Michael Chasnoff Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago According to Google's AI ... Roughing the Passer Does Not Apply to Laterals Under NCAA Rule 2-19-2, a pass is only a forward pass if it initially travels toward the opponent's goal line. Because a lateral travels parallel or backward, it is a backward pass, and NCAA Rule 9-1-9 (Roughing the Passer) explicitly does not apply. With a non call, we intercept the pass and win the game. 1 Quote
ClubWhatever Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago The roughing call wasn’t on the backward pass it was on the forward pass. 1 Quote
Michael Chasnoff Posted 16 hours ago Author Posted 16 hours ago It was definitely a double pass. The receiver passed the ball following a backward pass. Quote
ClubWhatever Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago So there cannot be roughing on a flea flicker where the QB pitches it back and then it’s pitched back to him? Of course there can. Sorry, you are wrong. 4 Quote
Michael Chasnoff Posted 16 hours ago Author Posted 16 hours ago Look, I don't know which play you are referring to but I'm questioning the following trick play... Oklahoma quarterback John Mateer threw a legal backward lateral to wide receiver Isaiah Sategna. Sategna was just a receiver catching a lateral... and therefore NCAA Rule 9-1-9 (Roughing the Passer) explicitly does not apply. 1 2 Quote
hookem1014 Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago 10 minutes ago, Michael Chasnoff said: Look, I don't know which play you are referring to but I'm questioning the following trick play... Oklahoma quarterback John Mateer threw a legal backward lateral to wide receiver Isaiah Sategna. Sategna was just a receiver catching a lateral... and therefore NCAA Rule 9-1-9 (Roughing the Passer) explicitly does not apply. Roughing the passer can be called in favor of anyone passing the ball vertically. It doesn’t have to be just for the QB. In this case it was called because of Biles hit on Sategna following his throw. 2 Quote
Longhorns1 Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago He was in the air and coming down when the ball was released. He may be able to soften the blow, but where was he supposed to land? 3 Quote
Fritztownhorn Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago I agree, he was Airborne before the release. Not sure what he was supposed to do. Quote
Lahorns2001 Posted 15 hours ago Posted 15 hours ago Referees did not beat Texas . Our undisciplined play, is what beat Texas Texas is an undisciplined team. That is on Sark along with his terrible play calling. Quote
Wentwood Posted 15 hours ago Posted 15 hours ago Yes Ref’s wee not the issue but I thought the roughing the passer and PI against Phillips were bad calls. He called roughing because Biles hit him hard IMO. Bad call 1 Quote
watty7796 Posted 15 hours ago Posted 15 hours ago 29 minutes ago, Wentwood said: Yes Ref’s wee not the issue but I thought the roughing the passer and PI against Phillips were bad calls. He called roughing because Biles hit him hard IMO. Bad call Biles had already left his feet prior to the pass. Kinda hard to change trajectory at that point. He was committed already. 1 Quote
ClubWhatever Posted 5 hours ago Posted 5 hours ago Sark said he was told the roughing penalty was for hitting the passer in the head. Quote
Oldest Horn Posted 4 hours ago Posted 4 hours ago 11 hours ago, Fritztownhorn said: I agree, he was Airborne before the release. Not sure what he was supposed to do. Not throw his arms into the passer’s head and neck area, for starters. 1 Quote
cmk4pres Posted 4 hours ago Posted 4 hours ago Stop crying about refs when we gift them 17 points. 1 1 Quote
Wentwood Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 13 hours ago, watty7796 said: Biles had already left his feet prior to the pass. Kinda hard to change trajectory at that point. He was committed already. Thats why I don’t think it was a penalty Quote
Ambassador of Texas Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago Hit to the neck/head is going to draw a flag. Be smart. 3 Quote
Wentwood Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago I probably need to watch it again, but have no desire too my thoughts were he did hit him high but was trying to block the pass and follow thru with a hit. I did not think he targeted head and neck area???? Doesn’t matter no going back, but that was a huge call. Have not read many agreeing with me so probably wrong, but the replay looked like no penalty to me Quote
Ambassador of Texas Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago Agree, it was a HUGE call at that point in the game. The INT likely would have sealed the game. Quote
ArizonaLonghorn Posted 52 minutes ago Posted 52 minutes ago 14 hours ago, watty7796 said: Biles had already left his feet prior to the pass. Kinda hard to change trajectory at that point. He was committed already. Can't hit the passer in the head/neck area, which is what he did ... As for the PI call on (I think) Phillips ... looked clean from the front (and probably real time at the game) but in the replay you can clearly see the DBs left arm wrapped around the neck/shoulder area. Good call. Quote
f1revo Posted 44 minutes ago Posted 44 minutes ago He didn't hit him in the head though. Clearly hit his shoulder Quote
Paul L Posted 42 minutes ago Posted 42 minutes ago After a lateral once the player establishes himself as a passer the same protections that a QB receive applies to the new passer. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.