[Husker] Reviewable plays?

[Robert Christensen]

According to Dictionary dot com, the definition of 
*_egregious-extraordinary in some bad way; glaring; flagrant: _**_an 
egregious mistake; an egregious liar_*. The only think that made this 
egregious was that it wasn't the way the Big 12 and Mack Brown wanted 
the game to end.  The fact remains that Mack Brown and Colt McCoy made a 
huge mistake in clock management and got the benefit of a mulligan to 
over come their mistake.

Does it change the final score?  Nope, the Huskers got hosed-again.  Am 
I whining? (see the previous answer!)  Will it be a motivator for 
preparation for the Holiday Bowl and the 2010 season?  I'm sure it will!

Go Big Red


Aaron Wolfson wrote:



> The rule allows for review of "egregious clock errors," which this certainly
> was.
>
> Aaron
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Dick Karre <dkarre at comcast.net> wrote:
>
>   
>> Smith, William wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Once again I risk being run off the list...
>>>
>>> putting the 1 second back on the clock was the right thing to do.  There
>>> was clearly a second left when the ball hit the ground out of bounds.
>>>
>>>       
>> To be precise, the game clock read :01 when the ball hit the ground. There
>> was probably less than a second left before it tripped to :00. I agree,
>> though, restoring a second was probably the correct call - if it was a
>> reviewable play, which is less than clear.
>>
>> But I don't think anyone will run you off the List for this.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dick Karre
>> dkarre at comcast.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> husker site list
>> husker at tssi.com
>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>
>
>