|
Replies: 16
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [4903]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5280
Joined: 8/24/11
|
Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 8:57 PM
|
|
For those of us that were at the game
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Blooded [4747]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 6973
Joined: 1/24/07
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 8:58 PM
|
|
The ball was caught in the air on the fly by Clemson. It's kick catch interference because the receiving team player must be allowed to catch it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2517]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 3835
Joined: 6/21/03
|
Bonus pts for using the right terminology...must be an
Nov 29, 2014, 9:28 PM
|
|
official.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4747]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 6973
Joined: 1/24/07
|
Re: Bonus pts for using the right terminology...must be an
Nov 29, 2014, 9:31 PM
|
|
Nah, I looked up the rule after it happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [62]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 206
Joined: 4/16/07
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 8:58 PM
|
|
Ball has to hit the ground. The Carolina player made a good play by calling for a fair catch and the Defended can't hit the player and allow him to make the catch
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40970]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42979
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Ball never hit the ground so
Nov 29, 2014, 8:59 PM
|
|
it was a pooch kick. Receiver called for a fair catch but we didn't let him fair catch the ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [27439]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10154
Joined: 2/14/13
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 9:03 PM
|
|
it not that the ball never hit the ground its that the player called for a fair catch and was not givin an opportunity to catch it before it hit the ground. No fair catch signal its clemsons ball. heads up play from the gamecock player whoever it was
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [62]
TigerPulse: 18%
Posts: 206
Joined: 4/16/07
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 9:05 PM
|
|
Well if the ball hits the ground the player can't call a fair catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29049]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36109
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Oddly he can
Nov 29, 2014, 9:33 PM
|
|
It has to bounce twice before a air catch isn't valid. New rule of late to try and stop the big collision on the big single hop onside kick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [370]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 208
Joined: 12/11/06
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 9:08 PM
|
|
The ref stated that "because the was kicked in the air the receiving team must be given an unimpeded opportunity for a catch" ( or something very close). It never hit the ground so it did not matter whether a fair catch was called or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [2]
TigerPulse: 40%
Posts: 24
Joined: 8/28/11
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 9:18 PM
|
|
That is correct. Otherwise you could block the up guys and kick a short pooch kick and catch it. Kickoff team can never catch the ball in the air regardless if a receiver is in the area or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [441]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 795
Joined: 8/31/08
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 9:22 PM
|
|
Well if that is the case, for every inside kick, couldn't someone on the receiving team always call a fair catch and the kicking team not be allowed to touch the ball until after the receiver tried?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1059]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1729
Joined: 11/20/03
|
Re: Onside kick - please explain what happened
Nov 29, 2014, 9:25 PM
|
|
Most onside kicks are first bounced along the ground. This one never hit the ground first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8094]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6826
Joined: 10/16/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 28685
Joined: 8/17/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2687]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2753
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Did our coaches not know the rule?
Nov 29, 2014, 9:32 PM
|
|
It sure looked like we'd practiced that play and ran it to perfection. Did we not anticipate that it would result in a penalty? Or was Pinion supposed to bounce it and just didn't do it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 28685
Joined: 8/17/05
|
good question... I don't think he was supposed to bounce it
Nov 29, 2014, 9:34 PM
|
|
I think it was just a rules oversight by the staff... maybe gambling that it wouldn't get called, or that UCS would touch it first
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 16
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
