• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

2011 SEC Football Discussion

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Bucknut24;2022075; said:
anyone see the dirty play during the Ark/Vandy game? Arky guy just completely blew up the Vandy punt returner well before the ball arrived there, he got ejected from the game...he even celebrated after the hit
Click to expand...

The kid (freshman wide receiver Marquel Wade) is getting crucified for a stupid mistake.

Couple of things:

1. He's never had anything like this happen before.
2. Contrary to what how it was called in the broadcast booth, there was no fair catch call.
3. New to Special Teams - his second game at the gunner position.
4. If the hit had happened 1/3 of a second later it would have been the ESPN Play Of The Day.
5. He thought he was celebrating the Play Of The Day.

I don't say all that to excuse his behavior after the play, which was inexcusable, but it does help explain it.




And having said all that, I think he needs to be moved to Defense. :biggrin:

God knows we need help on that side of the ball.
 
Upvote 0
Bucknut24;2023804; said:
more like 3 seconds, he wasn't even close, you can't just blow up a player like that, fair catch or not
Click to expand...

Not anything like three seconds. Not a third of a second either. Definitely an unacceptably early hit, and definitely a fair catch signaled.

To be fair, the punt returner moved forward at the last couple seconds, and that closed the distance between the gunners. And I don't care what anybody says, going full speed it is damn near impossible to pull up. They practice this a lot, and the gunners are used to their own punter's hang time. If he got one particularly high with extra hang time, it could throw their timing off.

But once the kid puts his hand in the air, NONE of that matters. Fair catch. If you jack up the guy making the fair catch like that, you need to be tossed. I have to think that the kid missed the hand waive and just misjudged the timing. So sitting is appropriate. Nobody can say that it was "intentional", as nobody can say if the kid saw the hand briefly go up before the returner started forward to catch the ball.

What everyone ignores is the fact that the second gunner tackled him too.
 
Upvote 0
BB73;2023821; said:
It was "intentional".

The kid saw the hand briefly go up.
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't pay the $79.99 for "Dirty Player Cam". :lol:


BB73;2023821; said:
And the second gunner tackled him, too.
Click to expand...

Here, you are eating my SEC Speed comment dust :wink2:

BB73;2023821; said:
Don't tell me what I can't do. :tongue2:
Click to expand...

You can't ban Woof. YOU CAN'T!!!!!!! I DARE YOU!!!!
 
Upvote 0
There was no fair catch call.

Returner was shielding his eyes from the sun, pulled his hand down as he took off running.

There was no waving the hand back and forth over his head.

Not even a hint of it.



I'm not disputing it wasn't bad judgement on the part of Marquel Wade, it was.

But he doesn't deserve the crucifixion he's getting either.
 
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;2023828; said:
No doubt about that. You have to protect the guy watching the ball who cannot defend himself. You have to toss the gunner.
Click to expand...

I agree. It was flagrant, and I'm fine with the kid being tossed.

And I'm willing to call it a 'cheap shot', because it was basically a free train wreck on a guy who was looking up in the air; but I wouldn't go as far as calling it a 'dirty play', since we can't really say that it was intentional. To me, a dirty play is a conscious decision to try to injure somebody, and this kid was probably just trying to blow the guy up right after he caught the ball. He can't really tell when the ball is going to get there, but it's a high risk play to run full speed directly at somebody fielding a punt like that.
 
Upvote 0
SECTION 8. Fair Catch
Fair Catch
ARTICLE 1. a. A fair catch of a scrimmage kick is a catch beyond the neutral
zone by a Team B player who has made a valid signal during a scrimmage kick
that is untouched beyond the neutral zone.
b. A fair catch of a free kick is a catch by a player of Team B who has made a
valid signal during an untouched free kick.
c. A valid or invalid fair catch signal deprives the receiving team of the
opportunity to advance the ball. The ball is declared dead at the spot of the
catch or recovery or at the spot of the signal if the catch precedes the signal.
d. If the receiver shades his eyes from the sun without waving his hand(s), the
ball is live and may be advanced.
Valid Signal
ARTICLE 2. A valid signal is a signal given by a player of Team B who has
obviously signaled his intention by extending one hand only clearly above his
head and waving that hand from side to side of his body more than once.
Invalid Signal
ARTICLE 3. An invalid signal is any waving signal by a player of Team B:
a. That does not meet the requirements of Article 2 (above);
Click to expand...
SECTION 4. Opportunity To Catch a Kick
Interference With Opportunity
ARTICLE 1. A player of the receiving team within the boundary lines
attempting to catch a kick, and so located that he could have caught a free
kick or a scrimmage kick that is beyond the neutral zone, must be given an
unimpeded opportunity to catch the kick (A.R. 6-3-1-III, A.R. 6-4-1-V and IX).
a. This protection terminates when the kick touches the ground, when any
player of Team B muffs or touches a scrimmage kick beyond the neutral
zone, or when any player of Team B muffs or touches a free kick in the field
of play or in the end zone (Exception: Rule 6-5-1-b) (A.R. 6-4-1-IV).
b. If interference with a potential receiver is the result of a player being
blocked by an opponent, it is not a foul.
c. It is an interference foul if the kicking team contacts the potential receiver
before, or simultaneous to, his first touching the ball (A.R. 6-4-1-II, III, and
VIII). When in question, it is an interference foul.
PENALTY?For foul between the goal lines: Receiving team?s ball, first
down, 15 yards beyond the spot of the foul for an interference
foul [S33]. For foul behind the goal line: Award a touchback
and penalize from the succeeding spot. Flagrant offenders shall
be disqualified [S47].
SECTION 5. Fair Catch
Dead Where Caught
ARTICLE 1. a. When a Team B player makes a fair catch, the ball becomes
dead where caught and belongs to Team B at that spot.
b. When a Team B player makes a valid fair catch signal, the unimpeded
opportunity to catch a free or scrimmage kick continues if this player muffs
the kick and still has an opportunity to complete the catch. This protection
terminates when the kick touches the ground. If the player subsequently
catches the kick, the ball is placed where he first touched it (A.R. 6-5-1-I-II).
c. Rules pertaining to a fair catch apply only when a scrimmage kick crosses
the neutral zone or during free kicks.
Click to expand...
I withdraw my previous statement. It was not a "fair catch", but a live ball. The gunner is guilty of interfering with the opportunity to catch the fall. Having made an invalid fair catch sign, the ball should have, absent the contact with the punt return man, been dead at the spot of the invalid sign.

The fact of the invalid fair catch sign means the ball was still live, and the Dore punt returner could have been jacked legally had the Pig gunner waited a moment longer.

That has nothing to do with the fact of interference with the Dore to catch the ball. The hit was still illegal, and the piggie tossed. He did NOT however, hit a guy who was fair catching the ball. That gives the pig NO right to jack him before the ball reached him. But it does explain why they disregarded the invalid fair catch sign by not stopping. So Smoov - I give you a small legal point that has no bearing on the hit on a defenseless kid.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top