1110 Audio from the Osborne Hit / Fumble

I still want clarification for this 'forward progress' ruling. What does that even mean...forward progress on a sack? I have never heard that excuse in my life and would appreciate if anybody has some insight into this.

 
I don't think you will find it. The consensus is that the replay officials most likely thought they missed a "leading with the crown of your helmet" call, so they didn't give us the fumble.... which makes total sense right?

Someone should be fired.

 
You can hear the disgust in there voices. Its funny listening to that, and watching the video of the same hit. Our guys say it wouldn't of happened if Gabbert had kept his head up, while Ed says its clearly an illegal hit, but both agree it was an fumble....

 
epocSoN said:
I don't think you will find it. The consensus is that the replay officials most likely thought they missed a "leading with the crown of your helmet" call, so they didn't give us the fumble.... which makes total sense right?

Someone should be fired.
Click to expand...
That in no way, shape, or form, seems ethical for a referee to make that judgment call. Penalties are non-reviewable and can only be called when they occur. That ref should not have taken the helmet to helmet into consideration if he did. Terrible officiating and yes, someone should at least be demoted for that crap.

 
Enhance89 said:
I still want clarification for this 'forward progress' ruling. What does that even mean...forward progress on a sack? I have never heard that excuse in my life and would appreciate if anybody has some insight into this.
Click to expand...
Doesn't mean anything. They were just blatantly making s**t up.

 
epocSoN said:
I don't think you will find it. The consensus is that the replay officials most likely thought they missed a "leading with the crown of your helmet" call, so they didn't give us the fumble.... which makes total sense right?

Someone should be fired.
Click to expand...
I actually had to do it backwards from most people as I had to listen to the game and didn't get to watch it until last night. I watched the play over and over again. The hit was much like Martin's hit last week. There was no leading with the crown of the helmet. His head was up. There would have been no helmet to helmet hit if Gabbert wouldn't have ducked at the last minute. Osborne I'm guessing is significantly shorter than Gabbert. Without leaving his feet, how could he have had a helmet to helmet hit with Gabbert? Easy, Gabbert crouched down knowing he was about to get blasted. The biggest difference between this play and Martin's against Okie State is the fact that Osborne was hitting the guy with the ball. I don't know how he can get blasted for hitting an unsuspecting player when Gabbert had the ball in his hands. Of course Osborne was targeting Gabbert, he was the ball carrier. Isn't the defense supposed to target the ball carrier?

 
Classic Husker audio. I love the Wimmers Meats ad they read during the review.

As for the call - completely blown call. I know the officiating in this game sucked but does anyone else think that Big 12 officials have been horrible all year? Not only in Husker games but games across the conference.

 
I don't get it. People are obsessed with this helmet to helmet crap. It's really a none issue because they didn't flag him for it.

Why do 80 percent of people care more about the helmet to helmet, rather then the refs screwing us out of 6 points even with the review of the play?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
epocSoN said:
I don't get it. People are obsessed with this helmet to helmet crap. It's really a none issue because they didn't flag him for it.

Why do 80 percent of people care more about the helmet to helmet, rather then the refs screwing us out of 6 points even with the review of the play?
Click to expand...
:yeah

I don't get in either. Its like they think are justified in blowing the call on the fumble because they think they missed an illegal hit - a hit that was legal IMHO.

 
Sometimes, ref's just have off games. However, this really doesn't justify what happened on this particular play. Why even have replay if they're going to blow it? I thought replay was brought into the mix so that incorrect calls could be corrected. The only way forward progress could have been used in this situation is if there would have been an inadvertant whistle. However, I didn't hear one and none of the announcers ever said anything about one. The fumble was on impact. I'm all for replay, but for those who don't like it they should get some very valuable ammunition from that call.

 
Love the radio broadcasts. Always try to listen to it over the TV broadcast.

This website always puts the radio highlights on so you can listen to the big plays after the game. Just click FB-2010 and you'll find the game list. Also has every season up to 2007 there too.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
junior4949 said:
Sometimes, ref's just have off games. However, this really doesn't justify what happened on this particular play. Why even have replay if they're going to blow it? I thought replay was brought into the mix so that incorrect calls could be corrected. The only way forward progress could have been used in this situation is if there would have been an inadvertant whistle. However, I didn't hear one and none of the announcers ever said anything about one. The fumble was on impact. I'm all for replay, but for those who don't like it they should get some very valuable ammunition from that call.
Click to expand...
It's because they didn't blow it. It was deliberate.

I don't know if it's the BIG12-is-out-to-get-us conspiracy, or if it was a make-up call... But there's no way this is "just" a missed call. It was a deliberate decision by the officials either on the field or in the replay booth to give Missouri the ball when they shouldn't have it.

As I've said before: The Big 12 refs are bad, but they aren't that bad.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top