🏈 Has anyone explained why Dabo was yelling so much after the onside kick?

[Max]

What was his deal?

 

[TerryP]

I'm not the best, or even any good, at lip reading. So, I'm just speculating here.

IF the ball would have hit the ground, the receiving team has the right/opportunity to catch the ball. Or, at the least, call a fair catch. There's a clause in the rules about interference in these situations.

The problem isn't Dabo's understanding of the rules. The problem is the rule he was pointing to didn't apply in that case.

That's my interpretation ...

• 
  

 

[EasyTider]

I think Terry meant to say 'since the ball never hit the ground'

 

[TerryP]

I read this yesterday and forgot to link the article. It's nothing earth-shattering, but a decent read on how it went down with the coaches, players, positions, etc.

How Alabama exploited a tiny Clemson error into the Championship's deciding play

 

[PurlJam]

I'm not the best, or even any good, at lip reading. So, I'm just speculating here.

IF the ball would have hit the ground, the receiving team has the right/opportunity to catch the ball. Or, at the least, call a fair catch. There's a clause in the rules about interference in these situations.

The problem isn't Dabo's understanding of the rules. The problem is the rule he was pointing to didn't apply in that case.

That's my interpretation ...

Not 100% sure, but I believe his complaint about them not having an opportunity to catch the ball did not apply because no one for Clemson signaled for a fair catch.

 

[TerryP]

I think Terry meant to say 'since the ball never hit the ground'

So, your interpretation of what was going on with Dabo mirrors mine?

And yes, I could have worded that more clearly ... that said, I never have a hard time comprehending what I write! :headscratch:

 

[EasyTider]

Maybe because at that point he knew he would be buying dinner this year during summer vacation.

 

[TerryP]

Not 100% sure, but I believe his complaint about them not having an opportunity to catch the ball did not apply because no one for Clemson signaled for a fair catch.

I'm not 100% sure, but my gut tells me I've read something about differences in how this is called based on the ball hitting the ground first versus being in the air the entire time. I very well could be wrong.

IF Clemson would have signaled for a fair catch, logic says they would have been given the right.

I'm wondering if the ball hits the ground a fair catch call no longer applies. :headscratch:

 

[PurlJam]

I'm not 100% sure, but my gut tells me I've read something about differences in how this is called based on the ball hitting the ground first versus being in the air the entire time. I very well could be wrong.

IF Clemson would have signaled for a fair catch, logic says they would have been given the right.

I'm wondering if the ball hits the ground a fair catch call no longer applies. :headscratch:

 

[PurlJam]

^^^^^^^^^
I think so. The play Dabo was referring to when they tried it and it didn't work, the opposing player called for a fair catch and Clemson didn't give him the opportunity to catch the ball, but if he calls for a fair catch and it hits the ground it's fair game.

 

[TerryP]

Rules cited here...

Alabama's Crazy Surprise Onside Kick Was Indeed Legal

 

[Bigwavedave]

Not sure, but looked to me that he was yelling you can't advance the ball. Which is correct on an onside kick. But, I'm getting old and my eye sight and lip reading skills are not what they used to be

 

[It Takes Eleven]

What I think Dabo yelled was essentially: "we have to have a chance to catch the ball". During the press conference, he essentially said that Clemson had lost an onside kick to that call earlier in the year, and added, sort of sheepishly, I was just arguing for my team. He knew it didn't apply in this case because there was no one in position to catch it.

RTR,

Tim

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

The big point is that there was nobody in position to catch it for us to interfere with anyway.

If fair catch rules had applied, we still could have recovered it because protection is only applied until it hits someone on the receiving team or the ground. There was nobody who could have gotten to it before it hit the ground so we still could have recovered it once it bounced. Only problem there would have been the possibility that it would go out of bounds.

 

[BigAl]

I think Dabo was arguing that where the ball is caught that's where its down. An onside kick can not be advanced. In other wors where ever the ball is caught that's where its down.

 

[rick4bama]

Dabo saying to the Ref. NO!! NO!! NO!! REF!! I'M THE ONE THAT DOES THE TRICK PLAYS NOT SABAN!!! I WANT A DO OVER NOW!!! But then I may be wrong, and you guys right about advance the ball. But, I like my way the best!

Sidenote here: I said that this play will be talk about for a very, very, long time. here it is Friday and we still posting about it. Well played Giff. for the kick!

 

[BamaHubMan]

what the ..........
I just got out-coached.
That is the game.
We have lost.
What straw can I grasp at to get this reversed.
Don confuse me with the facts my mind is made up,,,That play was illegal.


That is my guess of Dabo's thought process. :rolf::rant2::hurray::hyper: