 at 12:15 PM
  
  I think the ball is already past Felton by the time contact is made, thus no PI.
  1. VicDrit September 3, 2024 at 4:56 PM
    
    Chris, are you saying you can launch yourself into someone head first?? Because that's what happened on the last play.
brownsummithokie September 3, 2024 at 11:25 AM

Not sure why he didnt throw to Lane in the front of the EZ
TomTurkey September 3, 2024 at 11:09 AM

Appears in the last replay that the ball hit our receiver's hand(s) and deflected before their defender touched him.

Ask A Back Judge: Virginia Tech vs. Vanderbilt

This article is for TSL Pass subscribers

Share This Article

33 Comments

Leave a Comment — replying to Cancel

Leave a Comment — replying to