Official Ruling on Osborne hit/Gabbert fumble

[bleedNUred]

It was clear as day that was a good hit that caused a fumble which lead to a TD, no doubt in my mind. The score should have been 38-17 final but hey a win is a win and we completely handled Mizzou for the last time which feels amazing might I add.

[bleedNUred]

the officials are a disgrace to football stop whinning and complaining about us leaving and get the damn calls on the field right

This.

[TigerNuts]

the officials are a disgrace to football stop whinning and complaining about us leaving and get the damn calls on the field right

 

When did the officials whine and complain about NU leaving?

[GMoose]

So by ruling it forward progress, they are admitting that they blew the call that should have been a late hit apparently? I'm usually not one to call out refs, but this is a total crock.

[GMoose]

So by ruling it forward progress, they are admitting that they blew the call that should have been a late hit apparently? I'm usually not one to call out refs, but this is a total crock.

[Glendower]

2 Gabbert fumbles were disallowed after lengthy reviews. One was real close, the other was obvious. Not sure if the Big 12 has it out for us, but what is happening out there isn't doing much to quell that notion.

 

Oh, did you see the overturned muffed fumble in the Texas-Baylor game to let Texas get one more shot? Worst overturned call I have ever seen, wonder who owns this conference.

 

There were bad calls both ways. I can think of a serious face mask on Gabbert and at least a couple of PI calls that were missed. There is no conspiracy, missed calls are part of the game.

 

Did those non-calls directly result in points? If those 2 fumbles are called properly, it's 38-14 instead of 31-17. I didn't say there was a conspiracy, but sometimes you seriously wonder.

 

If the correct calls were made on that play then the fumble would have been negated by the personal foul/blow to the head on Gabbert.

 

Not saying I agree with the penalty and how its setup but it was an illegal hit.

 

No. That's not true. He tackled him. In anther thread someone posted a pic from the OWH of the hit and I posted one that I took from another angle-- maybe their heads were at the same height, but that's why people wear helmets in the first place. Heads are going to hit which is different from leading with your helmet. Osborne is wrapping up and taking him down with his head up. Is his head supposed to rotate backwards 90 degrees so it never risks hitting another player?

[Landlord]

I hope to see Nebraska on the Final Home Game of the season color over the turf where it says Big XII. Then, after Nebraska wins the Big XII Championship, pull up their Jerseys to reveal a shirt that reads "Big 10 Bound"

 

 

There is no part of our field that has the Big XII logo.

 

 

 

forward progress? wtf? how are there ever any fumbles then? i would think forward progress ruling could be used to overrule 99.9% of all fumbles in college football if it applies the same as it did on this play.

 

They weren't saying ONLY forward progress, they were saying forward progress and it had been whistled dead, similar to when a runningback gets stood up by four defenders and they start pushing him backwards and they blow the whistle. If he would have fumbled after being pushed backwards 15 yards it obviously wouldn't have been ruled an actual fumble.

 

The call was garbage, I'm not supporting it, only clarifying what the call actually was.

[trouble]

2 Gabbert fumbles were disallowed after lengthy reviews. One was real close, the other was obvious. Not sure if the Big 12 has it out for us, but what is happening out there isn't doing much to quell that notion.

 

Oh, did you see the overturned muffed fumble in the Texas-Baylor game to let Texas get one more shot? Worst overturned call I have ever seen, wonder who owns this conference.

 

There were bad calls both ways. I can think of a serious face mask on Gabbert and at least a couple of PI calls that were missed. There is no conspiracy, missed calls are part of the game.

 

Did those non-calls directly result in points? If those 2 fumbles are called properly, it's 38-14 instead of 31-17. I didn't say there was a conspiracy, but sometimes you seriously wonder.

 

If the correct calls were made on that play then the fumble would have been negated by the personal foul/blow to the head on Gabbert.

 

Not saying I agree with the penalty and how its setup but it was an illegal hit.

 

No. That's not true. He tackled him. In anther thread someone posted a pic from the OWH of the hit and I posted one that I took from another angle-- maybe their heads were at the same height, but that's why people wear helmets in the first place. Heads are going to hit which is different from leading with your helmet. Osborne is wrapping up and taking him down with his head up. Is his head supposed to rotate backwards 90 degrees so it never risks hitting another player?

Sure looked helmet to helmet the 4-5 times I watched it.

 

Meh, doesn't matter. Not like the call cost us the game anyways.

[The Maudfather]

Can't believe that the no call false start on Mizzou's left guard that drew Jared Crick offsides hasn't been mentioned yet. I was yelling obscenities at my TV after that. How do you miss a blatant false start like that?

[ZRod]

Can't believe that the no call false start on Mizzou's left guard that drew Jared Crick offsides hasn't been mentioned yet. I was yelling obscenities at my TV after that. How do you miss a blatant false start like that?

 

You just do! kind of like how you just miss Pierre Allen's skin tight jersey being streched out a foot and a half while he's TYRING to chase down the ball carrier.

[hskrfan4life]

Uh what about the officials waiting 1 or 2 extra seconds before throwing a damn flag for delay of game. Oh and BTW Missouri has perfect blockers. And on the Gabbert sack, there was no way that's not a fumble, he got KTFO and lost the ball.

[schuhbdoo]

I rewatched the hit by Osborne. He sacked the QB and the helmets did hit. It was a fumble, no question. If a flag would've been thrown for helmet to helmet, so be it. They stopped the clock and let Gabbert go to the sideline. They broke for commercial and did some kind of review. After the commercial break they came back and said 3rd and 22 with no explanation. They started the clock again and that is when Gabbert ran for 10 yards and they punted. The way that played developed, how is there anyway that could not be ruled a fumble? Just blows my mind.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Yeah, that call against Crick was absolutely ridiculous. I was pretty pissed about that and I also observed Allen's jersey being stretched out like someone was laying a red carpet behind him as he ran towards the ball carrier. Complete bull$hit!

[hskrfan4life]

I rewatched the hit by Osborne. He sacked the QB and the helmets did hit. It was a fumble, no question. If a flag would've been thrown for helmet to helmet, so be it. They stopped the clock and let Gabbert go to the sideline. They broke for commercial and did some kind of review. After the commercial break they came back and said 3rd and 22 with no explanation. They started the clock again and that is when Gabbert ran for 10 yards and they punted. The way that played developed, how is there anyway that could not be ruled a fumble? Just blows my mind.

Point is Gabbert should'nt of been allowed to be back on the field for the next play. Injury results in sitting out a play.

[JTrain]

I think overall it was a pretty well officiated game. There were some obvious facemasks against Mizzou that were missed. But those happen quite a bit (plus the one at the 1 yard line wouldn't have helped them much). But I also admit to being baffled by the whole "forward progress" sack/fumble ruling. I was in the north endzone so I didn't have the advantage of seeing all the TV replays, but isn't forward progress called only when someone is being held up for an extended period? I've never seen it called like that on a big hit. Anybody have a YouTube clip up?