Reilly out of bounds

[stargazer]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

 

[Micheal]

It was the right call by the refs. Now I am wonder which poster is Mark Dantonio?!

I finally had a chance to track down the MSU reaction to the play and from what I've found its a complete shoulder shrug. Not a single quote I saw from them blamed the loss on that play or even bitched about the call. This goes for player and coach quotes I saw in this piece.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/126594/blame-poor-play-not-the-officials-spartans-say-for-crushing-loss-at-nebraska

Overall I think that's taking a tough loss like a man

Yeah, Dantonio is classy. The announcers said it was a bad call, which was then run by all the national sports media and Michigan State media. It's not coming from MSU coaches.

I really wish announcers would know the exact wording of a rule before they go on and on about how Michigan State got screwed.

 

[zoogs]

The thing is, they know what feeds the media. "ANOTHER HUGE OFFICIATING CONTROVERSY" does a lot more than "Well, you know, that was the right call probably."

 

[Elf]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

There are pics on this board and in this thread that positively show contact. Whether or not there was contact really isn't up for debate, that one has been put to bed.

 

[shyndy]

It was the right call. But, even if it wasn't....paybacks a b!^@h.

https://twitter.com/mikelsevere/status/663519305988882432

I noticed that while watching live. The TE basically drive blocks Gerry for 4 yards clearing out the space for the WR. Not sure how that doesn't get called.

man mizzou made a living on those types of "screens" back when we were in the big 12 it always drove me nuts, the receiver would catch it 3-5 yards downfield and they are blocking like its a screen/ swing

 

[olddominionhusker]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

There are pics on this board and in this thread that positively show contact. Whether or not there was contact really isn't up for debate, that one has been put to bed.

Whether or not there was contact isn't really the controversy. That was just the one of two things they could review, the other being out of and back in bounds. The controversy is whether the contact from the defender was the cause of Reilly going out of bounds which is a judgement call that has to be made by the referee on the field. Somehow the narrative got started on this board that as long as there is any contact on a play like this the receiver is automatically free to leave the field of play. The statements by the Big 10 and the former NFL VP of officiating clearly illustrate that is not how the rule is interpreted.

It's still a 50/50 call and hardly could be considered "blown". But we look silly when we act like it was the only possible call on this play and there is no other side.

The Fox guy is the former NFL VP of officials and a rules expert and he feels the wrong call was made. I'm not saying he's right but i think he's a credible source and probably understands this rule a lot better than posters here who actually read the rule for the first time Saturday night.

Hell even our head coach thought it would be overturned

 

[Elf]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

There are pics on this board and in this thread that positively show contact. Whether or not there was contact really isn't up for debate, that one has been put to bed.

Whether or not there was contact isn't really the controversy. That was just the one of two things they could review, the other being out of and back in bounds. The controversy is whether the contact from the defender was the cause of Reilly going out of bounds which is a judgement call that has to be made by the referee on the field. Somehow the narrative got started on this board that as long as there is any contact on a play like this the receiver is automatically free to leave the field of play. The statements by the Big 10 and the former NFL VP of officiating clearly illustrate that is not how the rule is interpreted.

It's still a 50/50 call and hardly could be considered "blown". But we look silly when we act like it was the only possible call on this play and there is no other side.

The Fox guy is the former NFL VP of officials and a rules expert and he feels the wrong call was made. I'm not saying he's right but i think he's a credible source and probably understands this rule a lot better than posters here who actually read the rule for the first time Saturday night.

Hell even our head coach thought it would be overturned

I haven't seen anyone say that.

Take a look at the person I quoted and you'll understand why I made my post.

The only thing that is really up for debate on this officiating call is whether or not there was enough contact to make the receiver go out of bounds. Everything else is pretty cut and dried in the rule. One official even said that receivers are always given the benefit of the doubt. With all that said, I don't understand why people are still arguing about it.

*Edit* While an official can rule a receiver wasn't forced out of bounds, that isn't what happened this time. And if you look closely at all of the still pics and video clips earlier in this thread I think its pretty obvious that the defender forced Reilly out of bounds.

 

[olddominionhusker]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

There are pics on this board and in this thread that positively show contact. Whether or not there was contact really isn't up for debate, that one has been put to bed.

Whether or not there was contact isn't really the controversy. That was just the one of two things they could review, the other being out of and back in bounds. The controversy is whether the contact from the defender was the cause of Reilly going out of bounds which is a judgement call that has to be made by the referee on the field. Somehow the narrative got started on this board that as long as there is any contact on a play like this the receiver is automatically free to leave the field of play. The statements by the Big 10 and the former NFL VP of officiating clearly illustrate that is not how the rule is interpreted.

It's still a 50/50 call and hardly could be considered "blown". But we look silly when we act like it was the only possible call on this play and there is no other side.

The Fox guy is the former NFL VP of officials and a rules expert and he feels the wrong call was made. I'm not saying he's right but i think he's a credible source and probably understands this rule a lot better than posters here who actually read the rule for the first time Saturday night.

Hell even our head coach thought it would be overturned

I haven't seen anyone say that.
Take a look at the person I quoted and you'll understand why I made my post.

The only thing that is really up for debate on this officiating call is whether or not there was enough contact to make the receiver go out of bounds. Everything else is pretty cut and dried in the rule. One official even said that receivers are always given the benefit of the doubt. With all that said, I don't understand why people are still arguing about it.

*Edit* While an official can rule a receiver wasn't forced out of bounds, that isn't what happened this time. And if you look closely at all of the still pics and video clips earlier in this thread I think its pretty obvious that the defender forced Reilly out of bounds.

Sorry not aimed at you specifically you were just the last post.
Like I said. I think reasonable people can disagree on this call. Personally I think a questionable call went our way. Judging from Coach Riley's comments I think he may think so to

 

[Blackshirt96]

And let's not forget how MSU was simulating our snap signal and it never got called that game. What goes around comes around.

what?

The hand clap last year

 

[Elf]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

There are pics on this board and in this thread that positively show contact. Whether or not there was contact really isn't up for debate, that one has been put to bed.

Whether or not there was contact isn't really the controversy. That was just the one of two things they could review, the other being out of and back in bounds. The controversy is whether the contact from the defender was the cause of Reilly going out of bounds which is a judgement call that has to be made by the referee on the field. Somehow the narrative got started on this board that as long as there is any contact on a play like this the receiver is automatically free to leave the field of play. The statements by the Big 10 and the former NFL VP of officiating clearly illustrate that is not how the rule is interpreted.

It's still a 50/50 call and hardly could be considered "blown". But we look silly when we act like it was the only possible call on this play and there is no other side.

The Fox guy is the former NFL VP of officials and a rules expert and he feels the wrong call was made. I'm not saying he's right but i think he's a credible source and probably understands this rule a lot better than posters here who actually read the rule for the first time Saturday night.

Hell even our head coach thought it would be overturned

I haven't seen anyone say that.
Take a look at the person I quoted and you'll understand why I made my post.

The only thing that is really up for debate on this officiating call is whether or not there was enough contact to make the receiver go out of bounds. Everything else is pretty cut and dried in the rule. One official even said that receivers are always given the benefit of the doubt. With all that said, I don't understand why people are still arguing about it.

*Edit* While an official can rule a receiver wasn't forced out of bounds, that isn't what happened this time. And if you look closely at all of the still pics and video clips earlier in this thread I think its pretty obvious that the defender forced Reilly out of bounds.

Sorry not aimed at you specifically you were just the last post.
Like I said. I think reasonable people can disagree on this call. Personally I think a questionable call went our way. Judging from Coach Riley's comments I think he may think so to

Reasonable people will disagree on this call and that's ok. I haven't actually seen his comments yet, the initial links I tried were broken and I haven't looked for others yet.

 

[Elf]

And let's not forget how MSU was simulating our snap signal and it never got called that game. What goes around comes around.

what?

The hand clap last year

I love that .gif in your sig.

 

[VA Husker Fan]

Do you form all of your opinion's based on what you hear from Fox?

I'll go with what the heads of Big 10 and ACC officiating say.

No one could possibly make an accurate judgement as to what contact occurred, based on the best instant reply angles available. Only the official there, making the call can make that judgement (although from what I can see, it looks more likely that there was contact, particularly when you see the angle the DB ended up taking, in the series of images above, leading him out of bounds as well).

There are pics on this board and in this thread that positively show contact. Whether or not there was contact really isn't up for debate, that one has been put to bed.

Whether or not there was contact isn't really the controversy. That was just the one of two things they could review, the other being out of and back in bounds. The controversy is whether the contact from the defender was the cause of Reilly going out of bounds which is a judgement call that has to be made by the referee on the field. Somehow the narrative got started on this board that as long as there is any contact on a play like this the receiver is automatically free to leave the field of play. The statements by the Big 10 and the former NFL VP of officiating clearly illustrate that is not how the rule is interpreted.

It's still a 50/50 call and hardly could be considered "blown". But we look silly when we act like it was the only possible call on this play and there is no other side.

The Fox guy is the former NFL VP of officials and a rules expert and he feels the wrong call was made. I'm not saying he's right but i think he's a credible source and probably understands this rule a lot better than posters here who actually read the rule for the first time Saturday night.

Hell even our head coach thought it would be overturned

I haven't seen anyone say that.
Take a look at the person I quoted and you'll understand why I made my post.

The only thing that is really up for debate on this officiating call is whether or not there was enough contact to make the receiver go out of bounds. Everything else is pretty cut and dried in the rule. One official even said that receivers are always given the benefit of the doubt. With all that said, I don't understand why people are still arguing about it.

*Edit* While an official can rule a receiver wasn't forced out of bounds, that isn't what happened this time. And if you look closely at all of the still pics and video clips earlier in this thread I think its pretty obvious that the defender forced Reilly out of bounds.

Sorry not aimed at you specifically you were just the last post.
Like I said. I think reasonable people can disagree on this call. Personally I think a questionable call went our way. Judging from Coach Riley's comments I think he may think so to

Yes, Riley did say he thought the TD was probably going to be taken away, but he wasn't in a very good position to see if his receiver got bumped or ridden out of bounds. The way this season has been going he probably figured it was one more call not going our way. Also, the offense really should've been in a mental state to be ready to go back out on the field to try to score again so having that view wasn't a bad thing.

I agree it could've gone the other way. Whether it was 50/50 or 70/30 or whatever I don't know. What I do know what was wrong is Griese saying that the defender was looking back for the ball so he couldn't have been guilty. That's for pass interference, not for forcing a receiver OB. That's like looking at a holding penalty and saying it shouldn't have been a penalty since he didn't block from behind. I don't think announcers are told to make close plays controversial. I've seen a lot of times where they acknowledge that a ref got a close call right even if they didn't think so initially. I think the so-called expert analyst Griese doesn't understand the rule.

 

[Mavric]

[No message]

 

[Elf]

This should put any controversy to rest, but it won't.

 

[husker_fan_from_sweden]

Really Rocko the rumrunner rubbed out Reilly the rat robbing his rum running receipts.