[Husker] kick reception interference

[Paul Dalen]

Res ipso loquitur



On Sep 19, 2011, at 12:37, Mark Landin <marklandin at gmail.com> wrote:

> From what I saw, the marlowe call was botched but given how many
> players from both teams were in that small area, it was easy to see
> how the refs didn't see everything correctly.
>
> For burkhead, that call was harder to defend. He fielded the ball
> cleanly without signalling fair catch, and got levelled with a legal
> tackle a fraction of a second later. While I sympathize with Superman,
> there was no basis for a flag there. He was not impeded and the tackle
> was clean and within the rules.
>
> The third penalty was correct by rule.
>
> Again, my opinion.
>
> On 9/19/11, Theodore Heise <theo at heise.nu> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From my perspective in south stadium, the call on the Burkhead
>>> punt return was absolutely correct. This isn't the halo rule; you
>>> have to have a chance to catch the punt, and Washington didn't
>>> give him a chance.  The rules quoted online show the calls were
>>> correct. But I haven't seen a single replay.
>>
>> Not to belabor the point, but if he made the catch doesn't that say
>> something about having had an adequate chance to catch the punt?
>>
>> Good point that nobody thought it newsworthy enough to show widely
>> in replays.
>>
>> --
>> Theodore (Ted) Heise     <theo at heise.nu>     Bloomington, IN, USA
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> husker site list
>> husker at tssi.com
>> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>
> "He's old enough to know what's right and young enough not to choose
> it. He's strong enough to win the world and weak enough to lose it." -
> Neal Peart
>
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker