The Unofficial Put the Officiating complaint to rest thread

[Hercules]

We only ever notice/remember the calls that go against our favor.

I don't think that's entirely true. I will freely admit we got away with a pass interference on the throw to the end zone where Hagg (I think) grabbed the WR's arm early and that Crick facemasked Gabbert on the potential fumble near the goalline, but missing a clear as freaking day fumble on the Gabbert sack is absolutely unacceptable. Especially when we have video review. And anyone who buys that "forward progress was stopped" BS is flat-out wrong.

 

Right. And the Osborne fumble wasn't one of those calls where it's like, "Well, I guess the ball just didn't bounce our way today." This was more like, "the ball bounced our way, and then the officials punched us in the face, took the ball, teed it up, and kicked it the other way."

[cchusker]

The outside inside crack back refers to a WR or TE split out wide who comes in and blocks an inside defensive player below the waist. A one on one chop block is perfectly legal between two linemen.

[Enhance]

The outside inside crack back refers to a WR or TE split out wide who comes in and blocks an inside defensive player below the waist. A one on one chop block is perfectly legal between two linemen.

That is my understanding as well.

 

The chop block also only implies if it is with the original tackle box of the line of scrimmage. If I'm not mistaken, the play started on the far hasmark, thus the chop block is legal because it is still between the original tackle box.

[Nebula]

I am just tired of listening to Ed Pussingham talk about targeting hits. This guy is a complete tool and needs to be removed from the booth.

 

I like him!

[Count 'Bility]

I tend to disagree with the conspiracy against Nebraska, however, the officiating in this conference is just gettin worse when it comes to quality and consistency. Hmmm.

[AJMILLAHUSKER]

Your telling me a team throws 42 times and gets 1 holding call? Let's get real.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Holding occurs on every play. I'm sure Nebraska got away with holding at certain points during the Missouri game. The fact of the matter is we won, so, it doesn't matter.

[jsneb83]

I am just tired of listening to Ed Pussingham talk about targeting hits. This guy is a complete tool and needs to be removed from the booth.

Truly, how do you tackle or block without targeting a person? Just run around like a chicken with its head cut off hoping that you run into someone? 99% of these helmet-to-helmet hits are not intended, it's just part of the game. Martin, Meredith, and Osborne's hit are all incidtental and is just part of the game.

[shyndy]

The outside inside crack back refers to a WR or TE split out wide who comes in and blocks an inside defensive player below the waist. A one on one chop block is perfectly legal between two linemen.

That is my understanding as well.

 

The chop block also only implies if it is with the original tackle box of the line of scrimmage. If I'm not mistaken, the play started on the far hasmark, thus the chop block is legal because it is still between the original tackle box.

But, the way we were taught in high school, was that this imaginary box is only five yards deep to either side of the LOS also. Look, I've been plenty conspiratorial as far as officiating in the past, but in this game both teams got screwed enough that it kind of evens out. We got away with some DPI and facemask, they got away with a fumble and a bunch of holding and otherstuff. whatever.

[ESPY]

I am just tired of listening to Ed Pussingham talk about targeting hits. This guy is a complete tool and needs to be removed from the booth.

 

EQUALS

 

[jjamuss]

been saying this for years... of course, I was told I had a tinfoil hat, my moms basement is too dark and blah blah blah. finally, some redemption!

[sd'sker]

the refs were just awful. both teams can complain about that.

 

and i do not know how you do not 'target' a qb on a sack. you are getting held up in the block, you need to have your hands up to deflect potential passes, and when you get freed from your blocker, you are stood up and right in the face of the qb. of course helmets are going to collide. what is a d-lineman to do? it is not like they are spearing the guy or going at him with his crown. helmets are going to bump when you are stood up and then go to wrap up.

[74Hunter]

Mizzou fans want to point to a couple of blown calls to show that there is no conspiracy and that the game was called bad on both sides. What Mizzou fans don't understand---and what these images show---is that you are always going to find calls that referees missed because they didn't see them. I've seen this in every game I've ever watched.

 

What has Nebraska fans puzzled are the bizarre sleights of hand that occur under the spotlight. There is no better example of this than the Osborne fumble hit on Gabbert. It was clearly a fumble, the review process was suspiciously mishandled, and the explanation (forward progress) is insane. This is the smoking gun for officiating conspiracy theories as far as I'm concerned. MIssed calls are one thing, but this is unprecedented.

 

I saw the crack block and that is suppose to be illegal. I saw the jersey grab and that is suppose to be illegal. I saw the helu missed place 3rd down ball placement that lead to a punt too.

 

Someone needs to get on a soapbox on this. These photos need to got to the league office or officiating office.

Just exactly what good what that do? I'm sure that these "missed calls" especially when you have replay available, have come down from DeLoss Dodds, errrrrr, Dan Beebe. Do you think that the office really gives a fat, rat's behind how badly we are getting screwed? They do, it came from them.

 

Besides, the Smith forced fumble was a makeup for them missing the helmet to helmet hit.

[74Hunter]

The outside inside crack back refers to a WR or TE split out wide who comes in and blocks an inside defensive player below the waist. A one on one chop block is perfectly legal between two linemen.

That is my understanding as well.

 

The chop block also only implies if it is with the original tackle box of the line of scrimmage. If I'm not mistaken, the play started on the far hasmark, thus the chop block is legal because it is still between the original tackle box.

Last time people, that was not a CHOP block it was a CUT block. Blocking someone below the waste is not always a penalty.

 

Chop block: play in which one or more players of the same team are in contact with an opposing team's player, one of whom is blocking at or below the knees.

[knapplc]

Correct, 74. Going at or below the knees is only illegal if another player is engaged with the "victim" above the waist, while the second blocker then engages them below the waist. Without that second blocker, it's a cut block, and legal.