🏈 Should Alabama have been given the ball on the onside kick?

Big_Fan

Verified Member
Member
Danielson made the comment that the Vol player hitting Julio was legal because the ball had bounced...but on the replay it appeared to be kicked straight up in the air.

Onside kicks have to travel 10 yards for the kicking team to recover, but the kicking team cannot impede the receiver from catching the ball if it goes straight up in the air.

Did the ball bounce? It appeared to be kick catch interference to me, and should have been Alabama ball at midfield.
 
Whether the ball went 10 yards or not ... doesn't matter.
.
.
.
.
Whether the ball bounced or not ... doesn't matter.
.
.
.
.
Whether the ball hit a TN player first or not ... doesn't matter.
.
.
.
.
What really matters is --
.
.
.
.
.
Bama is still undefeated and Gary Danielson is still a douche.
 
Whether the ball went 10 yards or not ... doesn't matter.
.
.
.
.
Whether the ball bounced or not ... doesn't matter.
.
.
.
.
Whether the ball hit a TN player first or not ... doesn't matter.
.
.
.
.
What really matters is --
.
.
.
.
.
Bama is still undefeated and Gary Danielson is still a douche.

While all of that is true,if it did go straight up and not bounce(like it looked like to me) and was called the way it looked Bama would have got the ball and we would not have to go thru a near heart attack.
 
While all of that is true,if it did go straight up and not bounce(like it looked like to me) and was called the way it looked Bama would have got the ball and we would not have to go thru a near heart attack.

Which is my point, and it shuts up a lot of the UT whiners. It looked to me like UT got the benefit of a bad call there.
 
The Bama players should have been clearing the way for Julio to catch the ball. Tenn had a free shot at him and that never should have happened.
 
Back
Top Bottom