🏈 "I'd rather be good than lucky"

[PhillyGirl]

Interesting t-shirt

 

[TerryP]

Here's lucky. This is the play they called pass interference on Pitt.

 

[0LDSCH00L]

The Luck of the Irish is real, I have seen it first hand...

 

[JoshB]

Here's lucky. This is the play they called pass interference on Pitt.

Thats a damn good defensive play in my mind.

 

[BamaCore]

Don't forget about this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q58R0bhNcLI

 

[TerryP]

I can see both sides of the debate on the Stanford TD with some talking about his elbow, others referring to the forward progress being stopped. It's certainly close.

On the PI call, everything about what is not pass interference is ignored on that play. The defensive backs has his head turned, he's going for the ball, and there's legal contact.

In both cases: luck.

But hey, it takes luck to get through a season undefeated.

 

[Irish#1]

Don't forget about this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q58R0bhNcLI

He was down and the whistle had blown before he stretched.

The Pitt call was iffy. I wouldn't have called it, but I'd take it.

 

[RollTideRandy]

I wish someone would make a shirt that on the back says… “Historic Season 2012…Auburn Tigers…..0-8 in the SEC for the first time ever” and the front would say…”SEC Cellar Dwellers…0-8”.

 

[bamaraider]

I saw something online where Irish fans were making a shirt that said "Catholics vs Cousins" :shake:

 

[JoshB]

I saw something online where Irish fans were making a shirt that said "Catholics vs Cousins" :shake:

Yeah someone on facebook posted it, the Irish fans definitely aren't ingratiating themselves to me.

 

[BamaCore]

He was down and the whistle had blown before he stretched.

The Pitt call was iffy. I wouldn't have called it, but I'd take it.

Not once do I see his knee hit the ground, and the whistle being blown before the play was really dead is part of the problem. It is what it is, the Irish got away with a big one.

And saying the Pitt call was iffy is ridiculous. There is no way, in any sense, that that is pass interference. Literally no way. I'll give "iffy" on the Stanford call, but the Pitt call was a clear blown call.

 

[Irish#1]

Not once do I see his knee hit the ground, and the whistle being blown before the play was really dead is part of the problem. It is what it is, the Irish got away with a big one.

And saying the Pitt call was iffy is ridiculous. There is no way, in any sense, that that is pass interference. Literally no way. I'll give "iffy" on the Stanford call, but the Pitt call was a clear blown call.

Why are you so upset? If you look at the Pitt play again, he does hit Eifert right before the ball gets there. That's why I said it was iffy and I wouldn't call it. As far as Stanford you can call it whatever you want. Look at the other angles and you will see the line judge running in, arms waving blowing the play dead before he twists and reaches the ball across the goal line. Why else would the defensive players let up and start celebrating?

 

[BamaCore]

Why are you so upset? If you look at the Pitt play again, he does hit Eifert right before the ball gets there. That's why I said it was iffy and I wouldn't call it. As far as Stanford you can call it whatever you want. Look at the other angles and you will see the line judge running in, arms waving blowing the play dead before he twists and reaches the ball across the goal line. Why else would the defensive players let up and start celebrating?

Not upset, just calling it like I see it. That is in no way pass interference. Nevermind the fact that he's clearly making a play on the ball which means it doesn't really even matter, but using the word "hit" to describe what he did to his arm is being a bit liberal with the word. I would say he might have lightly brushed his arm.

 

[TerryP]

Why are you so upset? If you look at the Pitt play again, he does hit Eifert right before the ball gets there. That's why I said it was iffy and I wouldn't call it. As far as Stanford you can call it whatever you want. Look at the other angles and you will see the line judge running in, arms waving blowing the play dead before he twists and reaches the ball across the goal line. Why else would the defensive players let up and start celebrating?

He's got a matter of fact personality. Trust me, he's not upset.

As to hitting Eifert:

It doesn't matter that he did. As soon as a defensive back looks back at the ball it's up for grabs. He has as much right to the ball as Eifert did. It's contact, but certainly not interference. It's clearly defined in the rule book just like it is if he head wasn't turned it would have been flagged, and should have been.

 

[UAgrad93]

Has anyone heard mention of the missed FG by Pitt that ND had two indentical numbers on the field? I ask the question because if it was true, then it would've been a delay of game penalty against the Irish and would've resulted in a five yard step off and re-kick. I want to say that a radio personality referred to ND as having 2 #7s on the field. I know that a penalty is the result because, we got nailed with one a couple years back either on a kickoff or FG.

 

[Irish#1]

Has anyone heard mention of the missed FG by Pitt that ND had two indentical numbers on the field? I ask the question because if it was true, then it would've been a delay of game penalty against the Irish and would've resulted in a five yard step off and re-kick. I want to say that a radio personality referred to ND as having 2 #7s on the field. I know that a penalty is the result because, we got nailed with one a couple years back either on a kickoff or FG.

You are 100% correct.

 

[UAgrad93]

You are 100% correct.

Did it happen? Like I said, there was scuttle about it on the radio but nothing mentioned on ESPN or anywhere else. Big Break!!

 

[CRMSNtide]

He was down and the whistle had blown before he stretched.

Didn't they review that play though?
Doesn't seem like it would have been reviewable if they blew it dead.

 

[Irish#1]

Did it happen? Like I said, there was scuttle about it on the radio but nothing mentioned on ESPN or anywhere else. Big Break!!

Yes it did happen.

Didn't they review that play though?
Doesn't seem like it would have been reviewable if they blew it dead.

You have a good point and I don't have a good answer. I know that in one of the many replays you could see the line judge coming in waving his arms before the RB twisted and reached over. Mayock then stated that the ref had blown the play dead and they got confirmation that this is what happened, but they still reviewed. My only guess is the ref reviewed to see if he could determine whether he could hear the whistle?

 

[TerryP]

Yes it did happen.



You have a good point and I don't have a good answer. I know that in one of the many replays you could see the line judge coming in waving his arms before the RB twisted and reached over. Mayock then stated that the ref had blown the play dead and they got confirmation that this is what happened, but they still reviewed. My only guess is the ref reviewed to see if he could determine whether he could hear the whistle?

They use the same feed for replays as we see on TV so I'd assume they'd have audio as well.