That "fair catch" call was complete BS

[The Fatboy]

He was lining himself up to catch the punt on the bounce. No way you can look at that and say it was an intentional signal.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

That's why we question the fairness of SEC officiating. And they reviewed it.

 

[Drebin]

The bigger question that I haven't seen answered....why wasn't the ball placed at the 25?

 

[Ralph Cramden]

We need to find the actual rule on that. I can't recall ever seeing a fair catch on a kick off. Advancing a ball after a fair catch signal is a penalty but they did not throw a flag. Very strange to me

 

[Cooterpoot]

The bigger question that I haven't seen answered....why wasn't the ball placed at the 25?

Because he attempted to return it. So it's dead at the spot.

 

[dickiedawg]

The fair catch/kickoff/25 rule doesn’t work if it’s bounced. At least that’s my assumption based on how the referee explained it during the game.

 

[bulldoghair]

Because he attempted to return it. So it's dead at the spot.

I haven’t seen that rule stated yet. In 2018 the new rule is if a fair catch on a kick off is caught between the goal line and the 25, that the ball would he placed at the 25 yard line. Why didn’t they do that? And is it not a penalty to try and return after calling a fair catch?

ps- my personal opinion is that he was calling his teammates to get away from the ball

 

[GloryDawg]

I told the guy sitting next to be on obvious penalty State fans booed that if they did not make so many bad calls the legit calls would not give them a boo.

 

[Drebin]

The fair catch/kickoff/25 rule doesn’t work if it’s bounced. At least that’s my assumption based on how the referee explained it during the game.

Likewise it should be common sense that a returner wouldn't be asking for a fair catch on a ball bouncing on the ground

 

[ZombieKissinger]

I'm not on Twitter, but someone shoot them a question: https://twitter.com/SECOfficiating?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

We may get a second apology letter on the season.

 

[Allday.sixpack]

It’s my understanding that attempting to advance a ball after a fair catch signal, results in a 5 yard, delay of game penalty.
That’s what I remember seeing called in the past.

 

[kired]

I researched it, apparently it’s a dead ball if you catch it after it hits the ground but not a fair catch. Fair catch has to be caught in the air.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

And also if there was a penalty, they'd have to actually announce it

 

[GloryDawg]

The fair catch/kickoff/25 rule doesn’t work if it’s bounced. At least that’s my assumption based on how the referee explained it during the game.

I think it is a delay of game penalty if call for fair catch and run with the ball. At least it is on a punt.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

There was no choice but to call it a fair catch signal with a wave of the hand above your shoulders. Otherwise you open it dangerous territory where the defender can say I didn't think he meant it so I leveled him.

 

[Go Budaw]

There was no choice but to call it a fair catch signal with a wave of the hand above your shoulders. Otherwise you open it dangerous territory where the defender can say I didn't think he meant it so I leveled him.

But they didn’t 17ing call it. They went back after the fact and called it over the review even though it was plainly obvious to the entire football universe that it was not what he was doing. There’s no way in seven hells that should be reviewable….everything that transpired over that sequence is why.

If they called it a fair catch signal on the field, that’s one thing. But that’s not what happened. Absolutely no one watching in real time, including all 22 players on the field on both sides, thought that was a fair catch signal. It was Stoops playing lawyer ball like a ***** and trying to get a “gotcha” in there, and it didn’t even matter in the slightest after all was said and done anyway.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

https://rulebook.github.io/en/rules/2/sections/8/

Yeah, I did too. This spells it out

 

[dog12]

I researched it, apparently it’s a dead ball if you catch it after it hits the ground but not a fair catch. Fair catch has to be caught in the air.

I just researched this too. Based upon the rules, I think the refs (mostly) made the right call (i.e., the ball is dead when the returner catches it, and the ball is placed in that spot).

The rules define a "valid" fair catch and an "invalid" fair catch. Essentially, an "invalid" fair catch is any sort of waving of the arm that is not clearly a fair catch (e.g., the returner waves an arm to tell teammates to stay away from the ball after the kick hits the ground).

The rules also state the when an "invalid" fair catch is given, the kicked ball is dead when it is caught by any player on the return team. Lastly, the rules state that the returner cannot advance a caught kick after either a "valid" or an "invalid" fair catch.

Thus, assuming that what Griffin did was an "invalid" fair catch, the ball was dead when he caught it and should be spotted where he caught it (i.e., the 10-yard line).

Griffin obviously advanced the ball after he caught it, so I'm not sure why the refs didn't penalize us for that (i.e., move the ball back to the 5-yard line).

Of course, this is just my opinion based upon my interpretation of the rules and what happened on the play. I could be completely wrong.

 

[HumpDawgy]

So the SEC hyper intelligent refs say he waved his hand over his head, clearly calling a fair catch on a bouncing ball, but we didn't clearly down that ball at Memphis. I love how their strict enforcement moves back and forth when we are involved. 17 em all.

 

[aTotal360]

Let’s be honest, there were about a half dozen terrible calls that game. Fortunately most of them benefitted us.

 

[TrapGame.sixpack]

So the SEC hyper intelligent refs say he waved his hand over his head, clearly calling a fair catch on a bouncing ball, but we didn't clearly down that ball at Memphis. I love how their strict enforcement moves back and forth when we are involved. 17 em all.

Exactly.

 

[Smoked Toag]

But they didn’t 17ing call it. They went back after the fact and called it over the review even though it was plainly obvious to the entire football universe that it was not what he was doing. There’s no way in seven hells that should be reviewable….everything that transpired over that sequence is why.

If they called it a fair catch signal on the field, that’s one thing. But that’s not what happened. Absolutely no one watching in real time, including all 22 players on the field on both sides, thought that was a fair catch signal. It was Stoops playing lawyer ball like a ***** and trying to get a “gotcha” in there, and it didn’t even matter in the slightest after all was said and done anyway.

This.

 

[$altyDawg]

The refs should have been so attentive when one of their fellow officials was waving his arms to stop the clock in the Memphis game.

 

[johnson86-1]

If you can signal faircatch after the ball is on the ground, then it should have been a penalty unless you can’t assess a penalty off the relay.

If you cannot call a faircatch after the ball hits the ground (which is what I would have assumed the rule is), then they 17ed up.

So the only way they didn’t screw it up is if the fair catch signal is reviewable but the assessment of the penalty is not.

 

[Villagedawg]

Because it was not a fair catch.

The bigger question that I haven't seen answered....why wasn't the ball placed at the 25?

The ball hit the ground if I remember correctly. He didn't catch it on the fly. Therefore, he was not awarded a fair catch. All it is is a dead ball because of the signal he gave (intentionally or unintentionally).

 

[kired]

My only problem with the fair catch call was the ref didn't really explain it, or maybe I just didn't hear it. A lot of times on an unusual play like that you'll hear a good official explain it, something like - "After review it was determined the player made a fair catch signal. By rule, since the ball hit the ground before the player caught it - it's a dead ball and will be placed at the 10 yard line"

Then maybe you don't have thousands of confused fans.

 

[thekimmer]

Well the way I read the rules it was not a valid signal.....

I just researched this too. Based upon the rules, I think the refs (mostly) made the right call (i.e., the ball is dead when the returner catches it, and the ball is placed in that spot).

The rules define a "valid" fair catch and an "invalid" fair catch. Essentially, an "invalid" fair catch is any sort of waving of the arm that is not clearly a fair catch (e.g., the returner waves an arm to tell teammates to stay away from the ball after the kick hits the ground).

The rules also state the when an "invalid" fair catch is given, the kicked ball is dead when it is caught by any player on the return team. Lastly, the rules state that the returner cannot advance a caught kick after either a "valid" or an "invalid" fair catch.

Thus, assuming that what Griffin did was an "invalid" fair catch, the ball was dead when he caught it and should be spotted where he caught it (i.e., the 10-yard line).

Griffin obviously advanced the ball after he caught it, so I'm not sure why the refs didn't penalize us for that (i.e., move the ball back to the 5-yard line).

Of course, this is just my opinion based upon my interpretation of the rules and what happened on the play. I could be completely wrong.

The rule says nothing about simply raising one's arm above the shoulder pads. It actually gives an example where you CAN raise your arm without signaling. It says a valid signal is one where the hand is raised above the head and waved SIDE TO SIDE MORE THAN ONCE. The windmill motion that Griffin displayed does not meet this criteria. Also, hadn't the ball already hit the ground before the signal?

 

[Coast_Dawg]

His hand went above his head twice in a waving motion. It’s clear to me that he was gaining his balance but there are two different takes just on this board that he was gaining balance and he was waving his blockers to get into position. The call was mostly subjective as his hand didn’t wave from side to side of his body but I honestly can’t remember the last time I saw a fair catch signal that waved from to side to side of the callers body.

The refs gave the benefit of the doubt to Kentucky.

Ref gave horrible explanation. He should have at minimum called it an invalid signal which makes the ball dead.

Stop crying in your beers. The game was won. Go back to complaining about the Memphis refs.

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

I just researched this too. Based upon the rules, I think the refs (mostly) made the right call (i.e., the ball is dead when the returner catches it, and the ball is placed in that spot).

The rules define a "valid" fair catch and an "invalid" fair catch. Essentially, an "invalid" fair catch is any sort of waving of the arm that is not clearly a fair catch (e.g., the returner waves an arm to tell teammates to stay away from the ball after the kick hits the ground).

The rules also state the when an "invalid" fair catch is given, the kicked ball is dead when it is caught by any player on the return team. Lastly, the rules state that the returner cannot advance a caught kick after either a "valid" or an "invalid" fair catch.

Thus, assuming that what Griffin did was an "invalid" fair catch, the ball was dead when he caught it and should be spotted where he caught it (i.e., the 10-yard line).

Griffin obviously advanced the ball after he caught it, so I'm not sure why the refs didn't penalize us for that (i.e., move the ball back to the 5-yard line).

Of course, this is just my opinion based upon my interpretation of the rules and what happened on the play. I could be completely wrong.

This is exactly what happened. Thanks for the detailed explanation. Invalid fair catch signal. I've seen it called plenty of times in the NFL. It happens in college too, in fact, here's a touchdown on a punt return called back in the exact same type of "balancing" move from a Marshall game a few years ago.

https://sports.yahoo.com/obscure-invalid-fair-catch-signal-rule-wipes-marshall-touchdown-video-224512188.html

But as you know, facts and reason are not popular. The refs are on the take or incompetent is the real reason.**

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

And also if there was a penalty, they'd have to actually announce it

They save those penalties for review