Analysis of the penalty which cost us Nick's game saving Pick-6

[PrestonyteParrot]

''Bad call. It happened after the ball was released and after it was intercepted. It should have, if called at all, it should have been assessed on the ensuing SC kick-off since the result of the play was a touchdown for SC. After the interception, the QB is no longer protected. He is a player like any other.''

This makes a lot of sense to me. Was there review or even a discussion of the rules among the officiating crew?
It would be our luck that the SEC Commissioner confirms the above assessment to be correct but too bad Gamecocks. We're sorry.

 

[KingWard]

''Bad call. It happened after the ball was released and after it was intercepted. It should have, if called at all, it should have been assessed on the ensuing SC kick-off since the result of the play was a touchdown for SC. After the interception, the QB is no longer protected. He is a player like any other.''

This makes a lot of sense to me. Was there review or even a discussion of the rules among the officiating crew?
It would be our luck that the SEC Commissioner confirms the below assessment to be correct but too bad Gamecocks. We're sorry.

Yep. I think that's the bottom line.

 

[LonghornsGamecocks]

''Bad call. It happened after the ball was released and after it was intercepted. It should have, if called at all, it should have been assessed on the ensuing SC kick-off since the result of the play was a touchdown for SC. After the interception, the QB is no longer protected. He is a player like any other.''

Source of the quoted content?

 

[Crutcher]

Yep. I think that's the bottom line.

No, it's a spot foul. It was during the run-back, so the penalty was a live ball foul, assessed from the spot. I hate that it happened, but the touchdown was negated.

 

[uscjunkie]

The real point is the QB is no longer a QB after the interception. He was a defender and can be blocked like anyone else. He wasn't blindsided and was pushed in his chest. The play was 100% legal. Some great play acting by the QB drew that call. Raising your hands and looking guilty didn't help!

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Source of the quoted content?

The quoted content is wrong. If it had been a post play penalty it would be assessed on the kick off. The penalty occurred during the play.

 

[THEusccocks]

No, it's a spot foul. It was during the run-back, so the penalty was a live ball foul, assessed from the spot. I hate that it happened, but the touchdown was negated.

Yes, it doesn’t matter the INT had already happened, the play was still live so it’s a spot foul. Being assessed on ensuing kick would only apply IF it happened AFTER the TD, which of course it did not.

looking back on this play, I was very sure earlier this was a bad call because watching the replay he clearly hit with his hands and extended his arms. Legal. However someone on Twitter did post a still photo of the elbow hitting. Watching in real time I didn’t see that but if in fact his elbow hit on, near the facemask with the speed he came in I guess I could see this being at least a call that could go towards it being illegal. Still feel like BS though because it was NOT an attempt to hit illegally; if the elbow made contact it was incidental

 

[uscjunkie]

Yes, it doesn’t matter the INT had already happened, the play was still live so it’s a spot foul. Being assessed on ensuing kick would only apply IF it happened AFTER the TD, which of course it did not.

looking back on this play, I was very sure earlier this was a bad call because watching the replay he clearly hit with his hands and extended his arms. Legal. However someone on Twitter did post a still photo of the elbow hitting. Watching in real time I didn’t see that but if in fact his elbow hit on, near the facemask with the speed he came in I guess I could see this being at least a call that could go towards it being illegal. Still feel like BS though because it was NOT an attempt to hit illegally; if the elbow made contact it was incidental

Well if targeting to the *** is now a thing, I guess anything can be a penalty!

 

[KingWard]

The quoted content is wrong. If it had been a post play penalty it would be assessed on the kick off. The penalty occurred during the play.

I think the question is, when did the interception occur vis-s-vis the contact on the quarterback. If it was after, then a foul could be reasonably called. If it was before, then the QB is a defender. Would the same contact on any other defender have drawn a flag in that circumstance. I'm not quibbling, but I'm seeking closure on this.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

If this same scenario had occurred in reverse in Baton Rouge and Sellers were blocked on an LSU interception return, the likelihood of this being called is zero.

And when questioned, the explanation would be it was a judgement call and had no impact on the play itself. Also, after the interception, the QB becomes just a defender with no special protection.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Had a friend mine....absolute die-hard Clemson fan...text me a photo of the horse collar penalty saying it was pretty obviously a horse collar.

However, he then added "now the penalty on the other pick 6 was pretty cheap".

That's the most positive thing he's ever said about Gamecock sports. Ever.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I think the question is, when did the interception occur vis-s-vis the contact on the quarterback. If it was after, then a foul could be reasonably called. If it was before, then the QB is a defender. Would the same contact on any other defender have drawn a flag in that circumstance. I'm not quibbling, but I'm seeking closure on this.

The foul definitely occurred after the interception. I'm just going to add this bit of information. After the contact was made, 3 flags were thrown for that one incident. Three.

My take is that it would be stretching the imagination to believe 3 referees all make the same call in that instant, and infer that there was some kind of collusion in that moment.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

The foul definitely occurred after the interception. I'm just going to add this bit of information. After the contact was made, 3 flags were thrown for that one incident. Three.

My take is that it would be stretching the imagination to believe 3 referees all make the same call in that instant, and infer that there was some kind of collusion in that moment.

It could be that all 3 referees have the same mindset which has been beaten into their psyche - that's the QB, we must protect the QB at all costs - and they forget that after the INT he is just another player/defender.
As blocks go on defenders, that was a wussy block compared to most and the officials got sold a bill of goods by the QB.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

It could be that all 3 referees have the same mindset which has been beaten into their psyche - that's the QB, we must protect the QB at all costs - and they forget that after the INT he is just another player/defender.
As blocks go on defenders, that was a wussy block compared to most and the officials got sold a bill of goods by the QB.

Again, defaulting to Could be, perhaps, maybe.

I watched the play again for the 4th time, it was a blindside block, no debate, but the bottom line is, it was a bonehead play.
The QB is away from the play, and he is not going to be able to make a play to the interceptor, there is no justifiable reason to lay a block on him.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

Again, defaulting to Could be, perhaps, maybe.

I watched the play again for the 4th time, it was a blindside block, no debate, but the bottom line is, it was a bonehead play.
The QB is away from the play, and he is not going to be able to make a play to the interceptor, there is no justifiable reason to lay a block on him.

In hindsight yes it was a bonehead play but in the heat of the moment the mindset is to block somebody, anybody.
There are national analysts much smarter than me who are calling the penalty BS and I tend to agree that it was a penalty which did not impact the play but had a major impact on the game's outcome, and the flag should have stayed in the pocket.
In Baton Rouge with the teams reversed the chances of that flag being thrown are close to zero.

 

[18IsTheMan]

In hindsight yes it was a bonehead play but in the heat of the moment the mindset is to block somebody, anybody.
There are national analysts much smarter than me who are calling the penalty BS and I tend to agree that it was a penalty which did not impact the play but had a major impact on the game's outcome, and the flag should have stayed in the pocket.
In Baton Rouge with the teams reversed the chances of that flag being thrown are close to zero.

Rewatching the play on Twitter and what sold this as a penalty was Nussmeier's flop. If he doesn't collapse like a house of cards, I seriously doubt it would have been flagged.

He's a veteran QB, though, and sold it perfectly.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

Rewatching the play on Twitter and what sold this as a penalty was Nussmeier's flop. If he doesn't collapse like a house of cards, I seriously doubt it would have been flagged.

He's a veteran QB, though, and sold it perfectly.

But not the award winner

 

[jasonscottinsc]

''Bad call. It happened after the ball was released and after it was intercepted. It should have, if called at all, it should have been assessed on the ensuing SC kick-off since the result of the play was a touchdown for SC. After the interception, the QB is no longer protected. He is a player like any other.''

This makes a lot of sense to me. Was there review or even a discussion of the rules among the officiating crew?
It would be our luck that the SEC Commissioner confirms the above assessment to be correct but too bad Gamecocks. We're sorry.

As others noted... it's a spot foul and the TD doesn't count.

Should it have been called though? No. If you're not allowed to hit the QB the way you hit anyone else on the field in that situation, then simply make it a rule that QBs cannot try to make a tackle after an interception.

 

[will110]

I was listening to Dan Patrick on Monday and that call specifically was discussed on his show. DP and the Danettes all agreed it was a terrible call.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

I was listening to Dan Patrick on Monday and that call specifically was discussed on his show. DP and the Danettes all agreed it was a terrible call.

Many other sportscasters and analysts have said the same, but the SEC says everything was fine.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I was listening to Dan Patrick on Monday and that call specifically was discussed on his show. DP and the Danettes all agreed it was a terrible call.

I have flipped on this after seeing replays. As I recalled it in my mind, Kennard pushed him unnecessarily from behind. But seeing all the slow-mo replays on Twitter, the QB was absolutely running towards the ball carrier and Kennard shoved him from the front (not even close to a blindside). Just because he's the QB, do you have to give him an unimpeded path to the ball carrier?

Two things that worked against us: the QB flopped spectacularly and Kennard immediately threw his hands up in the air.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Many other sportscasters and analysts have said the same, but the SEC says everything was fine.

I was on the fence about the call early on. I thought it was a bad call but an unnecessary hit by Kennard. However, I have yet to hear one sportscaster/pundit/analyst say anything other than it was a horrible call.

 

[will110]

I have flipped on this after seeing replays. As I recalled it in my mind, Kennard pushed him unnecessarily from behind. But seeing all the slow-mo replays on Twitter, the QB was absolutely running towards the ball carrier and Kennard shoved him from the front (not even close to a blindside). Just because he's the QB, do you have to give him an unimpeded path to the ball carrier?

Two things that worked against us: the QB flopped spectacularly and Kennard immediately threw his hands up in the air.

Josh Pate thinks officials in general came into the weekend ready to "protect" quarterbacks after what happened to Tua on Thursday.

 

[Irvin Snibbley]

Do I think it should have been called. Emphatically No.!But as a former coach you always tell your guys Never Block Behind the Runner!Only bad things can happen.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Josh Pate thinks officials in general came into the weekend ready to "protect" quarterbacks after what happened to Tua on Thursday.

How is throwing a flag after a QB is destroyed for instance protecting the QB?

 

[18IsTheMan]

How is throwing a flag after a QB is destroyed for instance protecting the QB?

So a light shove is now being "destroyed"?

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

I was listening to Dan Patrick on Monday and that call specifically was discussed on his show. DP and the Danettes all agreed it was a terrible call.

ESPN analyst David Pollack spent some time rewatching games from the weekend and one takeaway he had from LSU vs. South Carolina involved the officiating.

More specifically, an unnecessary roughness penalty assessed on South Carolina at a key moment of the game shouldn’t have been called, he said.

“What the heck is going on with the roughing the passers?” Pollack said. “They make an unbelievable play, (Kyle) Kennard gets to him and hits him, basically forces an INT, forces him to throw the football. Then he touches him. Like he gives him a little touch and it’s a 15-yard penalty. I’m not sure what you want him to do.”

 

[18IsTheMan]

ESPN analyst David Pollack spent some time rewatching games from the weekend and one takeaway he had from LSU vs. South Carolina involved the officiating.

More specifically, an unnecessary roughness penalty assessed on South Carolina at a key moment of the game shouldn’t have been called, he said.

“What the heck is going on with the roughing the passers?” Pollack said. “They make an unbelievable play, (Kyle) Kennard gets to him and hits him, basically forces an INT, forces him to throw the football. Then he touches him. Like he gives him a little touch and it’s a 15-yard penalty. I’m not sure what you want him to do.”

This is the unanimous sentiment cross college football analysts/pundits. I haven't even heard anyone say it was questionable. All are saying it was absurd. These are comments from non-USC people.

Link to the comment you referenced:

David Pollack blasts SEC officiating late in LSU vs. South Carolina game

ESPN analyst David Pollack blasted the SEC officiating over one particular call during Saturday's LSU vs. South Carolina game.

www.on3.com

It would be easier to flush it and move on if the general sentiment was that it was a good call, or even a borderline call.

 

[doubledawg55]

They changed the rules in HS 10-15 years ago. For most of my life all you had to do was get your head in front and you could blow them up. Now you have to be blocking towards the goal you are trying to score on. If you are moving towards the other goal its illegal. Not sure about college.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

So a light shove is now being "destroyed"?

I did say for instance. But thanks for the response.

 

[Tngamecock]

Rewatching the play on Twitter and what sold this as a penalty was Nussmeier's flop. If he doesn't collapse like a house of cards, I seriously doubt it would have been flagged.

He's a veteran QB, though, and sold it perfectly.

Caitlin Clark would’ve been proud of Nussmeier’s flop. I said it in real time when they showed it again. My son who is a UT grad was at my house Sunday morning and the replay was on sec network highlights. I told him to watch the quarterbacks reaction to being pushed in the chest and right shoulder not even hard. When they showed it, we both started laughing because the QB acted like he was dead. The referees bought it hook line and sinker, but they should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[Tngamecock]

I was on the fence about the call early on. I thought it was a bad call but an unnecessary hit by Kennard. However, I have yet to hear one sportscaster/pundit/analyst say anything other than it was a horrible call.

Of course you didn’t. Fans from other schools calling talkshow after talk show talking about how we were screwed by the referees over and over, including that call. Kirk Herbstreit even said LSU received many gratuitous calls. I dare say that was one of them. But none of this matters because it’s a loss, and as many bad calls that we had we also made mistakes we shouldn’t have. It just sucks the refs always make up crazy calls in our games over the years.

I remember when spencer rattler dropped back (two step drop) and fired a ball way outside to a receiver he thought was going to break to the sideline, but the receiver broke inside. Now mind you, Spencer was under no pressure and it was a quick pass. The referee called intentional grounding. I had never seen that when one receiver goes the wrong way in my lifetime.