(no message)
ADVERTISEMENT
It would appear that way…
Replies to: "It would appear that way…"
- Anybody find a good explanation on the fake punt call? It seems to be - ndphysics - 11:08am 11/17/24
(24) [View All]
- The rule makes sense. Not having at least 5 players with linemen numbers.. - SteveM - 12:53pm 11/17/24
- The Defense has eyes and brains…they should be able to recognize something is odd and adjust. [NT]
- TyroneIrish - 1:34pm 11/17/24
- It's the refs job to call the existing rules - it was the correct call [NT]
- Fisher01 - 4:27pm 11/17/24
- Fine, but also make the fair catch call under the existing rules. Clown show. [NT] - Frank L - 5:52pm 11/17/24
- Right, so then give all 11 guys on offense receiver numbers and tell the defense to figure it out... - SteveM - 2:16pm 11/17/24
- Worth a shot…but seriously, the rule deserves a look at the end of the season… - TyroneIrish - 4:25pm 11/17/24
- The play is fine if you have the correct lineman numbers on the field. ND did not. - McIrish - 5:29pm 11/17/24
- Worth a shot…but seriously, the rule deserves a look at the end of the season… - TyroneIrish - 4:25pm 11/17/24
- It's the refs job to call the existing rules - it was the correct call [NT]
- Fisher01 - 4:27pm 11/17/24
- The Defense has eyes and brains…they should be able to recognize something is odd and adjust. [NT]
- TyroneIrish - 1:34pm 11/17/24
- According to the announcers MF had shown the play to Refs prior to the game - TyroneIrish - 12:39pm 11/17/24
- That’s what Freeman was mouthing. [NT] - whatsamataU - 2:42pm 11/17/24
- ND probably did not specify to the refs the number of players who would wear receiver numbers. [NT]
- SteveM - 2:17pm 11/17/24
- I had wondered about this detail. Perhaps small but very important - ndphysics - 10:12pm 11/17/24
- The ACC is no friend to Notre Dame. - AlbanyIRISH - 12:50pm 11/17/24
- It would appear that way… [NT] - TyroneIrish - 1:27pm 11/17/24
- Yes, but MF made no mention of it in his post game unless I missed it. [NT]
- ELP - 12:49pm 11/17/24
- “Cost/Benefit Ratio” for continuing the debate isn’t worth it…we won handily. [NT]
- TyroneIrish - 1:30pm 11/17/24
- Yep. Also besides pass interference so inconsistently called, I hate inadvertent face mask - THEISMANCARR - 4:14pm 11/17/24
- Could not agree more… - TyroneIrish - 4:33pm 11/17/24
- The calls weren't "facemask" penalties. They were for illegal hands to the face - McIrish - 5:22pm 11/17/24
- Yup, and the ones I saw looked like legit calls, especially the one on 78 bringing back - Frank L - 5:50pm 11/17/24
- Didn't 78 basically extend his arms sideways and the defender ran into his hand? Even if it was - THEISMANCARR - 6:09am 11/18/24
- Yup, and the ones I saw looked like legit calls, especially the one on 78 bringing back - Frank L - 5:50pm 11/17/24
- The calls weren't "facemask" penalties. They were for illegal hands to the face - McIrish - 5:22pm 11/17/24
- Could not agree more… - TyroneIrish - 4:33pm 11/17/24
- Yep. Also besides pass interference so inconsistently called, I hate inadvertent face mask - THEISMANCARR - 4:14pm 11/17/24
- “Cost/Benefit Ratio” for continuing the debate isn’t worth it…we won handily. [NT]
- TyroneIrish - 1:30pm 11/17/24
- I've heard several explanations & none that put the play to rest. - ELP - 12:34pm 11/17/24
- He shouldn't have to call and blow a TO to have the play reviewed. - McIrish - 5:24pm 11/17/24
- The NBC rules guru offered confusing explanations - MarkHarman - 12:33pm 11/17/24
- That last part really sounds like bullshit. [NT] - THEISMANCARR - 4:16pm 11/17/24
- The rule makes sense. Not having at least 5 players with linemen numbers.. - SteveM - 12:53pm 11/17/24
Consent Management