Intentional grounding

[Clevinger]

I accept that we pissed the game away. Congrats on your win, Northwestern.

Having said that, if what their qb did on their 2nd to last drive in regulation isn’t intentional grounding, they might as well remove that rule from the rule book. He was getting sacked between the tackles and just chucked it into the ground. He didn’t even pretend to throw it towards anyone. The intended target was the ground in front of him.

 

[Huskerfan2112]

Agreed. I would be interested to get an official explanation

 

[Clevinger]

Agreed. I would be interested to get an official explanation

Exactly. I’m just curious.

If player in the area includes “somewhere in the stadium,” then fine. Good call.

 

[huskerbaseball13]

Didn’t he throw it at the feet of his RB? Granted his RB was blocking

 

[SkerInCo]

I almost broke my TV on both no calls. Game over if they call either.

 

[koolman1210]

I almost broke my TV on both no calls. Game over if they call either.

Seek professional help

 

[Clevinger]

I almost broke my TV on both no calls. Game over if they call either.

I also hadn’t realized holding doesn’t include tackling our d line by their jerseys.

The refs were like, “F it. They are 0-5.”

 

[shine003]

The officiating this year for Nebraska games has been just plain awful. Wouldn’t change the outcome in any but today and maybe Purdue but still it’s been shameful and merits acknowledgement.

 

[Baxter48]

I also hadn’t realized holding doesn’t include tackling our d line by their jerseys.

The refs were like, “F it. They are 0-5.”

Only if we do it

 

[barney44]

BS no calls..

 

[Baxter48]

Reminds me of Martinez safety still haven't herd a decent explanation

 

[huskerfan66]

Yes. #1 i believe was within about three yards of the pass. Plus the QB was getting hit. Now, with out going back and watching it again, if the running back was blocking, I would try to argue for offensive pass interference. Probably wouldn't get very far but worth a shot. Refs would never call it, but I would argue it.

 

[headcard]

Seek professional help

Ironic

 

[Baxter48]

Yes. #1 i believe was within about three yards of the pass. Plus the QB was getting hit. Now, with out going back and watching it again, if the running back was blocking, I would try to argue for offensive pass interference. Probably wouldn't get very far but worth a shot. Refs would never call it, but I would argue it.

Again if it was Martinez he'd have been called, look these officials have a predetermination what there going to call against us there only human but they've studied film, plus kick a team while there down

 

[huskerfan66]

Again if it was Martinez he'd have been called, look these officials have a predetermination what there going to call against us there only human but they've studied film, plus kick a team while there down

Hypothetical. I complain about officiating as much or more than the next guy. But that wasn't anywhere near intentional grounding. Sorry

 

[kidofSN]

Sorry neither of them were intentional grounding. Well they were but done legally. Receiver in area.

 

[Clevinger]

Hypothetical. I complain about officiating as much or more than the next guy. But that wasn't anywhere near intentional grounding. Sorry

It unquestionably was intentional grounding the first time he did it that drive. The second time it was disgusting but he was outside the pocket.

 

[Clevinger]

Sorry neither of them were intentional grounding. Well they were but done legally. Receiver in area.

BS

 

[Clevinger]

Sorry neither of them were intentional grounding. Well they were but done legally. Receiver in area.

If the first wasn’t nothing is.

No one in the area and he just chucked it straight into the ground. Meaningless rule.

 

[CatColumbia]

Both were the right call. Thorson is a smart dude and knows when to throw the ball away...

 

[Baxter48]

Pretty soon the quarterback will get hurt imo he's already in the grasp and when he outside the tackle and everyone is covered he dumps it off is way different he just trying to avoid the sack plain and simple

 

[kidofSN]

Yes he threw it away to avoid the sack. He did it legally. There was a receiver close by both times! That is not BS...Watch it again!

 

[Clevinger]

Yes he threw it away to avoid the sack. He did it legally. There was a receiver close by both times! That is not BS...Watch it again!

First one, no one in area. Textbook intentional grounding. Total bs.

You might as well just spike the ball if you are getting sacked.

 

[Remeniscence U]

I almost broke my TV on both no calls. Game over if they call either.

lol.
Can't believe anyone could get "angry" at an 0-6 team losing. Seems like it should be expected by now.

 

[BigNUFan51]

First one, no one in area. Textbook intentional grounding. Total bs.

You might as well just spike the ball if you are getting sacked.

Same thing happened AGAINST Northwestern last week multiple times. Obviously a rule that needs to be changed.

 

[Jimmy Frank]

Reminds me of Martinez safety still haven't herd a decent explanation

Or throwing a flag for facemask after watching a replay.

 

[Clevinger]

Obviously a rule that needs to be changed.

I agree. It just seems like it got interpreted out of existence. The refs essentially ignore the spirit and letter of the rule, so just get rid of it. It never gets called.

 

[jedimasterjed]

Didn’t he throw it at the feet of his RB? Granted his RB was blocking

You could never get a sack if kept a running back blocking, just spike the ball at his feet. That was grounding

 

[Hoosker Du]

I accept that we pissed the game away. Congrats on your win, Northwestern.

Having said that, if what their qb did on their 2nd to last drive in regulation isn’t intentional grounding, they might as well remove that rule from the rule book. He was getting sacked between the tackles and just chucked it into the ground. He didn’t even pretend to throw it towards anyone. The intended target was the ground in front of him.

Nope. #1 was right in the vicinity of on both occasions. Shouldn't have been a penalty in either case. I hate to agree with refs that weren't outstanding, but it was the right call.

The fact is, we gave up a 2 TD lead in the 4th quarter, and gave up a 10 point lead with less than 5 minutes left. Frost has a shitty defensive staff, and if he hitches himself to their wagon, he is going to jeopardize his own tenure at Nebraska.

 

[mmunso7]

Agreed. I would be interested to get an official explanation

If you get this explanation, please share it with Fat Albert, the house zebra at NW. He don't get it either.

 

[Clevinger]

Nope. #1 was right in the vicinity of on both occasions. Shouldn't have been a penalty in either case. I hate to agree with refs that weren't outstanding, but it was the right call.

The fact is, we gave up a 2 TD lead in the 4th quarter, and gave up a 10 point lead with less than 5 minutes left. Frost has a shitty defensive staff, and if he hitches himself to their wagon, he is going to jeopardize his own tenure at Nebraska.

How big is the vicinity/area? Is that defined? There was no one close to where he threw it on the first one.

 

[Hoosker Du]

How big is the vicinity/area? Is that defined? There was no one close to where he threw it on the first one.

Rewatch the plays. You'll see on both plays that #1 was in the vicinity, which is really all that needs to happen. I've seen worse no calls on intentional grounding.

 

[Clevinger]

Rewatch the plays. You'll see on both plays that #1 was in the vicinity, which is really all that needs to happen. I've seen worse no calls on intentional grounding.

I didn’t record it. Some of you seem certain there was a player nearby, but watching live I don’t recall that at all. It looked like no one was close.

Is the nearness of the receiver at the whim of the ref? Because what he did is what that rule is supposed to prevent.

 

[kidofSN]

And yes a QB can spike it if a receiver is next to him and it is NOT intentional grounding. As much as it sucks it was not an intentional grounding penalty either time.

 

[Hoosker Du]

I didn’t record it. Some of you seem certain there was a player nearby, but watching live I don’t recall that at all. It looked like no one was close.

Is the nearness of the receiver at the whim of the ref? Because what he did is what that rule is supposed to prevent.

I initially thought the same as you, but then on the replays saw #1 pass blocking for Thorson pretty much right in front of him.

 

[huskerfan66]

It unquestionably was intentional grounding the first time he did it that drive. The second time it was disgusting but he was outside the pocket.

No. Neither was

 

[TruHusker]

Again if it was Martinez he'd have been called, look these officials have a predetermination what there going to call against us there only human but they've studied film, plus kick a team while there down

I read so much crap on here and this is some of it. Officials are human and not perfect but they don't go out there with intent to screw the Huskers. There isn't a giant officials watergate conspiracy among all of them to make up calls. Each week they get graded on the game, it isn't like Saturday is done and just put away. They have supervisors they have to answer to, they watch film and are graded. The real fact and only a few want to admit it, our DL can't get around my deceased grandmother, our DB's take poor angles, incredibly poor technique, our entire D doesnt seem to know what the opposing team is doing. On O our linemen can't block someone that comes from an angle other than straight ahead, we have no height at receiver and let's not even talk about special teams. Right now they not only don't know what they are doing they are not getting better.

Were there questionable calls? Sure. With there always be? Yep. Will we get some going our way? Sure. Shoot, if Northwestern would not have dropped so many passes today it wouldn't have been this close. It also might help if people actually knew all the rukes instead if just thinking they do.

Blame it all you want on the officials if that makes you feel better but it is not reality. It is a fools way of explaining why things don't go the way you want.

 

[Clevinger]

No. Neither was

No, first was.

 

[CatColumbia]

I almost broke my TV on both no calls. Game over if they call either.

We would have found another way to f’ it up.. trust me.

 

[Baxter48]

I read so much crap on here and this is some of it. Officials are human and not perfect but they don't go out there with intent to screw the Huskers. There isn't a giant officials watergate conspiracy among all of them to make up calls. Each week they get graded on the game, it isn't like Saturday is done and just put away. They have supervisors they have to answer to, they watch film and are graded. The real fact and only a few want to admit it, our DL can't get around my deceased grandmother, our DB's take poor angles, incredibly poor technique, our entire D doesnt seem to know what the opposing team is doing. On O our linemen can't block someone that comes from an angle other than straight ahead, we have no height at receiver and let's not even talk about special teams. Right now they not only don't know what they are doing they are not getting better.

Were there questionable calls? Sure. With there always be? Yep. Will we get some going our way? Sure. Shoot, if Northwestern would not have dropped so many passes today it wouldn't have been this close. It also might help if people actually knew all the rukes instead if just thinking they do.

Blame it all you want on the officials if that makes you feel better but it is not reality. It is a fools way of explaining why things don't go the way you want.

Never said a vast right wing conspiracy I'm saying if a team is known for being penalized a lot that's already in the officials minds, just watch next weeks Minnesota game Nebraska will get at least 4 bad or marginal penalties against them where Minnesota will do something worse and no call