You had to know the refs were going to get involved in this one sooner or later

F*n bullshit! This game is just not what it used to be. Pathetic

DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.

Comments

I'm more disgusted by the fact that they stood there until it was intercepted then looked around and threw the flag than the simple fact they threw it.

Totally crooked. Not a doubt in my mind. Notre Dame gets every break and advantage ie Fiesta Bowl in 00, but still can't win anything. Garbage program

This! In the replay, the Center Judge is staring at the QB hit and makes no motion whatsoever towards his flag. After the INT, the referee throws the flag. We got hosed. 😑😑

I don't know what a Hokie is, but God is one of them!

And not a single coach has the balls to say anything. Screw the potential fines. Show some damn pride for the team. Totally robbed and absolutely no emotion.

Because you can't say anything. Once a flag is thrown it can't be picked up and the penalty reversed. when it comes to a player safety call. All the emotion would just give the other team more of an advantage.

I've seen numerous times when a flag is thrown, a coach yells, the refs consult, and there is "no flag on the play"

Now finish up them taters; I'm gonna go fondle my sweaters.

The rules might have changed recently but there were a few times personal fouls for targeting and facemasks were called and when reviewed under replay it clearly wasn't the correct call. The penalty stood, but you couldn't take back the penalty even though it never actually happened since penalties can't be reviewed. They can review the ejection, not the penalty.

I'm talking about once the flag is thrown, and the refs consult before announcing the penalty.

And unless I missed something if they overturn the ejection, they also overturn the penalty...didn't that happen with #14 for ND?

Now finish up them taters; I'm gonna go fondle my sweaters.

The Targeting rules have changed a number of times over the years. At first, they weren't reviewable. Then, they made the ejection reviewable, but the 15 yards and first down would stand. Then, they made the entire penalty reviewable, but made it so that Targeting could be an add-on offense to an unreviewable penalty. For example, if a player is flagged for "Roughing the Passer, with Targeting", the Roughing the Passer penalty will stand regardless of the result of the Targeting review. But if it's just Targeting, and not tacked onto another penalty, the entire thing is either "confirmed" or "reversed".

So upset with how bad the call was that I didn't watch that closely. Did the ref who threw the flag actually look and see the interception before he threw the flag? Because where I come from we have a technical term for that - fireable offense.
Gonna have to watch the replay of that, because if that actually happened..........

The LewDew, Professional Golf Bum

Yup didn't motion for his flag at all from what I could tell until Chatman had possession.

The flag was definitely out before the interception. It was a call that could probably go both ways, but most of the time I rarely see it called. πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

That drive ended with no points for the Irish, so it's just sour grapes at this point, but would have been nice to have that arm punt right then and there.

VPI '10

here's a head scratcher. What benefits us more: ND burning clock here and eventually ending with no points or us getting the ball and going 3-and-out from our own 40, thus burning less clock?

Obviously we want to get the ball in great field position and move the ball and maybe get points, but, realistically, we were unlikely to get in FG range from there given how most of our drives went. And obviously, getting our defense some rest instead of making them live through that long ND drive cranked up to 11 is preferable, but we did lose the game with 35 seconds on the clock so burning clock definitely has to carry some weight.

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

It flipped the field position and gave their defense time to catch their breath.

In my opinion, ND hitting the FG might've been a good thing in the grand scheme of things.

Would've changed our play calling most likely and then they would've been down 3 instead of 6 and they might've schemed to simply get in field goal range their last drive instead of being forced to get a TD which then puts Bud into a "prevent the win" defense mode.

VT Marketing Class of 2009
Current Roanoke-Hokie
Go Hokies!

Can we get this footage? or even better throw it in a gif?

804

VPI '10

are you sure that's not just the leprechaun mascot running really fast?

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Game thread

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Don't post threads with the sole purpose of riling people up. For instance, "ESPN just said ______ about us - they suck!", "Bleacher Report sucks!", etc. are not worthy of topics \ threads.

Don't start a new topic to rant.

This doesn't deserve to be a thread.

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

And the game all goes to...the Notre dame players in stripes

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

Also interesting that two of Notre Dame's cheerleaders were in the booth.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

That can't be referring to Tirico and Flutie.

I mean, they call 6-7 ND games a year. They are obviously very knowledgeable about that team. But they did their homework. It really felt like they had more than a cursory knowledge of VT coming into this game. And I didn't feel like I had ND shoved down my throat for three hours, other than what you would usually see for a home team. It was definitely a much more neutral call than that mess we had in the booth against Miami.

But the refs still sucked ass no matter which team you were rooting for today.

You can certainly hold that opinion. But yes, I was referring to them.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

Tirico busted a nut when they made the PAT. And I am a Tirico homer. I love the guy. But he clearly wanted ND to win.

I have no idea why my username is VT_Warthog.

Arkansas blew a 24-0 lead in the Belk Bowl.

It's a ND broadcast. It's literally their job to cheer for ND during the game.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

PREACH!

I think he was just impressed with the holder. The snap was so bad.

"Parrish at the 30….and…the ball came loose! Taken away by DeAngelo Hall, and he..will…score!"

I thought he busted a nut when Josh Morgan scored in the Sugar Bowl.

I think this beats the Michigan Sugar bowl for me in terms of how mad I am about losing. Notre Dame did not deserve that win at all.

Erm...false. we beat Michigan in all phases that night...today? Refs weren't as much of a factor....we were outplayed, but not by much

I was more mad at that loss but less mad at the refs. The blown touchdown reception call against Michigan seemed more cowardly than calculated.

Hokie, Hokie, Hokie, Hi. Tech, Tech, V.P.I.
Sola-Rex, Sola-Rah. Polytech- Vir-gin-I-a.
Ray, Rah, V.P.I. Team! Team! Team!

I live in PAC-12 country...this is a very accurate description of what I hear most weekends

How the fuck are you possibly less mad at the refs for the Sugar Bowl?

They didn't just make the wrong call in the end, they overturned the call on the field of a catch and touchdown.

If you play it, they will win.

"How the ass pocket will be used, I do not know. Alls I know is, the ass pocket will be used." -The BoD

That call was terrible, obviously, and cost us a bowl game, but the catch was so amazing that it was almost unbelievable. This one felt like a concerted effort. Remember that Michigan didn't just need a couple bad calls, but lucky break after lucky break.

Hokie, Hokie, Hokie, Hi. Tech, Tech, V.P.I.
Sola-Rex, Sola-Rah. Polytech- Vir-gin-I-a.
Ray, Rah, V.P.I. Team! Team! Team!

This is where I'm at with at as well. In the Sugar bowl it was one really bad call (maybe two if you count Hosley's intereception being called back), but that's all it was. This game it was bad call after bad call. At a certain point it just got ridiculous, and it did ultimately effect the outcome of the game.

I generally say it's loser talk to blame the refs. This is maybe the one game I saw where it was actually egregious enough where I openly wonder about a fix. It's still probably more likely that the refs just generally sucked and we were unlucky, but boy were we unlucky by a lot.

In the Sugar bowl, they went out of their way to overturn the correct call on a game-winning play.

Sorry, but that's inexcusable.

And you can't tell me that the CEO of the Sugar Bowl being a Michigan alum didn't have anything to do with that ridiculously long replay review!

Absolutely. There was nothing in the video to overturn it. Zero. I would have liked to see the replay official defend it because there is no way he could have. It was a screw job, that and stuff like Saturday has just made me lose interest in college football. We are going to be on the shit end of stuff like that when you play Notre Dame, Michigan and the like.

One of the softest RTP calls I've seen.
And that should've been a safety. "Momentum" carrying him into the endzone for the knee & touchback, my ass.

"Safety...oh wait, we gotta keep us closer than a TD Um, his momentum carried him in. Yeah, that's right. Ball on the one."

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

That was a made up call. Either his momentum carried him into the EZ = Touchback or he established position and went into the EZ on his own power = safety.

We put the K in Kwality

I really want to see the explanation on this. I watched at at the bar with no sound and said if it wasn't a touchback, it was a safety and our ball. I can't see a different outcome

The explanation was that he caught the ball at the 1 yard line and momentum carried him backwards into the end zone, where he knelt. So I guess it was a variation on "forward progress".

Correct

Virginian by Birth, Hokie by Choice

Except they originally gave them the ball at the 25 (TB).

We put the K in Kwality

Except for if you watched the play again it absolutely wasnt "forward progress" he caught the ball at the 1 1/2 yard line and took and intentional two backwards steps into the endzone where he knelt. He didnt call for fair catch, therefore it was a safety.

Funny how the same situation on our interception, our momentum into the end zone doesn't matter.

VT Marketing Class of 2009
Current Roanoke-Hokie
Go Hokies!

Which was legitimate momentum considering Deablo was damn near horizontal still.

Warning- Filter lost.

"Look at this... This is just spectacular.... These people are losing their minds"

STICK IT IN HAS RETURNED!!!

It is the exact same thing. What is different about it?

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Except it totally was not the same situation

Now finish up them taters; I'm gonna go fondle my sweaters.

The way the rule is written, if a player's momentum carries him into the endzone on a turnover or kick return, and he is then downed before leaving the endzone, he is marked down at the spot where he first gained possession. Both the interception and the kickoff were located correctly since the call made was that momentum carried them into the endzone.

I really do appreciate looking up the rule. But go back and watch the play and then watch deablo's INT. Deablo was at full sprint diving for the INT, and I dont agree with the spot but that was a case of momentum. There was no momentum on the kick return. He caught the ball, maybe you could say his momentum caused him to take the first step back, but then intentionally took another step into the endzone and took a knee. That is by definition of the rule a safety.

I just looked at the play again. Here's a screenshot as he's bringing in the ball:

And here's a screenshot as his second foot is hitting the ground:

That is over one yard of motion, mostly while entirely airborne. Yes, if he had planted his right foot at the goal line and fully halted his momentum, he might have kept the ball out of the endzone. As it was, he coasted another half step into the endzone and took a knee. Once in the endzone, it doesn't matter that he took another step or two to change where he was facing or whatever before taking a knee. Hell, he could have started doing sprints from one side of the endzone to the other before taking the knee, and the call they made still would have been the right call. All that matters is that his momentum carried the ball across the goal line, and he did not advance it back out of the endzone.

Momentum carried the ball, or he carried the ball?

That's as close as you could possibly get to walking it into the end zone.

To the refs credit, they spotted the ball on the one yard line, similarly to what they had done to VT, earlier in the game. So, reasonably consistent.

Those two plays were probably their most accurate of the game to be honest. A lot of weird no calls throughout though. They really seemed to struggle with where to draw the line for a penalty which is the worst for players and coaches.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Maybe you don't understand the concept of momentum. It's a scientific term, referring to the product of mass times velocity. I'm also not sure if you're familiar with Newton's first law of motion, which deals directly with the concept of momentum. That law of physics is commonly summarized by the phrase, "an object in motion stays in motion, unless acted upon by a force", meaning that an object retains its momentum unless there is a force that causes it to change.

The player had momentum. The player could have stopped his momentum by planting his foot at the goal line, but he instead chose to allow his momentum to carry him into the endzone, where he hoped he would be awarded a touchback. The officials instead applied the rule correctly and awarded them the ball on the 1 yard line.

I don't know how more clearly I can state that the eventual ruling was 100% correct.

I always find insulting intelligence is the best way to get people to agree with you.

@hokie_rd

I had run out of ways to show that the rules were applied correctly in this one case, and figured the most likely disconnect was a lack of understanding of momentum from a physics perspective. I apologize if I offended anyone.

Momentum isn't the same thing as inertia (Newton's first law).

But you're right about the football rule regarding momentum. It was correctly applied.

Single worst call I've ever seen...and my freshman year was 1990. Pitiful.

They were bad both ways but it is still ok to be mad about it because they were really bad

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Early on I said the same thing, but especially in the second half they made calls that I just find completely dumbfounding. The non-safety call and interception call back were absolutely huge plays they had no business calling.

The non-safety was right call but the roughing on the int was horrible. They scored no points on the drive though. They also let us get away with a lot of contact in the secondary.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

They didn't score points on that drive, but the int would've given us huge momentum. Instead, they gained the momentum on that drive (gifted by the refs, who also missed a blatant hold on the very next play) and we never got the momentum back after that.

Proud of our guys! Fuck those refs

Yes,that's the Hokie Bird riding a camel. Why'd you ask?

I was so disappointed that we clammed up on our last real drive and decided to just "grind it out" up by 6. stupidest shit ive ever seen and predictable.

i knew we lost once that happened.

I love Bud as much as anyone, but he's done that so many times and it rarely works. You know why we kept the lead against Ohio State in the Shoe? We pinned our ears back and stuck with the Bear defense and trusted what was working. When we dropped 8 every play of that last drive; I wanted to throw my TV out of the window.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

Recency bias. You're wrong.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Not even in the ball park really.

Defense played tough and I'm looking forward to them moving forward

I'm not worried about the offense. Hooker is a much better passer and ND knew we were one dimensional.

My goodness, I didn't say the defense didn't play tough if you're referring to me, but please, tell me how I'm out of bounds.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

I agree with you Ernie. The D played their ass off and had Book scared all night long. For some reason we went away from that and from what I saw we went to some type of prevent for that last drive and they picked us apart. I could be completely wrong. #5 couldn't cover us so he held jersey the WHOLE game. I'm wanting to drink heavily so bad right now past the 8 beers I'm into now but, I need to save myself for tomorrow.

Excuse me? No, I'm not wrong. It's happened quite a bit in Bud's tenure, and considering I've been a Tech fan for almost 30 years, I wouldn't say it's recency bias. But how about instead of just bluntly telling me I'm wrong, you back up your assertion with how how in these situations we haven't just sat back in prevent, dropped 8, and allowed the opponent to pick-and-pop their way down the field. Go ahead buddy, I'm listening...

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

How many games did we lose doing that in 25 years. Why don't you provide some more examples?

I'll get you started off the top my head these are:

2007 BC
Today
Maybe 2012 Cincy but I don't remember, I just know that's a game we lost on the last defensive drive. I do know most of the game we played a lot of man because we did get a few PI's on Exum (though overall I prefer taking a few PI's if we are kicking down most of the other downs in man, that isn't a dig on Exum who I actually really appreciated his play at corner)

Reality is we've probably outlasted a lot of teams playing similarly over the years.

The times when it failed are very hard to forget, and I don't like the strategy, but you make it sound like this has happened 20+ times throughout Bud's tenure and I'm just not remembering anywhere close to that many examples. I'm sure it happened other times but I can't even remember them.

Edit: still looking to hear some more examples to support your assertion that "he's done this so many times and it rarely works."

Good post Chris. Stepping back, if I'm being honest with myself, it's probably somewhere between more than what you've listed and less than what I think after the agony of a defeat like this. In my head and soul, if feels like a lot and it doesn't help that I was at 2/3 of those games. I would honestly be curious to know the actual numbers, but extracting that is way more time-consuming than what I'd like to spend my Saturday night doing. However, I get your point.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

I can think of at least 3 games in the '92 season alone right off the top of my head. NC State, So Miss and ECU...let me know if you want more examples

Bud Foster was not the DC in '92, so not sure how that's relevant.

"Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!"

I dont need research to tell me that Bud and his coaching philosophy has won a hell of a lot more games for this program than he has lost. You are simply second guessing based on a result you are not happy with.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

If you want to skew my point, fine. I love Bud's overall coaching philosophy too and it's won us a lot of games. However, without having the energy to dig up every game we've lost where we're trying to protect a lead, it seems there's been a fair number of games I've watched in my lifetime where we've lost them because we just sit back and drop everyone when we have a lead. Ya I'm pissed about this loss, but it's not like I'm losing my religion over this and saying anything unreasonable. It's been pretty well-noted on here over the years, so to act like I'm just "wrong" and using "recency bias" is pretty unfair.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

Or you could just be wrong and that is ok too. I didnt slap you or anything.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Coming from the guy who really put a lot of effort into backing up his vague point when he was called out. Got it. Ya, no I've got everything I need.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

It will be better tomorrow. Any bitching about this game is silly right now. We were 17 point underdogs.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Fair enough. Respect.

"What kind of person would throw away a perfectly good dog?"

But...he isn't. Graduated in 95...this has happened...a LOT. Sad, but true. All depends on your frame of reference, I suppose.

The whole three man rush thing seems like its been a giveaway program all season long. I would be interested in someone running some stats on how much we give up (yards per attempt, etc) comparing three man rush vs four man rush. Someone give me some numbers to back up what I think I'm seeing, because, yes we set up for a three man rush and I want to throw up, and moments later I do.......

The LewDew, Professional Golf Bum

After thinking more about it, I don't necessarily think it was just cause of the prevent defense.

There is a time and a place for it. IMO (granted Bud's defensive mind will never be in the same stratosphere as mine), After a couple field goals, and then a stalled drive, giving the ball back to ND with 3:30 minutes and a TO to work with is not the time. If all else remained the same, and there was say 1 minutes on the clock, sure. 3:30 is just too damn long to let them pick you apart all the way down the field at their leisure.

Now finish up them taters; I'm gonna go fondle my sweaters.

That defensive strategy reminded me of Boise 2010. I still understood it... Until they got inside the +40 after that you can't really get beat deep so you need to let the guys loose

Yes,that's the Hokie Bird riding a camel. Why'd you ask?

I actually had flashbacks from the '07 BC game and then just watched that series over again to make sure I wasn't going crazy.

"Parrish at the 30….and…the ball came loose! Taken away by DeAngelo Hall, and he..will…score!"

Honestly I'm proud as hell of the men on our team. This is the most encouraged ive been all season. Bring on Wake, we control our destiny

Good post, I think we learned more from this game than any victory. Really think this was our best game since at FSU last year

That last offense of series for Virginia Tech, I'm sorry, but F*ing Cornelson has got to go!!!

Go Hokies!

No need to apologize. I think everyone is on the same page.

I criticize knowing full well I could never do what these athletes do.

I'm not on that page, but we are all entitled to an opinion.

"Take care of the little things and the big things will come."

Nah. He did enough to win. I would have liked to see more, but that was all on the refs. When they take 2 points off the board and we lose by 1? refs

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

Beat the spread 2 games in a row, that is progress!

I can imagine no more rewarding a career. And any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worthwhile, I think can respond with a good deal of pride and satisfaction:
β€œI served in the United States Navy"

KCCO

Im not putting it on our defense. Our defense actually kept us in that game. Our offense teed them up perfectly giving them a 3 minute drill with their Senior QB.

(edit) up by 7 sure, up by 6 is entirely different.

Terrible thread. Negative leg

Negative VORT here

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Why?

Because of the two CGs that tell you not to start threads like this. Game thread/vent thread. Don't start a thread to complain about the refs while the game is still going on and we're winning

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Because regardless of whatever the refs may or may not have done, complaining about the refs is pure whining.

I didn't like some of the calls/noncalls but I also liked some of the calls/noncalls.

We. Lost. The. Game. The refs didn't lose it for us.

Preach horse. The Hokies have everyone caring again. We had a real chance to win. We all need to realize that

Complaining about the refs in 04 vs USC and Michigan in the Sugar Bowl was definitely not whining. It cost us those games.

Fuente needs to ask "were the refs inept or cheating?"

We put the K in Kwality

Yes

Fuck we're the youngest team in college football and outplayed them. Got fucked by the refs. Teams should be scared of VT in the upcoming years.

Those refs can suck my balls

I'm also glad they felt the need to handicapped us for a half against Wake

VT Marketing Class of 2009
Current Roanoke-Hokie
Go Hokies!

That roughing call on our pick was brutal. Clean hit on the QB and it was at best a judgement call. In no way was it "clearly late," and that's why it was so frustrating. They got the benefit of the doubt on that call without a second thought. Uncalled blatant hold on the next play as well.

We still should have won either way. No single penalty cost us the game, but it certainly made it more difficult on us.

Setting for fields goals all game lost us the game. Corny should've kicked the 3 points on first down once we got I. Field goal range way he called the game

I saw more than one straight up hit in the back of our defenders as well when things got hairy for Book. That dude is garbage and I hope the rest of the teams they play make them look silly.

At least the last drive was all on us. But who knows with that BS pass interference and/or roughing the passer, we might have gotten the ball back and gone down and gotten a score to seal it.

I am really happy and a relief to see a pulse with this team but damn that would have been a nice win. I don't really want to be too critical but I do feel we should be able to generate more offense with the players we have on O. Even Patterson is not a seasoned, polished QB, he does enough well to be successful. Just my opinion.

no no no no...putting this on the refs is lame.

"Take care of the little things and the big things will come."

Agreed. Control what we can. Calls like this happen in every game, some of them just seem so much more consequential.

VPI '10

Rule 8, section 5 does say it gets spotted where he gets control of the ball. But exception b states it must be his original momentum that takes him into the end zone, which clearly did not happen. He took a step onto the goal line with the intent to take a knee.

Edit: this was obviously supposed to be a reply to a comment.. oops

We should get an apology that says that was a safety, the crews bad. No cookie for them this week.

They need to apologize to both teams for a lot more than that play.

What's the actual rule with illegal formation? Tre and Hazelton were both 1 yard off the line of scrimmage but more or less level with the TE at the end of the line. What is the point of reference on that sort of thing? Do they need to take a step back relative to the tackle or tight end?

they were plenty far off the LOS. The ref just blew the call.

they were plenty far off the LOS.

Operative word being "they". They were both almost exactly one yard off the LOS, and were definitely in line with each other. They were either both "on the line" or both "off the line". In the first case, that results in an Ineligible Receiver Downfield penalty, and in the second case, that results in a "Too Many Men in the Backfield" penalty. Either way, we should have been awarded a 5 yard, replay the down, penalty.

The second part isn't true. There were two tight ends. The design of the play was clearly to have both WRs off the line.

You're right, went back to watch it again. I guess I missed the TE on that side when it was live, thought he was the RT.

That's what pissed me off so much, it was a clever play design, and the refs punished VT for scheming within the rules.

@hokie_rd

I STILL can't see how they were lined up on the line of scrimmage. I saw a few calls that I've never seen in my life tonight.

I assumed the LOS was even with the ball. Tirico and Flutie said you have to be at least 1 yard back, and they were 1 yard back of the ball without a doubt. Yet Tirico and Flutie both said they were right on the LOS. So all I could reason was that either the refs, Tirico, and Flutie were all full of BS or the line of reference is not the ball and is instead the tackle/TE.

EXACTLY! They were lined up at least 1-2 yard behind the ball. And they checked the refs right before said refs threw a flag. I don't get it. I would love to hear an explanation.

So I looked it up myself. The line is waistline of the snapper. On review of the images it is borderline. I would embed images but I'm too lazy.

"2. A Team A player is legally on his scrimmage line when he faces his
opponent's goal line with the line of his shoulders approximately
parallel thereto and either (a) he is the snapper (Rule 2-27-8) or (b)
his head breaks the plane of the line drawn through the waistline of
the snapper.

1. A back is any Team A player who is not a lineman and whose head
or shoulder does not break the plane of the line drawn through the
waistline of the nearest Team A lineman."

That's helpful.

In a game where they were missing PI all over the place, seems pretty nuanced.

"2. A Team A player is legally on his scrimmage line when he faces his
opponent's goal line ...

I wonder if this is something Willie had in mind when he drew that play up? Of course, it wasn't executed properly because he isn't on the line of scrimage.....

Take the shortest route to the ball and arrive in bad humor.

The more sober I get, the more I remember, and the more I realize how God awful that officiating was.

VT Marketing Class of 2009
Current Roanoke-Hokie
Go Hokies!

Someone, please explain targeting to me. I just rewatched the HG6 hit and Wallers. Waller's definitely was as the intent was stupid (didn't need to hit him like that). But ND's hit was textbook targeting with intent to hurt. There is no way they should have reversed that call. It was egregious.

We put the K in Kwality

Wait a damn minute. You're sober right now?

Literally no one in the country can explain targeting and that includes every official and whoever wrote the rule.

It's going to be a garbage opinion call until we can figure out how to detach our skulls from our spines right before making a hit.

I honestly don't mind the fact that it is an opinion call. I HATE that any bang bang play can lead to not only being kicked out of current game but half of the next one as well. That is like a week in jail for a speeding ticket in my eyes.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

Especially when the offensive player lowers himself to receive the hit. That wouldn't be that difficult to facilitate on offense if you're smart to make those calls happen.

What sucks is how many times I see the defensive player dropping his head expecting to be throwing his shoulder into the offensive player's body, only to have the offensive player twist and/or drop his head so that it's positioned right in front of the defender's head.

In other words, the defender adjusts himself to avoid helmet-to-helmet but hits it anyway because the ball carrier moved.

Don't lower your helmet and you won't get called for targeting.

The ND player made contact helmet up initiating contact with the facemask. Waller lowered his head and made contact with the crown of his helmet.

That's the difference in the play and why one was an ejection and the other overruled. Literally, that's it. And mind you, I'm not saying I agree with the way these are ruled, but you wanted an explanation and that's it.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

I understand why they made the rule, but until they can properly officiate it, the rule is garbage.

If you want to reduce head to head contact, that's fine. But this whole ejecting players and punishing them for the next game on bang/bang plays where there is no ill intent is bullshit.

Penalize head to head contact 15 yards, fine. But replay can clearly show when there's intent to harm or specific launching towards a player, when you see that eject the player.

To me, that's a clean hit with a super consecutive PC call.

VT Marketing Class of 2009
Current Roanoke-Hokie
Go Hokies!

Most inconsistent worst called game in a long time. At least 3 defensive holding/P.I. calls missed in the first half on ND that were awful.

#5 is hands down the best jersey grab in the NCAA

Sooner or later? The refs were involved from minute 0 until the end...this game featured some of the strangest calls I've ever seen. Did the refs make up a special rulebook for this one game? Prove me wrong....
..

I thought the officiating was bad all game, but evenly so. There were a number of defensive holds, etc. that should have been called on us tonight too that weren't. They were pretty much just letting both teams maul each other and were then calling the ticky tacky stuff

You certainly have the right to an opinion but you must have watched a different game if you thought that was an evenly called game. The refs made multiple incorrect calls at key points for VT and only one iffy call on ND with the block below the waist that was at a crucial moment.

ND didn't get called for a hold ALL game which we all know cant be true they just chose not to call it. They may have missed a few DPI but called phantom holding on Farley and some ridiculously generous spots all game. The game is played on a Notre Dame exclusive network so I get why it is more lucrative for them to help out ND to wins. A better record ND means more viewers.

The game is played on a Notre Dame exclusive network so I get why it is more lucrative for them to help out ND to wins. A better record ND means more viewers.

That's a load of crap, considering that the refs were from the ACC and would not be receiving any revenue from the ND/NBC contract at all. If the game was on an ESPN channel, then maybe at some point down the road, the ACC revenue pot would increase and some of that money would be funneled to refs' paychecks. But that money would be so little and so far away that this game would be long forgotten by then.

phantom holding on Farley

You mean the one where he illegally tackled the receiver after biting on the pump fake? That's one of the calls you have an issue with?

That one actually didn't get a call, if it's the one I'm thinking about. The one that he did get flagged for was in the endzone when the receiver tripped himself.

Oh, right, I remember that one now. On that one I can at least understand why the flag was thrown at full speed, even if the slo-mo replay showed it shouldn't have been.

But speaking of, the no-call holding is a prime example of a blown call in our favor. They may have blown more calls in ND's favor, but at least early on we got a decent number ourselves. Those refs were not good, no matter how you slice it.

ND didn't get called for a hold ALL game

ref looking right at 'em

Now finish up them taters; I'm gonna go fondle my sweaters.

Their left tackle had his arm around our DL all day.

Take the shortest route to the ball and arrive in bad humor.

And Touchdown Jesus looked down and said "Blessed are the referees that forgive my players of trespasses such as holding" and a Notre Dame victory was achieved.

It was all like biblical, dude.

The LewDew, Professional Golf Bum

This must be what Clay Matthews feels like.

Whew boy. This one is going to stick with me for a while. I mean, I am BITTER.

I HATE noter Dame like I hate green bay now.

Reminded me a bit of the Lions v Green Bay game a few weeks ago.

What about the obvious pick play on the first ND TD? I realized that is missed a bunch, but damn - that was obvious.

Sometimes we live no particular way but our own

Now finish up them taters; I'm gonna go fondle my sweaters.

Yeah, having the ball inside field goal range from a turnover wouldn't have an effect on the game in a one point loss would it?

Its infuriating that the ACC, which has zero incentive to help out ND in football, went and gifted them a game like this by getting so many calls just flat out wrong.

If you're going to screw someone over, at least make sure you yourself can benefit from it in the end. The ACC, as a conference, stood more to gain by having VT beat ND than propping ND up, and yet here we are.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

You have just proven that the problem is incompetence not motive.

The first rule of Fight Club is we don't talk about turkey leg votes

If we're going down the rabbit hole (which I don't mind doing for fun) motive could still be a factor. NBC has a bazillion dollar contract with the Irish through infinity, and would probably have enough sway to stick their nose in there.

In real life, I refuse to believe such chicanery is actually taking place, but the timing of the flag on that play was pretty creepy. Also, if they make a movie about the offensive line on Book's last TD run the best title would be Fists of Jersey. That was straight up fuck you I don't even care who sees this holding.

Oh well, though. This team has got to be ready for the Deacs. Newman will be five times the QB that Book was. If the Hokies win this Saturday, I'll be more impressed.

Leonard. Duh.

If we're going down the rabbit hole (which I don't mind doing for fun) motive could still be a factor. NBC has a bazillion dollar contract with the Irish through infinity, and would probably have enough sway to stick their nose in there.

Kind of like Michigan and the All State Sugar Bowl.

Sort of, but the All State Sugar Bowl thing was more homerism. But remember Herbstreit going off on the fact we even were selected for that bowl? It's because we "travel well" (tickets sold, not donated to the USO) and more eyes would be on the broadcast.

Look at it from NBC's position. If Notre Dame starts having 4-8 seasons all over the place, NBC starts losing a lot of viewers on fall Saturday afternoons. And advertisers are looking at those viewership numbers when it's time to draft an advertising contract. You can't tell me this isn't why Notre Dame is always ranked high in the preseason and benefits in the weekly rankings as much as possible without being completely ridiculous. It's all about the dollar bills and it has been affecting the competition since they signed the TV deal and more so after the BCS was implemented.

But I don't see how NBC has that much sway with the polls or rankings. In the realm of college football, they are extremely small time. At least with ESPN, you could argue that even if their people aren't actually voting in the polls, the voters are watching Sportscenter and having their opinions swayed that way. No one's watching NBC Sports for college football analysis.

I see your point with the rankings, but if Notre Dame wins, it benefits NBC. Notre Dame winning gets them ranked higher. Higher ranked match ups bring in more viewers. And I can't tell you how, but Notre Dame has this way of benefitting from wins and not suffering from losses like other teams. I know it's anecdotal, but they are a sweetheart team because of NBC.

Aaaaannnd I'm angry all over again

It bugs me when people say: "but ND didn't even score on that drive so it doesn't matter"

No one ever takes into consideration the 50ish yards closer to the end zone we would've been, the lack of rest the ND Defense would've had, and the flip in field position if say we didn't score, but were able to pin them back around their 10 yard line.

VT Marketing Class of 2009
Current Roanoke-Hokie
Go Hokies!

ACC refs gonna ACC ref.

I think it embarrasses me more than how weak the ACC is this year.

Seeing a problem that is so well documented for so long, and it isn't possible to correct?

I mean, if only there was an organization dedicated to the fair and equitable state of college football that had tons of money it could spend to increase the number and quality of refereeing.

Obviously such an organization would have the game's best interests in mind, and wouldn't pay exorbitant salaries to itself.