What the HECK happened!!!!!!

[jello1717]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dr Death

Perhaps it's just me, but the other guy coming off-sides and standing right next to his holder is something like... what's the word... oh yeah... OFF-SIDES!!! Whoever said "You got EA'd" nailed it right on the head!!!

No one ever said that he wasn't OFF-SIDES!!!

The problem is that he declined the offsides penalty because he thought his kick was good (which it wasn't because of the explanation you quoted).

[Pete7ate]

this will be talked about for a long time now.

[FSUNolez]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dr Death

Perhaps it's just me, but the other guy coming off-sides and standing right next to his holder is something like... what's the word... oh yeah... OFF-SIDES!!! Whoever said "You got EA'd" nailed it right on the head!!!

I love how the EA bashers at the beginning of this thread have disappeared now that it's been proven that EA was right and they just didn't know the basic rules of college football. They were so quick to say, "Only in EA's world is that extra point no good. No one will be able to shine some light." Where are you all now?

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dr Death

Perhaps it's just me, but the other guy coming off-sides and standing right next to his holder is something like... what's the word... oh yeah... OFF-SIDES!!! Whoever said "You got EA'd" nailed it right on the head!!!

In your haste to criticize EA I think you forgot to read the explanations that have been provided.

[Wilson16NCSU]

the only part where EA failed in this is if the person offsides was that close to the QB/holder they would've blown the play dead as soon as he hiked it, especially with the worry of player safety. I guess EA didn't put that in because a player never comes that close to the holder when he goes offsides on an XP

[JerzeyReign]

Actually, if I remember correctly, touching the holder without touching the ball is the same as touching the kicker without touching the ball -- the result of the play, since the kick went up, should have been roughing the kicker.

So technically, yeah, dude got EA'd

[FSUNolez]

Quote: Originally Posted by JerzeyReign

Actually, if I remember correctly, touching the holder without touching the ball is the same as touching the kicker without touching the ball -- the result of the play, since the kick went up, should have been roughing the kicker. So technically, yeah, dude got EA'd

Not quite. If the holder is not displaced from his position, he is down and there is not a penalty.


The rule you are referring...


Running into the kicker or holder is a foul that occurs when the kicker or holder is displaced from his kicking or holding position but is not roughed (A.R. 9-1-3-II[II. A1 kicks the ball, after which B1, unable to stop his attempt to block the kick, runs into the kicker or holder. RULING: Penalty—Five yards from the previous spot. Roughing and 15 yards and first down if in question as to whether the foul is “running into’’ or “roughing.’’]).

[Wilson16NCSU]

Quote: Originally Posted by JerzeyReign

Actually, if I remember correctly, touching the holder without touching the ball is the same as touching the kicker without touching the ball -- the result of the play, since the kick went up, should have been roughing the kicker. So technically, yeah, dude got EA'd

this is true

"According to NCAA rules, when a team tries a field goal, no player on the defense can run into or rough the holder or kicker during the play. Exceptions to this rule occur if you block the kick. If you touch or alter the kick, it is OK to make contact with the holder and kicker. However, if you do not make contact with the ball, you will get a penalty for touching the kicker or holder."

http://www.livestrong.com/article/40...lege-football/