The Shivers Kickoff Return Play

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,673]

6 hours ago, twilli13 said:

Undoutably so....but we would be hailed as crybaby pansies. However, the rest of the SEC seems to join in on the hate Auburn train when s*** like this happens. It happened with the Arkansas thing and will happen with this. Watch. 

I will say that we have definitely got blessed with officiating to this point this season. You could mark this game as a push if you wanted, but Kentucky and Arkansas definitely got hosed

[Duder 238]

Auburn didn't play well enough to win AND got helped by the refs.  Ticky tack but still holding.

Worm muffed the kick.  Auburn should've been down 8 on an eventual final possession 

[twilli13 600]

On 10/24/2020 at 11:07 PM, Duder said:

Auburn didn't play well enough to win AND got helped by the refs.  Ticky tack but still holding.

Worm muffed the kick.  Auburn should've been down 8 on an eventual final possession 

See this is where my issue is. Yes, Auburn did play well enough to win this game. This is a stupid argument people make that is completely and totally incorrect. Auburn actually won the game. Some stupid freak mistake costing us the game means we played good enough to win THIS game but wouldve lost on some bonehead mistake. Did we play great? Hell no. Did we play good enough to beat a garbage Ole Miss team? Yes we did. mod edit:  Leave out the name calling

[twilli13 600]

On 10/24/2020 at 11:05 PM, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

I will say that we have definitely got blessed with officiating to this point this season. You could mark this game as a push if you wanted, but Kentucky and Arkansas definitely got hosed

I'm not marking it as anything other than what it is, a win. Anything other than that is asinine and dumb. Kentucky and Arkansas lost because they didnt make enough plays to win. Stop making stupid beta male excuses for those *******.

[DAG 33,988]

On 10/25/2020 at 12:01 AM, twilli13 said:

I'm not marking it as anything other than what it is, a win. Anything other than that is asinine and dumb. Kentucky and Arkansas lost because they didnt make enough plays to win. Stop making stupid beta male excuses for those *******.

Are you okay? 

[Cardin Drake 1,829]

1 hour ago, AURex said:

The closest official was *behind* Shivers and could not see his hands. Shivers began to pursue the ball, but  *** the whistle blew *** so play over. At that point, kinda hard for replay officials to overturn the call on the field.Like ladt week, if the whistle had not blown the play dead, maybe Shivers would have recovered. No way to know.

 

This. Whistle blew. Dead ball. Nothing else matters.

And I'm still hot about the block in the back, actually more like a tackle, that resulted in their last touchdown.  I've always kinda liked Ole Miss, but I can't stand Lane Kiffen, so if he's upset, that's a plus in my book.

 

 

[Dual-Threat Rigby 8,673]

49 minutes ago, DAG said:

Are you okay? 

don't even know how to reply to that lol. We were literally given a win versus Arkansas. Arkansas did everything in that situation to win. They were not allowed But this guy think that's a beta excuse

side note: anyone who breaks down football discussions to "alpha/beta" usually doesn't have a leg to stand on lol

[aucanucktiger 1,794]

11 hours ago, WalkingCarpet said:

If that call went against us we would be howling about it for weeks. 

Nope, we'd blame Gus. 

[Duder 238]

On 10/24/2020 at 11:57 PM, twilli13 said:

See this is where my issue is. Yes, Auburn did play well enough to win this game. This is a stupid argument people make that is completely and totally incorrect. Auburn actually won the game. Some stupid freak mistake costing us the game means we played good enough to win THIS game but wouldve lost on some bonehead mistake. Did we play great? Hell no. Did we play good enough to beat a garbage Ole Miss team? Yes we did. Your a moron if you cant see that.

*you're

When attempting to insult someone's intelligence never make that mistake.

Auburn should have lost this game.  Full stop.  We were trailing when a blown call took an additional touchdown off the board for Ole Miss.

[woodford 3,656]

The way I see it, if you need the ref’s help in beating Auburn this year then you’ve got some problems. 

[russnagel1 26]

One play doesn't make a game. Neither does one call that goes your way or the other way. If either team had clearly been better than the other, the victory would have been decisive. Some days your the bug and some days your windshield, that's just how it goes when one team is not clearly better than the other. So if your the windshield that day, be happy. I am!

 

[Maverick.AU 13,281]

 

[Tigerpro2a 5,650]

On 10/24/2020 at 8:59 PM, TigerPAC said:

The refs got the call right.....it’s considered a muff—never had possession and initial trajectory of the kick was not changed.  Thereby, once gets to EZ, it’s automatic touchback.  No one cheated anyone.  Now, if this was a punt, while different story.  Rules🤪

I have nevere heard this in my life. Can you show me a rule that says it if it touches a player and goes into EZ it is a touchback? 

[weagl1 1,784]

How does anybody but Shivers know if he touched it or not.  All the pictures I have seen are side angles that are deceptive at best.  Did he move his pinky finger or did the ball hit it?  Who knows?  If there is a shot from In front or behind showing the ball changed trajectory maybe I would buy it but not from the pictures in this thread or that I have seen on the internet.   Also, Shivers initially turned around and started toward the ball but stopped.  He had plenty of time to get to the ball before the Ole Miss player.  This tells me the ref blew the whistle when the ball went across the goal line.  Once the whistle is blown the play is DEAD!  I’m sure everyone would have felt better about it if Shivers had run back in the end zone and downed the ball but if he heard a whistle and stopped the rest is irrelevant.  If you muff the kick and it goes into the end zone on the momentum of the kick you can still down in and it’s a touchback.  But the whistle negates everything the play is DEAD and the determination by the replay booth is correct.  Inconclusive as to whether he touched the ball or not but if the ref in the end zone says I blew the whistle the rest doesn’t matter.  

[Gowebb11 9,326]

AU had some very favorable calls vs UK, Arky, and OM. On the other hand, UK and OM threw picks in the end zone, Arky had a punt blocked in the end zone, and OM dropped a potential TD pass on their last drive. I love calls going our way, hate when they don’t, but in games of 150 or so plays it’s is never just about one. 

[TigerPAC 965]

5 hours ago, Tigerpro2a said:

I have nevere heard this in my life. Can you show me a rule that says it if it touches a player and goes into EZ it is a touchback? 

this is what a ref friend of mine told me.  sorry, i cant quote the rule or point to page in rule book.

[CleCoTiger 1,957]

How about a thread titled "The Tank Bigsby kickoff return play called back for phantom holding"?

For real folks, our Tigers won the game. Calls go funny ways sometimes. Ask Tank. That phantom holding call cost our Tigers a TD.

[EastAl_Tiger 228]

25 minutes ago, TigerPAC said:

this is what a ref friend of mine told me.  sorry, i cant quote the rule or point to page in rule book.

it's in the rule book. near the back. it's in Rule 8, Section 7

Responsibility ARTICLE 1. The team responsible for the ball being out of bounds behind a goal line or being dead in the possession of a player on, above or behind a goal line is the team whose player carries the ball or imparts an impetus to it that forces it on, above or across the goal line, or is responsible for a loose ball being on, above or behind the goal line. Initial Impetus ARTICLE 2. a. The impetus imparted by a player who kicks, passes, snaps or fumbles the ball shall be considered responsible for the ball’s progress in any direction even though its course is deflected or reversed after striking the ground or after touching an official or a player of either team (A.R. 6-3-4-III; A.R. 8-5-1-II, VI and VIII; and A.R. 8-7-2-I-IV).

Part II Interpretations:

Any kick by Team A strikes the ground and a Team B player bats the ball across Team B’s goal line, where Team B recovers it while grounded or it goes out of bounds. RULING: New impetus is given by Team B. Safety, two points for Team A. Batting the kick is considered to have destroyed the impetus of the kick and imparted a new impetus. However, merely touching or deflecting the kick, or being struck by it, does not destroy the impetus of the kick (Rule 8-5-1-a)

[Mikey 16,605]

1 hour ago, Gowebb11 said:

AU had some very favorable calls vs UK, Arky, and OM. On the other hand, UK and OM threw picks in the end zone, Arky had a punt blocked in the end zone, and OM dropped a potential TD pass on their last drive. I love calls going our way, hate when they don’t, but in games of 150 or so plays it’s is never just about one. 

I replayed that one three times. We had two guys between their player and the goal line and they were closing fast outside the 5. After the whistle for the incomplete pass was blown, there were 3 seconds left on the clock. Had that guy caught the pass, the game would have been over while we were making the tackle.

[autan 737]

2 hours ago, weagl1 said:

How does anybody but Shivers know if he touched it or not.  All the pictures I have seen are side angles that are deceptive at best.  Did he move his pinky finger or did the ball hit it?  Who knows?  If there is a shot from In front or behind showing the ball changed trajectory maybe I would buy it but not from the pictures in this thread or that I have seen on the internet.   Also, Shivers initially turned around and started toward the ball but stopped.  He had plenty of time to get to the ball before the Ole Miss player.  This tells me the ref blew the whistle when the ball went across the goal line.  Once the whistle is blown the play is DEAD!  I’m sure everyone would have felt better about it if Shivers had run back in the end zone and downed the ball but if he heard a whistle and stopped the rest is irrelevant.  If you muff the kick and it goes into the end zone on the momentum of the kick you can still down in and it’s a touchback.  But the whistle negates everything the play is DEAD and the determination by the replay booth is correct.  Inconclusive as to whether he touched the ball or not but if the ref in the end zone says I blew the whistle the rest doesn’t matter.  

Best rationalization so far.

[weagl1 1,784]

26 minutes ago, EastAl_Tiger said:

it's in the rule book. near the back. it's in Rule 8, Section 7

Responsibility ARTICLE 1. The team responsible for the ball being out of bounds behind a goal line or being dead in the possession of a player on, above or behind a goal line is the team whose player carries the ball or imparts an impetus to it that forces it on, above or across the goal line, or is responsible for a loose ball being on, above or behind the goal line. Initial Impetus ARTICLE 2. a. The impetus imparted by a player who kicks, passes, snaps or fumbles the ball shall be considered responsible for the ball’s progress in any direction even though its course is deflected or reversed after striking the ground or after touching an official or a player of either team (A.R. 6-3-4-III; A.R. 8-5-1-II, VI and VIII; and A.R. 8-7-2-I-IV).

Part II Interpretations:

Any kick by Team A strikes the ground and a Team B player bats the ball across Team B’s goal line, where Team B recovers it while grounded or it goes out of bounds. RULING: New impetus is given by Team B. Safety, two points for Team A. Batting the kick is considered to have destroyed the impetus of the kick and imparted a new impetus. However, merely touching or deflecting the kick, or being struck by it, does not destroy the impetus of the kick (Rule 8-5-1-a)

Exactly.  The momentum of the kick carried the ball into the end zone.  Shivers didn’t bat it and cause it to go into the end zone.  Even if it grazed his pinky finger the ref looking right at it obviously ruled it didn’t and, in all likelihood, blew the whistle when it went into the end zone and Shivers didn’t chase after it.  It makes no sense that Shivers would just stop if he thought there was any chance it was a live ball and he had plenty of chance to recover it if it was.  No use in doing that if the whistle blows it’s dead.  Much ado about nothing.  

[gr82be 14,425]

20 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I replayed that one three times. We had two guys between their player and the goal line and they were closing fast outside the 5. After the whistle for the incomplete pass was blown, there were 3 seconds left on the clock. Had that guy caught the pass, the game would have been over while we were making the tackle.

Provided we actually tackle the guy instead of trying to launch at his shins to knock him down. That burned us bad earlier in the game. I hate that style of (non) tackling. 

[toddc 13,194]

28 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I replayed that one three times. We had two guys between their player and the goal line and they were closing fast outside the 5. After the whistle for the incomplete pass was blown, there were 3 seconds left on the clock. Had that guy caught the pass, the game would have been over while we were making the tackle.

Exactly what I was saying after it happened!

[Gowebb11 9,326]

3 hours ago, Mikey said:

I replayed that one three times. We had two guys between their player and the goal line and they were closing fast outside the 5. After the whistle for the incomplete pass was blown, there were 3 seconds left on the clock. Had that guy caught the pass, the game would have been over while we were making the tackle.

But the tackler could’ve missed, thus the word ‘potential’.

[PigskinPat 2,579]

6 hours ago, weagl1 said:

How does anybody but Shivers know if he touched it or not.  All the pictures I have seen are side angles that are deceptive at best.  Did he move his pinky finger or did the ball hit it?  Who knows?  If there is a shot from In front or behind showing the ball changed trajectory maybe I would buy it but not from the pictures in this thread or that I have seen on the internet.   Also, Shivers initially turned around and started toward the ball but stopped.  He had plenty of time to get to the ball before the Ole Miss player.  This tells me the ref blew the whistle when the ball went across the goal line.  Once the whistle is blown the play is DEAD!  I’m sure everyone would have felt better about it if Shivers had run back in the end zone and downed the ball but if he heard a whistle and stopped the rest is irrelevant.  If you muff the kick and it goes into the end zone on the momentum of the kick you can still down in and it’s a touchback.  But the whistle negates everything the play is DEAD and the determination by the replay booth is correct.  Inconclusive as to whether he touched the ball or not but if the ref in the end zone says I blew the whistle the rest doesn’t matter.  

Call me crazy, but I feel like the years of trying to get out of trouble as a kid have come to fruition.