I am no official and would like to look at that play again, not that it matters. the defensive person has every right to his position so the "walling off" is position fair and square. westy had three guys around him and did a nice job of selling it, but they weren't buying. I hope this isnt our battle cry for the rest of the year. We could have made more plays on D and a play or two on O would have been huge. oh well, good effort, not the result.
2nd HALF GAME THREAD!
- Thread starter DerHusker_rivals270018
- Start date
I am no official and would like to look at that play again, not that it matters. the defensive person has every right to his position so the "walling off" is position fair and square. westy had three guys around him and did a nice job of selling it, but they weren't buying. I hope this isnt our battle cry for the rest of the year. We could have made more plays on D and a play or two on O would have been huge. oh well, good effort, not the result.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Wisconsin held so many times in this game, I lost count. On their first TD run, there was at least one hold (can't remember which player) and another block in the back (also can't remember which player). On their TD pass, Ross Dzuris was absolutely mugged right in front of the quarterback, probably sacks him or at the very least breaks up a pass if not for that hold. Long run that Wisconsin had later in the game, on the drive where Gerry's second INT ended the drive, Ross Dzuris was again absolutely mugged on the play. I also saw the holds on Bando you're referring to, and there are plenty others that I saw, but the player it was done to didn't stick in my mind.
Obviously some penalties are going to be missed, and not every hold is going to be called, but not a single one all game? And when it occurs right in front of the QB, there is no way it should be missed.
Of course, you would defend the no call. Of course you would. And if it was the other way around, you'd be saying we won unfairly.
Huh? the only difference between the shotgun and pistol assuming a RB in the shotgun is the placement of the RB.
the shotgun and the pistol are two different formations. you can't run the outside zone read out of the pistol.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
Pistol lets you run way more options in the run game.... but don't hold your breath on the experts here understanding that
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
With a FB in the game? Was he in the game? I could be wrong. Sorry...it was the wrong call. We were hurting Wisconsin by spreading them out. And the second down call? Genius right?
but not the play that had been quite successful that we were getting our guys in a lot of open space.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
I said I would like to see it again. I was addressing the "walling off" comment. why such a jerk? it's in the books isnt it? They arent going back to change it are they?
We played a good game, the officials weren't good but sometimes on the road you have to overcome some things. Gerry gave us two gifts and we safely got 3 points. Riley has to play to win, I think he plays to not lose. With Tommy the last thing you want is overtime.
The defensive player has every right to his position, unless that position INTERFERES with the receiver getting to the ball. Also, it would be one thing if he ran to try to make an interception, and ran into Westy in the process, but he didn't, he ran over and just blocked him from getting to the ball. That's pass interference, not matter how you slice it. It should have been DPI, no matter what, and I would have said so even if it were Nebraska called for the penalty (as I'm sure you would have been very quick to say as well).
The moment we lined up in that formation Wiscy knew we were running the ball. Forget about the first down call. Next playcall was a wasted down...but hey, I'm no expert.
Why? Tommy was a gamer. Wisconsin's defense is no joke, injuries or not, that's a welll-coached group. With the right playcalls and playing to Tommy's strengths, I think we could have gotten the win. Why did we go away from the QB run? What happened to the screen game and getting DPE more involved? Why did Wilbon get brought in at some of the most crucial times?! And last but certainly not least, WHY WASN'T THE BLATANT PASS INTERFERENCE SEEN AND/OR ACKNOWLEDGED
Defensive cannot touch the receiver when the ball is in the air, cannot impede the receivers route to the ball and cannot run over the receiver. Wisconsin did all 3, not ONE official threw a flag. It was like, the ball left the QB's hands, game over! Nothing happened after that.
I wouldn't have minded running one or the other, but didn't like both. I really don't get what we were doing on the last series of regulation. Few nice short to intermediate passes and then not.
Are you out of your mind? The guy who has gone for it on 4th down in critical times this year when others say we should have punted plays not to lose? What in the world are you talking about?
Totally agree, if they go with a fake run up the gut and throw to the outside, say an out pattern 7 yards. Then come back with a run play, but on first down, when you've been doing it the whole game, why not just line up and call the play at the line, the whole stadium knew the play!
Exactly. Here's what the actual rule from the rule book states:
So lets go through this point by point:
Was there contact beyond the neutral zone? Yes.
Was Jordan Westerkamp an eligible receiver? Yes.
Was the Wisconsin player's intent to impede him? Yes.
Was it obvious and did it prevent Westy from the opportunity off receiving a catchable forward pass? Yes and yes.
Did the contact occur after the pass was thrown? Yes.
Then you have the 4 things that disqualify it. #1 doesn't apply because it wasn't within one yard of the neutral zone. #2 doesn't apply because clearly the defender wasn't "making a simultaneous and bona fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass" as the ball went behind him and he wasn't even looking at it, only at Westy. #3 doesn't apply because it was after the pass was thrown (and if it occured before, it should have been defensive holding). #4 doesn't apply because it wasn't a kick.
It was pass interference. Period.
My bad. I shouldn't have added that last part. Just frustrated. Like I said in another post, maybe outside zone is something I would have done different.
Yes you are. Riley is anything but a play not to lose coach. Just have to come up with something to criticize him for, don't you? Heaven forbid we'd give our coaches credit for something. Bottom line-you wanted to blame this on Riley, and you came up with something that is totally stupid. If we had gone for the TD, you would have got on him for being to agressive. Because, you wanted to get on Riley for something. That was your only desire. Blame Riley.
The problem with a lot officials in game such as this, an official doesn't want to be the official that decides the game on one play. So, what our crew does is this, if the penalty is there more than one officials throws a flag and it's a group call. This re-enforces the call and it makes the call right. Too many, just want to get off the field and leave, it's so much easier (which is weak). You can bet the officials talked about this exact play in the locker room. Guarantee they knew it was real.
Yeah, Riley fan my a$$. If your criticism made any sense, I wouldn't say anything about it. Your criticism of him calling him a play not to lose coach is so mind blowingly stupid and indefensible that I wasn't going to let it get by. He is anything but a play not to lose coach-and by calling him that, you clearly are not a Riley fan. Yeah, you make up stupid crap to criticize him for-but you're certainly a fan, aren't you? What a joke. Your schtick is pretty easy to see through.
Man a coach and a mind reader, your better than I thought. Let it get by? Not a Riley fan? It is still my opinion, I think we kicked the safe field goal rather than go for the touchdown. Wasn't a slam, just my opinion. For some reason you took it personal.
Because it's stupid. Your position is reaching to make a point-and proves that you are making up crap to criticize him about. And also proves why Mike Riley is a coach and you are some pathetic poster who doesn't understand strategy and doesn't understand what being a coach that plays not to lose is.
It's a coach that doesn't try to score a touchdown to win, it's a coach that plays prevent, it's a coach that beats Notrhwestern Illinois and Indiana in close games, it is a coach that hasn't learned how to put a team away. Maybe you are a pathetic poster.