My video post above clearly explains why the correct call was made. Take two minutes of your time to watch it and you’ll finally understand.
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE COOPER DEJEAN WAS POINTING, NOT WAVING
- Thread starter Phenomenally Frantastic
- Start date
And I suppose that you're pissed the targeting call got overturned with an apology?
He knows he's wrong. He just enjoys pissing people off.
I know I’m right and the video above proves it. The call has been confirmed.
I think the damning thing here is that dude never had an indisputable camera angle to actually parse for that call. If there is any doubt you have to allow the call on the field to stand.
In addition, this rule is intended specifically for player health and safety. Failing to call a waving motion on the field would be an egregious error for an official. I think the comments afterwards basically were CYA type stuff and yeah - they admitted they used the press box angle to officiate this via replay.
My guess is that they are going to communicate an emphasis on the indisputable standard for games moving forward for those replay refs. And Mr Koester might not see the inside of a booth for a week or two.
In addition, this rule is intended specifically for player health and safety. Failing to call a waving motion on the field would be an egregious error for an official. I think the comments afterwards basically were CYA type stuff and yeah - they admitted they used the press box angle to officiate this via replay.
My guess is that they are going to communicate an emphasis on the indisputable standard for games moving forward for those replay refs. And Mr Koester might not see the inside of a booth for a week or two.
If you think that was an intended fair catch signal you are a dumb *ucker! End of story!
Ummm try to follow along moron as you clearly don’t understand. Dejean was not intending to call a fair catch. The refs are not saying he was intending to call a fair catch. Dejean was clearly pointing with his right arm at the area where the ball would land while waving his teammates to get away with his left arm. If a returner does that he is not allowed to advance the ball. Black and white cut and dry rule.
Replays always use all the camera angles, not just field angles. Look at out of bounds catches, touchdowns etc. To say only the on field angle should be used is not what replays are about. Some go in your favor and some don't. Only option would be no replays, and no one wants that.
The confusion of the rule is because it’s called an “invalid fair catch signal.” It makes it sound like the player was intending to call a fair catch but didn’t do it correctly. It’s why so many people on this site think the call was BS. They simply don’t understand what the refs are saying.
You need to crawl back into your golden rodent hole.
Video Link:
Left arm CLEARLY going in a circular motion. NOT on a single plane.
Exhibit A
1:03 Both hands closed, index fingers pointing.
Exhibit B
1:07 Left hand STILL pointing
@tarheelbybirth
How would you like your crow served sir?
😂… Time to let it go.…It’s an L (against a terrible team) no matter how you want to spin it.
Shouldn’t have come down to an officials call.
.
From the backseat of my parent's car when I was a kid, the moon looked like it was flying alongside me.
I certainly hope that the Iowa players and coaches have put this to rest and have been using this Bye Week to get ready for the remaining four games (all of which they will be favored in and should win). 10-2 will get them to the Big Ten Championship.
If it wasn't an intended fair catch signal then it wasn't an illegal fair catch signal...you are a dumb ****....
This isn't hard.
He was waving his left arm.
You can do that, but it stops the ball.
You don't throw the flag right away and kill the play, because what if upon review, it's decided it wasn't an invalid fair catch? You let the play play out, then look at it.
And how come nobody is talking about the Iowa player who ran out of bounds and then back in?
The argument really is, should they have called it at all. It probably happens a lot, just like holds, etc.
He was waving his left arm.
You can do that, but it stops the ball.
You don't throw the flag right away and kill the play, because what if upon review, it's decided it wasn't an invalid fair catch? You let the play play out, then look at it.
And how come nobody is talking about the Iowa player who ran out of bounds and then back in?
The argument really is, should they have called it at all. It probably happens a lot, just like holds, etc.
He was pointing with his left arm, not waving, and it rotated while he was keeping balance.
The only viewpoint where it even resembled a wave was from the high camera view, as admitted by the officials. It didn't look like a wave from the only view that mattered, that is, on the field.
Wow, still a segment of the fanbase trying to convince themselves and others that DeJean wasn't making a circling motion with is left arm. Amazing how dishonest some people are, but even more so stupid to think they can convince others just by saying the same thing over and over. What Dejean did was a textbook illegal fair catch. The ref blew the call by not blowing the whistle when he picked the ball up and started running, review caught it and correctly reversed the play, end of story.
Last edited:
Great post. It’s crazy that people can watch the video and then claim he never waved his left arm. There’s a reason it was reviewed, there’s a reason it was overturned after the review, and there’s a reason it has been confirmed as the correct call afterwards. This was a textbook example of exactly what a punt returner is not allowed to do if he plans to advance the ball.
A poster with some sense and an IQ over 80. Doubtful you’re an Iowa fan. Kudos.
What's your IQ? 60? Cause you're a dumb mother****er.
You
Your IQ not your weight.
Uh huh....
That picture of you next to your Blue Heeler begs to differ @Rubrum_Magnus_Virtus.
Thank God you're over here instead of wasting bandwidth on Soundoff.
WTF are you posting about?? I post all over social media and wherever I want, when I want…..not surprised big bro Nebraska fans have destroyed you on other platforms.
I think it's funny how you keep referring to doormat Nebraska as big bro. You guys are like a little yapping lapdogs that feel compelled to keep jumping up and down screaming "look at me!" "look at me!". And everyone in the conference just pities you poor broken sacks. Good doggy.
Destroyed me?
I still have my original handle.
I don't get triggered to the point of getting banned.
What number handle is this for you?
Replays also aren't about adjudicating judgement calls. The point is to correct obvious errors. It should be used for things like did he step out of bounds, was he down before he fumbled. This is interpretive as evidence It is over legislation of the game. The language of the rule is particularly problematic as it allows for absurd interpretation. People's arms move when they field punts. The call should stick with the onfield determination for these judgement call plays. Do we want to have holding calls reviewed?
Section 3 Reviewable Plays (something seems to be missing here.)
Kicks
ARTICLE 4. Reviewable plays involving kicks include:
a. Touching of a kick.
b. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball.
c. Kicking team player advancing a ball after a potential muffed kick/fumble
by the receiving team.
d. Scrimmage kick crossing the neutral zone.
e. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch
the ball on an on-side kick.
f. A player touching or recovering a kick or loose ball who is or has been out
of bounds during the kick.
FR-116 RULE 12 / Instant Replay
g. Receiving team advancing after a fair catch signal.
Kicks
ARTICLE 4. Reviewable plays involving kicks include:
a. Touching of a kick.
b. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball.
c. Kicking team player advancing a ball after a potential muffed kick/fumble
by the receiving team.
d. Scrimmage kick crossing the neutral zone.
e. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch
the ball on an on-side kick.
f. A player touching or recovering a kick or loose ball who is or has been out
of bounds during the kick.
FR-116 RULE 12 / Instant Replay
g. Receiving team advancing after a fair catch signal.
You wouldn't think a 6'2" 195 lb guy would be such a coward and hide behind his keyboard.
But if it was an invalid fait catch symbol? IMHO if it's invalid it doesn't*-* count as a signal. But then not a football mind .just for grammar and/or us=e of words.
Idiotic. The reason it was reviewed was to see if CDJ stepped out of bounds. When Ken realized it wasn’t close to OOB he had to come up with something else. Why else would a replay that should have taken 20 seconds end up taking over two minutes?
Why would Ken review Hill’s TD run? Why would Ken call and confirm a targeting when there was no indisputable evidence of targeting? Hmmmm, seems like ole Ken may have something invested in this game.
