|
Replies: 31
| visibility 275
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
45
Posts: 17413
Joined: 2010
|
The Mike Williams fumble?
Oct 16, 2016, 12:29 AM
|
|
He touched the ball while out of bounds.
Should the ball been ruled out as well?
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [6575]
TigerPulse: 100%
40
|
Re: The Mike Williams fumble?
Oct 16, 2016, 12:36 AM
|
|
Yes, but by rule he was never technically 'down' because his elbow or knee never hit. I'm not sure what constitutes as out of bounds though. If a foot makes you out of bounds a hand sure would too. Probably should have been clemsons ball
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3957]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
I remember last year we got a TD by stepping on a Coots
Oct 16, 2016, 6:02 AM
|
|
hand that was out of bounds so I assume the same rule applies. Go Tigers 7-0!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [105576]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 44178
Joined: 2008
|
Doesn't matter. He needs to stop fighting for
Oct 16, 2016, 12:37 AM
|
|
an extra 2 yards once he gets the first down. Don't risk a freak turnover like that. He's had 2 turnovers this year on the sideline fighting for a couple extra yards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10402]
TigerPulse: 95%
45
Posts: 17413
Joined: 2010
|
Re: Doesn't matter. He needs to stop fighting for
Oct 16, 2016, 12:43 AM
|
|
I agree make a move but when you're down go down
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1125]
TigerPulse: 98%
26
|
Re: Doesn't matter. He needs to stop fighting for
Oct 16, 2016, 12:48 AM
[ in reply to Doesn't matter. He needs to stop fighting for ] |
|
My question is this...in both these cases (Auburn and ncst) he's on top of a player who is out of bounds, while touching the ball, correct? He's technically not touching out of bounds himself...but is not ruled down when his body is on top of another which is out of bounds.
If that's true what's to stop someone from throwing a pass to a player who is standing on a player out of bounds behind the end zone? Then they could just flip it back(lateral) to whoever was open in the end zone.
Just playing devils advocate, but srsly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11251]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: Doesn't matter. He needs to stop fighting for
Oct 16, 2016, 1:24 AM
|
|
Good question and valid point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2802]
TigerPulse: 77%
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1125]
TigerPulse: 98%
26
|
Re: lol! that would be so cool to see.***
Oct 16, 2016, 9:02 AM
|
|
Ok so if we need a score in the red zone just have one of our WR go lay down behind the end zone, while another wr stands on him like an island. The wr standing on said "island" catches it and the ball is still live despite being in the out of bounds area.
Then hypothetically we build a bridge of players for him to walk to the end zone or he just laterals it back to any open player for the td.
Far fetched, yes! But not against the rules apparently!
Now the defense has to defend even the out of bounds areas. How's that for the "opening the playbook crowd"?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
Re: lol! that would be so cool to see.***
Oct 16, 2016, 9:19 AM
|
|
It would be against the rules because there is a rule about using your players to launch yourself.
It's the same reason while a defense can't jump on the back of one of his teammates to block a kick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3975]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
To be honest if you make that kind of
Oct 16, 2016, 12:42 AM
|
|
play it's not getting overturned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5059]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
I thought we was out of bounds when he touched the fumble. Should'vd been out there.***
Oct 16, 2016, 12:43 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [5059]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
I thought we was out of bounds when he touched the fumble. Should'vd been out there.***
Oct 16, 2016, 12:43 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [530]
TigerPulse: 99%
19
|
Re: I thought we was out of bounds when he touched the fumble. Should'vd been out there.***
Oct 16, 2016, 10:36 AM
|
|
Mike was OOB when he touched it but ball never was. Rule is ball that is possessed then fumbled OOB goes to last player to touch it BEFORE it goes out. Possession is at the point where ball left the field of play. I think the refs got that one right, though not many others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1125]
TigerPulse: 98%
26
|
Re: I thought we was out of bounds when he touched the fumble. Should'vd been out there.***
Oct 16, 2016, 11:26 AM
|
|
C/o 09 - what if he doesn't "launch" and just stands there and catches it? What defender in his right mind is going to run way out of bounds to defend a pass?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5797]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [11087]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
Posts: 13558
Joined: 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4854]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player
Oct 16, 2016, 12:47 AM
|
|
who was on the ground out of bounds constitutes Mike also being considered out of bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Champion [118169]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 76358
Joined: 2003
|
Re: Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player
Oct 16, 2016, 6:56 AM
|
|
not correct (see below)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5179]
TigerPulse: 42%
38
Posts: 17167
Joined: 2005
|
Re: Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player
Oct 16, 2016, 7:13 AM
|
|
Yeah it would really ruin those end zone fade routes if a defender just had to step a foot out of bounds and touch the WR to to make him an ineligible WR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Champion [118169]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 76358
Joined: 2003
|
Re: Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player
Oct 16, 2016, 7:37 AM
|
|
must be tough coming on here and correcting people who are looking for things to complain about after a win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [585]
TigerPulse: 100%
20
|
Re: Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player
Oct 16, 2016, 7:28 AM
[ in reply to Re: Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player ] |
|
If the ball is fumbled and the out of bounds player touches the ball in any manner, the ball is considered out of bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Champion [118169]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 76358
Joined: 2003
|
Re: Pretty sure him being on top of the NCSU player
Oct 16, 2016, 7:35 AM
|
|
agree, but in this case no out of bounds player touched the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17108]
TigerPulse: 91%
51
Posts: 27279
Joined: 2003
|
that's exactly how they ruled the same scenario in the OSU
Oct 16, 2016, 12:53 AM
|
|
Wisc game
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25338]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 10039
Joined: 2015
|
^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^
Oct 16, 2016, 8:15 AM
|
|
EXACTLY!!!!
smFh!!!!'
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerNet Champion [118169]
TigerPulse: 100%
65
Posts: 76358
Joined: 2003
|
Re: The Mike Williams fumble?
Oct 16, 2016, 6:55 AM
|
|
they got the call right, landing on a player that is out of bounds does not mean you are out of bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [76]
TigerPulse: 100%
8
|
Re: The Mike Williams fumble?
Oct 16, 2016, 8:11 AM
|
|
You got me curios, so I checked the rule. Here's the rule addressing loose ball being out of bounds:
Loose Ball Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player possession, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is out of bounds, or that is on or outside a boundary line.
Player Out of Bounds is defined earlier in the rules as "...when any part of his person touches anything, other than another player or game official, on or outside a boundary line." Based on this part of the rule, I could argue the fumble was still a live ball since Williams was on the defender when he touched the loose ball.
However, the last "or" statement in Article 3 is independent of whether or not the player is touching the ground. Williams was "...outside a boundary line," but it's not clear from the wording whether it means they have to be touching the ground based on that last "or" statement. It seems to imply that a loose ball is considered out of bounds when it touches anything on or outside the boundary line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1081]
TigerPulse: 78%
25
|
Re: The Mike Williams fumble?
Oct 16, 2016, 8:23 AM
|
|
Rule aside ... the sad part is that when MW made his last attempt to recover the ball, he appeared to hit it back into the field of play, and that may have actually prevented the ball from going OOB's ... 'cause it seemed to be headed that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [10131]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
Mike Williams had a good game with a lot of Mistakes
Oct 16, 2016, 10:35 AM
|
|
It really is that simple. It seems he has been off all year, dropping passes etc. not sure if Watson is over throwing him or if he isn't on his route like in practice but our offense has failed to click with the exception of the BC game. I have nothing but hope that the bi week, followed by a huge hyped up game at FSU is going to tell us whether or not we deserve to even be in the hunt or not. Either way I am still proud of these tigers and realize that we are living in some glorious times. Let's not take that for granted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1127]
TigerPulse: 99%
26
|
Re: The Mike Williams fumble?
Oct 16, 2016, 10:23 AM
|
|
To add more fuel to the fire. I thought mike was down before he fumbled. By rule the only things you can use to stay up are your hands and feet. Not sure about the ball in college. However it looked like mike Williams wrist was what he used to stay up. Haven't seen the replay to confirm. I have seen players ruled down before in a similar situation where their wrist touched and they were marked down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [26689]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 46351
Joined: 2010
|
That's how it was ruled in the OhioSt/Wisky game...***
Oct 16, 2016, 11:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 31
| visibility 275
|
|
|
50
