2nd HALF GAME THREAD!

HuskerRick

All-American
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
4,930
1,036
113
Ranson WV
I am no official and would like to look at that play again, not that it matters. the defensive person has every right to his position so the "walling off" is position fair and square. westy had three guys around him and did a nice job of selling it, but they weren't buying. I hope this isnt our battle cry for the rest of the year. We could have made more plays on D and a play or two on O would have been huge. oh well, good effort, not the result.
Defensive cannot touch the receiver when the ball is in the air, cannot impede the receivers route to the ball and cannot run over the receiver. Wisconsin did all 3, not ONE official threw a flag. It was like, the ball left the QB's hands, game over! Nothing happened after that.
 

cubsker

Head Coach
May 29, 2003
12,619
7,818
113
The moment we lined up in that formation Wiscy knew we were running the ball. Forget about the first down call. Next playcall was a wasted down...but hey, I'm no expert.
I wouldn't have minded running one or the other, but didn't like both. I really don't get what we were doing on the last series of regulation. Few nice short to intermediate passes and then not.
 

Truehuskerfan

Athletic Director
May 1, 2003
15,270
3,478
113
We played a good game, the officials weren't good but sometimes on the road you have to overcome some things. Gerry gave us two gifts and we safely got 3 points. Riley has to play to win, I think he plays to not lose. With Tommy the last thing you want is overtime.
Are you out of your mind? The guy who has gone for it on 4th down in critical times this year when others say we should have punted plays not to lose? What in the world are you talking about?
 

HuskerRick

All-American
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
4,930
1,036
113
Ranson WV
The moment we lined up in that formation Wiscy knew we were running the ball. Forget about the first down call. Next playcall was a wasted down...but hey, I'm no expert.
Totally agree, if they go with a fake run up the gut and throw to the outside, say an out pattern 7 yards. Then come back with a run play, but on first down, when you've been doing it the whole game, why not just line up and call the play at the line, the whole stadium knew the play!
 

jedihusker

Senior
Aug 17, 2003
2,679
690
113
Defensive cannot touch the receiver when the ball is in the air, cannot impede the receivers route to the ball and cannot run over the receiver. Wisconsin did all 3, not ONE official threw a flag. It was like, the ball left the QB's hands, game over! Nothing happened after that.
Exactly. Here's what the actual rule from the rule book states:
Defensive pass interference is contact beyond the neutral zone by a Team B player whose intent to impede an eligible opponent is obvious and it could prevent the opponent the opportunity of receiving a catchable forward pass. When in question, a legal forward pass is catchable. Defensive pass interference occurs only after a legal forward pass is thrown (A. R. 7-3-8-VII, VIII, XI and XII). It is not defensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-III and 7-3-9-III):
1. When, after the snap, opposing players immediately charge and establish contact with opponents at a point that is within one yard beyond the neutral zone.
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bona fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When a Team B player legally contacts an opponent before the pass is thrown (A.R. 7-3-8-III and X).
4. When a Team A potential kicker, from scrimmage kick formation, simulates a scrimmage kick by throwing the ball high and deep, and contact by a Team B player occurs.
So lets go through this point by point:
Was there contact beyond the neutral zone? Yes.

Was Jordan Westerkamp an eligible receiver? Yes.

Was the Wisconsin player's intent to impede him? Yes.

Was it obvious and did it prevent Westy from the opportunity off receiving a catchable forward pass? Yes and yes.

Did the contact occur after the pass was thrown? Yes.

Then you have the 4 things that disqualify it. #1 doesn't apply because it wasn't within one yard of the neutral zone. #2 doesn't apply because clearly the defender wasn't "making a simultaneous and bona fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass" as the ball went behind him and he wasn't even looking at it, only at Westy. #3 doesn't apply because it was after the pass was thrown (and if it occured before, it should have been defensive holding). #4 doesn't apply because it wasn't a kick.

It was pass interference. Period.
 

kaz36

Administrator
Moderator
May 2, 2005
28,370
21,002
113
Like I said..out of shotgun, not the pistol. All I do is complain? Is that all you got?
My bad. I shouldn't have added that last part. Just frustrated. Like I said in another post, maybe outside zone is something I would have done different.
 

jdrpbill

Walk On
Feb 4, 2014
112
68
28
I am not crazy and I don't care about a fourth down against Purdue or Illinois. I thing our last series of regulation we got into field goal range and then shut down. I wish we would have been more aggressive and tried for the touchdown.
 

Truehuskerfan

Athletic Director
May 1, 2003
15,270
3,478
113
I am not crazy and I don't care about a fourth down against Purdue or Illinois. I thing our last series of regulation we got into field goal range and then shut down. I wish we would have been more aggressive and tried for the touchdown.
Yes you are. Riley is anything but a play not to lose coach. Just have to come up with something to criticize him for, don't you? Heaven forbid we'd give our coaches credit for something. Bottom line-you wanted to blame this on Riley, and you came up with something that is totally stupid. If we had gone for the TD, you would have got on him for being to agressive. Because, you wanted to get on Riley for something. That was your only desire. Blame Riley.
 

jdrpbill

Walk On
Feb 4, 2014
112
68
28
I am a Riley fan but it is going to take him some time too. I don't share your opinion so that makes me stupid I guess. I will just read your posts and try to get as smart you. Thank you for your knowledge.
 

HuskerRick

All-American
Gold Member
Nov 15, 2001
4,930
1,036
113
Ranson WV
Exactly. Here's what the actual rule from the rule book states:

So lets go through this point by point:
Was there contact beyond the neutral zone? Yes.

Was Jordan Westerkamp an eligible receiver? Yes.

Was the Wisconsin player's intent to impede him? Yes.

Was it obvious and did it prevent Westy from the opportunity off receiving a catchable forward pass? Yes and yes.

Did the contact occur after the pass was thrown? Yes.

Then you have the 4 things that disqualify it. #1 doesn't apply because it wasn't within one yard of the neutral zone. #2 doesn't apply because clearly the defender wasn't "making a simultaneous and bona fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass" as the ball went behind him and he wasn't even looking at it, only at Westy. #3 doesn't apply because it was after the pass was thrown (and if it occured before, it should have been defensive holding). #4 doesn't apply because it wasn't a kick.

It was pass interference. Period.
The problem with a lot officials in game such as this, an official doesn't want to be the official that decides the game on one play. So, what our crew does is this, if the penalty is there more than one officials throws a flag and it's a group call. This re-enforces the call and it makes the call right. Too many, just want to get off the field and leave, it's so much easier (which is weak). You can bet the officials talked about this exact play in the locker room. Guarantee they knew it was real.
 

Truehuskerfan

Athletic Director
May 1, 2003
15,270
3,478
113
I am a Riley fan but it is going to take him some time too. I don't share your opinion so that makes me stupid I guess. I will just read your posts and try to get as smart you. Thank you for your knowledge.
Yeah, Riley fan my a$$. If your criticism made any sense, I wouldn't say anything about it. Your criticism of him calling him a play not to lose coach is so mind blowingly stupid and indefensible that I wasn't going to let it get by. He is anything but a play not to lose coach-and by calling him that, you clearly are not a Riley fan. Yeah, you make up stupid crap to criticize him for-but you're certainly a fan, aren't you? What a joke. Your schtick is pretty easy to see through.
 

jdrpbill

Walk On
Feb 4, 2014
112
68
28
Man a coach and a mind reader, your better than I thought. Let it get by? Not a Riley fan? It is still my opinion, I think we kicked the safe field goal rather than go for the touchdown. Wasn't a slam, just my opinion. For some reason you took it personal.
 

Truehuskerfan

Athletic Director
May 1, 2003
15,270
3,478
113
Man a coach and a mind reader, your better than I thought. Let it get by? Not a Riley fan? It is still my opinion, I think we kicked the safe field goal rather than go for the touchdown. Wasn't a slam, just my opinion. For some reason you took it personal.
Because it's stupid. Your position is reaching to make a point-and proves that you are making up crap to criticize him about. And also proves why Mike Riley is a coach and you are some pathetic poster who doesn't understand strategy and doesn't understand what being a coach that plays not to lose is.
 

jdrpbill

Walk On
Feb 4, 2014
112
68
28
It's a coach that doesn't try to score a touchdown to win, it's a coach that plays prevent, it's a coach that beats Notrhwestern Illinois and Indiana in close games, it is a coach that hasn't learned how to put a team away. Maybe you are a pathetic poster.