Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Why no safety?
Page: 1 of 1
OU812812
General User
OU812812
Member Since: 11/23/2016
Post Count: 7
person
mail
OU812812
mail
Posted: 11/22/2016 10:21 PM
A holding call was made during Akron's next to last possession and the QB was in the endzone. OU declined (which I understand) but why wasn't a safety automatically called? The rules clearly state if the player in possession of the ball is still in the endzone during the holding infraction a safety is assessed. Am I missing something or did the refs clearly blow it which is highly probable since they are in fact MAC officials?
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
General User
Member Since: 12/1/2006
Location: Cincinnati
Post Count: 1,926
mail
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead
mail
Posted: 11/22/2016 10:24 PM
I believe the holding call was on our NT up the middle so he was around the 1 yard line, not in the End Zone.
allen
General User
A
Member Since: 1/24/2006
Post Count: 4,638
person
mail
allen
mail
Posted: 11/22/2016 10:24 PM
OU812812 wrote:expand_more
A holding call was made during Akron's next to last possession and the QB was in the endzone. OU declined (which I understand) but why wasn't a safety automatically called? The rules clearly state if the player in possession of the ball is still in the endzone during the holding infraction a safety is assessed. Am I missing something or did the refs clearly blow it which is highly probable since they are in fact MAC officials?
true
OU812812
General User
OU812812
Member Since: 11/23/2016
Post Count: 7
person
mail
OU812812
mail
Posted: 11/22/2016 10:29 PM
bigtillyoopsupsideurhead wrote:expand_more
I believe the holding call was on our NT up the middle so he was around the 1 yard line, not in the End Zone.
Maybe but right after the snap the QB looked to be in the endzone immediately. Typical MAC officials but I would also like to know why the coaches didn't raise hell over the call.
Mike Coleman
Administrator
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Near the Pristine Sandy Shores of Lake Erie, OH
Post Count: 1,999
mail
Mike Coleman
mail
Posted: 11/22/2016 10:37 PM
OU812812 wrote:expand_more
I believe the holding call was on our NT up the middle so he was around the 1 yard line, not in the End Zone.
Maybe but right after the snap the QB looked to be in the endzone immediately. Typical MAC officials but I would also like to know why the coaches didn't raise hell over the call.
Where was Tom McCabe when we needed him?
crackerbaby00
General User
C00
Member Since: 3/9/2007
Post Count: 442
person
mail
crackerbaby00
mail
Posted: 11/22/2016 11:35 PM
I am pretty sure what matters is where the foul is committed, not where the QB is.
Athens
General User
A
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,454
person
mail
Athens
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 12:33 AM
Mike Coleman wrote:expand_more
I believe the holding call was on our NT up the middle so he was around the 1 yard line, not in the End Zone.
Maybe but right after the snap the QB looked to be in the endzone immediately. Typical MAC officials but I would also like to know why the coaches didn't raise hell over the call.
Where was Tom McCabe when we needed him?
McCabe is the missing piece of the puzzle. We've got the punter to pin the opposing team within the 5. Need McCabe's goal line judgement for better results.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,820
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 7:18 AM
crackerbaby00 wrote:expand_more
I am pretty sure what matters is where the foul is committed, not where the QB is.
This is what I thought too.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,683
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 11:35 AM
I may be wrong about this, but I think the question is where is the ball when the foul occurs. If the impetus for the ball being in the end zone is on the offense (which it was) and if the ball is still in the end zone when the infraction occurs, it's a safety. I'm not sure if the last qualification was met, but I think it was. The announcers seemed to think so, too. If I'm wrong about, I'm sure BTC will set me straight.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,558
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 11:52 AM
I always thought the holding itself had to be in the end zone.
Bobcat110
General User
Member Since: 3/5/2005
Location: Mount Gilead, OH
Post Count: 724
mail
Bobcat110
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 11:52 AM
I was sitting in stands behind Ohio bench and wondered too, but saw no concern from coaches, so figured it must not have been a Safety.

It looks like from the rule books that it's based on where the foul was committed, not where the ball was located. So, guess the ball can be in the endzone and a hold committed on the 1 yard line and that's not a safety.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR17.pdf

"Determining the Enforcement Spot and the Basic Spot
ARTICLE 2. a. Dead-ball fouls. The enforcement spot for a foul committed
when the ball is dead is the succeeding spot.
b. Fouls by the offensive team behind the neutral zone. For the following
fouls committed by the offensive team behind the neutral zone, the
penalty is enforced at the previous spot: illegal use of hands, holding,
illegal block and personal fouls (Exception: IF THE FOUL occurs in Team
A’s end zone the penalty is a safety.). However, see Rule 6-3-13 for
offensive team fouls during scrimmage kick plays."
Last Edited: 11/23/2016 11:53:29 AM by Bobcat110
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 12:02 PM
crackerbaby00 wrote:expand_more
I am pretty sure what matters is where the foul is committed, not where the QB is.

I'm pretty sure that the location that matters is where McCabe is located.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 12:38 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
I may be wrong about this, but I think the question is where is the ball when the foul occurs. If the impetus for the ball being in the end zone is on the offense (which it was) and if the ball is still in the end zone when the infraction occurs, it's a safety. I'm not sure if the last qualification was met, but I think it was. The announcers seemed to think so, too. If I'm wrong about, I'm sure BTC will set me straight.
Yeah, you'd be wrong about this. What matters is where did the penalty occur and what is the spot of enforcement. Holding penalties on the offense are "spot" fouls when they occur beyond the line of scrimmage, and previous spot on fouls behind the LOS. On this play, the enforcement would be the previous spot. the position of the ball has zero bearing on this enforcement.
Last Edited: 11/23/2016 12:44:28 PM by BillyTheCat
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,820
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 1:48 PM
L.C. wrote:expand_more
I am pretty sure what matters is where the foul is committed, not where the QB is.

I'm pretty sure that the location that matters is where McCabe is located.
Ok now that is funny.
GoCats105
General User
GC105
Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,820
person
mail
GoCats105
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 1:49 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
I may be wrong about this, but I think the question is where is the ball when the foul occurs. If the impetus for the ball being in the end zone is on the offense (which it was) and if the ball is still in the end zone when the infraction occurs, it's a safety. I'm not sure if the last qualification was met, but I think it was. The announcers seemed to think so, too. If I'm wrong about, I'm sure BTC will set me straight.
Yeah, you'd be wrong about this. What matters is where did the penalty occur and what is the spot of enforcement. Holding penalties on the offense are "spot" fouls when they occur beyond the line of scrimmage, and previous spot on fouls behind the LOS. On this play, the enforcement would be the previous spot. the position of the ball has zero bearing on this enforcement.
So you're telling me that if the QB drops back 99 yards from the one to the opposite end zone, but the holding occurs at the 3 it's not a safety? THAT'S PURE POPPYCOCK! ;)
ytownbobcat
General User
Y
Member Since: 8/7/2006
Post Count: 1,253
person
mail
ytownbobcat
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 2:40 PM
It is a spot foul. From the point of the infraction.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,683
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 3:35 PM
Thanks, BTC, I stand corrected.
Pete Chouteau
General User
Member Since: 11/17/2004
Location: You Can't See Me
Post Count: 1,696
mail
Pete Chouteau
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 3:46 PM
Not unless they call intentional grounding.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,795
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 11/23/2016 6:49 PM
ytownbobcat wrote:expand_more
It is a spot foul. From the point of the infraction.
Not in the NCAA

"Fouls by Team A behind the neutral zone. For the following fouls committed by Team A behind the neutral zone, the penalty is enforced at the previous spot: illegal use of hands, holding, illegal block and personal foul (Exception: If the foul occurs in Team A’s end zone the penalty is a safety). However, see Rule 6-3-13 for kicking team fouls during scrimmage kick plays."
Showing Messages: 1 - 19 of 19
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)