Ask A Back Judge: Virginia Tech vs. Duke

16 Comments

1. 

   Hokietech November 26, 2024 at 8:02 PM

   Thank you for answering my question. It always bothered me that those few inches make the difference between a penalty that causes an ejection and no flag at all. I hope that rule is improved.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 November 27, 2024 at 1:37 PM

      I find it difficult to articulate how strongly I agree with you on that one ?. Thanks for reading and asking the question!
2. 

   BGHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 3:47 PM

   If one man uses his helmet to hit another man’s helmet hard enough to cause a concussion…that seems the definition of what a targeting call should be. As always, the rules are so convoluted that a concussion causing helmet to helmet gets semantically twisted to say that it isn’t a penalty.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 4:05 PM

      I'll give the Duke player some leeway in that regard just because I think the ground is likely to be the bigger culprit there. Still, if the defender does *exactly* the same thing, but happens to make contact with his helmet all of 4 inches to the left, that's a foul and an ejection. That's absolutely insane to me. If you need to bust out a tape measure to decide whether or not a dude is ejected, the rule is, to quote Beamer, outta whack. I can only hope the NCAA recognizes that in the near future as well, as much as I hate the seemingly constant targeting rule tweaks, it very much seems to be in need of some tweaking, in my opinion.
   2. 

      Mark Duncan November 26, 2024 at 4:28 PM

      The Duke defender definitely lowered his head, even if contact was slightly off the crown.
      1. 

         TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 4:49 PM

         Yep, therein lies my frustration with how the rule is administered. If 4 inches to the left is the difference between an ejection and no foul, either a whole lot more guys need to be ejected each game, or none. I just don't see the point in enforcing the rule like this, when a clearly dangerous hit is deemed legal because the defender happened to turn his head (and put himself in arguably a *more* dangerous position!) at the last second and missed the proverbial strike zone by mere inches at game speed.
3. 

   bkbroiler November 26, 2024 at 2:31 PM

   That should have 100% been an OPI call. Very blatant push-off from the receiver there. Still doesn't excuse how poorly our DBs played against Duke, except for the 3 picks we had on Murphy.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 3:01 PM

      I'm just not seeing a push that could have thrown Lovett to the ground like that. I see the receiver stopping and going straight up; his hand/arm only join the party later to clean things up. As far as I can tell (and who knows, maybe a different camera angle would tell a different story), Lovett just loses his balance trying to stop his own momentum.
      1. 

         nvpbrown November 26, 2024 at 4:52 PM

         The thing I found most amusing about the "is it OPI" replay is Jaylen Jones grabbing a hold of the receiver he's covering in the middle of the field at the 30 yard line and spinning him around.
4. 

   nvpbrown November 26, 2024 at 1:56 PM

   Thanks for the explanation of the Greene TD. To be sure I understand it, does this sound right? (1) When his right foot lands in the end zone, the ball looks like it hadn't broken the plane (in bounds or out of bounds). So no TD yet at that point even though a part of his body broke the plane. (2) While his foot is still on the ground in the end zone but before the left foot hit the pylon, the ball moves forward and breaks the extended plane out of bounds. That's good enough for a TD. (3) Had his right foot hit the pylon initially, the play would immediately be dead. No TD assuming the ball hadn't crossed the extended plane at that point. In that case, do you spot the ball at the forwardmost point against the extended plane?
   1. 

      TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 2:02 PM

      Correct on 1 and 2. For 3, if the ball is somehow still in bounds (unlikely, but I suppose physically possible), it's dead at the foremost point just like any other play. If the ball is out of bounds, by rule it goes back to the foremost point where it crossed the sideline (probably around the 1 or so most likely). So you're correct, no TD either way.
5. 

   4dhokies November 26, 2024 at 12:46 PM

   Once again, these articles are filled with game knowledge that most people don't have. Very interesting and appreciated!
   1. 

      TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 1:03 PM

      That's why they pay us the medium bucks ?
   2. 

      TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 1:04 PM

      And thanks very much!
6. 

   TomTurkey November 26, 2024 at 12:16 PM

   What confused me about the "no play" explanation[sic] was no whistle (that I know of) stopped the snap of the ball.
   1. 

      TechHokie13 November 26, 2024 at 12:23 PM

      Yeah, U was super slow on the whistle there. He basically started blowing it after the snap. Super sloppy, tbh. But at that point, it's probably the least-bad option. He's clearly not comfortable with what he's seeing, not trusting his eyes, and almost certainly not focused properly on his keys. Easily could have missed something major and let the problem snowball on him had he not stopped it. Pretty similar scenario to that Texas game: crew probably took the least-bad approach, but only had to because they got themselves in a pretty messy situation to start with.