Video of the phantom hold?

[Mountain Man Hawk]

We had a sack and fumble negated by penalty and I’ve seen several people say it was a bad call. The announcers on TV seemed to think their TE grabbed our LB so they held us as opposed to us holding them.

Does anyone have video of that? For such an important play I was surprised TV didn’t give us more angles. Thanks! 🙏

 

[kceasthawk]

We had a sack and fumble negated by penalty and I’ve seen several people say it was a bad call. The announcers on TV seemed to think their TE grabbed our LB so they held us as opposed to us holding them.

Does anyone have video of that? For such an important play I was surprised TV didn’t give us more angles. Thanks! 🙏

They did show a replay, though not close up, and clearly the TE grabbed Higgins and turned him. I imagine they decided against continuing the review once they were reminded that a regular penalty is not reviewable.....

 

[Madman_1]

We had a sack and fumble negated by penalty and I’ve seen several people say it was a bad call. The announcers on TV seemed to think their TE grabbed our LB so they held us as opposed to us holding them.

Does anyone have video of that? For such an important play I was surprised TV didn’t give us more angles. Thanks! 🙏

It was not a phantom hold. Their TE clearly held our LB.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

It was not a phantom hold. Their TE clearly held our LB.

Thanks, I’ve heard a lot of people say that, I’d love to be able to see it. I guess since we won by so much nobody cares but normally a controversial play like that we would see the replay pasted all over the internet.

 

[Hawkeye Marching Band]

They did show a replay, though not close up, and clearly the TE grabbed Higgins and turned him. I imagine they decided against continuing the review once they were reminded that a regular penalty is not reviewable.....

It’s not reviewable, but couldn’t the officials have a conversation and revise the call? Or can they only converse before the referee makes the announcement?

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

It’s not reviewable, but couldn’t the officials have a conversation and revise the call? Or can they only converse before the referee makes the announcement?

I have seen officials converse and pick up a flag before, I just don’t think they can use the video to do it. It’s a shame no other official came over to talk to the official that threw the flag and say they had a better view, etc.

And to your point, I’ve never seen them do it after they make the announcement. I’ve only seen them wave off the flag and announce that there is no flag on the play.

 

[toddhawkwi]

Yes sadly for this play the referee could not turn on him mic and say "After further review, there is no penalty". And if they could, I promise you that would go against us 10x more than it would favor us especially against the top teams. Remember (and after watching games over the last few days I triple down on this): The B1G has the most incompetent idiots looking at replays in all of college football by a wide margin. In the B1G I'm getting to the point where I would just as soon totally eliminate reviews as the replay reviewers have shown they cannot perform their duties properly as in other conferences.

 

[herkhatescy]

It’s not reviewable, but couldn’t the officials have a conversation and revise the call? Or can they only converse before the referee makes the announcement?

They thought it was reviewable they were going to look at the monitors and found out that they couldn't.

 

[uihawk82]

It’s not reviewable, but couldn’t the officials have a conversation and revise the call? Or can they only converse before the referee makes the announcement?

You know that game management things like spotting the ball and the down marker are items that can be changed. I really think if they finalized that call but were thinking about reviewing it then one of the onfield refs saw it differently but they never mentioned it.

I have seen calls finalized and then the officials talk about it and change the call. It was weird

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

I have seen officials converse and pick up a flag before, I just don’t think they can use the video to do it. It’s a shame no other official came over to talk to the official that threw the flag and say they had a better view, etc.

And to your point, I’ve never seen them do it after they make the announcement. I’ve only seen them wave off the flag and announce that there is no flag on the play.

Yeah ... the officials should have conferred first about what they saw.

I rewatched that play multiple times ... I see Jay's arm go back a little ... but I don't know if that is him grabbing the TE or vice versa (or both). There aren't enough pixels from my view to be able to discern what I saw.

 

[Beattheohiostate]

They thought it was reviewable they were going to look at the monitors and found out that they couldn't.

First-game jitters. LOL

 

[ICWestfan]

They thought it was reviewable they were going to look at the monitors and found out that they couldn't.

Aren't reviews now originating from the BIG office? I honestly don't know.

Nothing egregious by either players from my view in the living room.

 

[Dauminator]

I don't understand the concept of some things being reviewable and others not. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

Only argument is bogging the game down with reviews.

 

[SI_NYC]

We had a sack and fumble negated by penalty and I’ve seen several people say it was a bad call. The announcers on TV seemed to think their TE grabbed our LB so they held us as opposed to us holding them.

Does anyone have video of that? For such an important play I was surprised TV didn’t give us more angles. Thanks! 🙏

What was the time in the game? I can look at my recording of the game.

 

[BurgHawk87]

First-game jitters. LOL

Quick turnaround from the Fever game the night before.

 

[sober_teacher]

Thanks, I’ve heard a lot of people say that, I’d love to be able to see it. I guess since we won by so much nobody cares but normally a controversial play like that we would see the replay pasted all over the internet.

What truly kept it from being controversial is that 1) they punted 3 plays later and 2) we ended up winning by 40 so it was a non-issue.

Early nominee for worst call of the year however. I’m sure they send that one to b10 and ask for clarification on.

I don't understand the concept of some things being reviewable and others not. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

Only argument is bogging the game down with reviews.

If it’s stuff that can clearly be ruled on objectively; like was player X past the LOB before the pass, I agree. More subjective stuff like pass interference is tougher.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

What was the time in the game? I can look at my recording of the game.

I believe it was around the 6:00 mark of the 2nd quarter, maybe slightly later. According to my Yahoo sports app, Illinois State started the drive at the 6:32 mark and the penalty was on the 3rd play of the drive.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

What truly kept it from being controversial is that 1) they punted 3 plays later and 2) we ended up winning by 40 so it was a non-issue.

Early nominee for worst call of the year however. I’m sure they send that one to b10 and ask for clarification on.

If it’s stuff that can clearly be ruled on objectively; like was player X past the LOB before the pass, I agree. More subjective stuff like pass interference is tougher.

Yeah, if they have to start reviewing judgement calls then the game will never end because you could review every play and see if it warranted a holding penalty or not.

 

[HawksRule73]

Couple of things regarding that play:

1. It reminded me of the infamous Outback Bowl against Florida. Clinton Solomon is running his route, gets his face mask yanked, flag is thrown. Call goes AGAINST Solomon for a face mask. I think it was that particular play that caused Spielman in the booth to start absolutely losing his shit on air and constantly berating the refs for their incompetence.

2. My initial thought when they went to replay was they were going to see if the hold occurred before or after the fumble. But maybe they really didn't know they couldn't review a penalty and then someone buzzed down and said, "Hey, idiots, you can't reverse a penalty thru replay!" 😀

 

[ksihawk]

I initially thought that the officials would review whether the hold occurred after the ball had been fumbled. Since they didn't go to the monitor, I have no idea what they were doing or thinking. I agree with the poster above that the BIG review team has real problems. I was watching a bit of the PSU vs. WVU game, and a spot was challenged where the replay clearly showed the ball carrier was down well before the mark. The announcers and Mike Pereira were clearly baffled when the call stood.

 

[ksihawk]

Couple of things regarding that play:

1. It reminded me of the infamous Outback Bowl against Florida. Clinton Solomon is running his route, gets his face mask yanked, flag is thrown. Call goes AGAINST Solomon for a face mask. I think it was that particular play that caused Spielman in the booth to start absolutely losing his shit on air and constantly berating the refs for their incompetence.

2. My initial thought when they went to replay was they were going to see if the hold occurred before or after the fumble. But maybe they really didn't know they couldn't review a penalty and then someone buzzed down and said, "Hey, idiots, you can't reverse a penalty thru replay!" 😀

To point 2, I, too, thought they would review if the hold happened after the fumble. So are you saying they can not review that? I know it is not the NFL, but I have seen flags get picked up many times on plays where the hold happened after a fumble or the ball was tipped in an NFL game.

 

[herkhatescy]

Aren't reviews now originating from the BIG office? I honestly don't know.

Nothing egregious by either players from my view in the living room.

It was a no call at best.

 

[F5n5]

 

[pistachio1999]

View embedded media

That is a definite hold on Higgins.

 

[herkhatescy]

That is a definite hold on Higgins.

Couldn't really tell. When the receiver reaches for Higgins, you couldn't tell who was holding who. No call.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

Couldn't really tell. When the receiver reaches for Higgins, you couldn't tell who was holding who. No call.

Really? The fact that their player falls down would seem to indicate that Higgins was holding him. After seeing the replay, I don’t hate the call as much as I thought I would.

If there is contact and the receiver falls down, it’s fair to expect a flag more often than not.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

View embedded media

Thanks! I knew this video must exist somewhere.

 

[sober_teacher]

Really? The fact that their player falls down would seem to indicate that Higgins was holding him. After seeing the replay, I don’t hate the call as much as I thought I would.

If there is contact and the receiver falls down, it’s fair to expect a flag more often than not.

From another angle, it looked as much like the receiver had grabbed Higgins.

Regardless, a moot point as they ended up punting anyways.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

there are probably 10 holds not called to every one called. well, maybe not that many. but it probably evens itself out a little.

 

[Mountain Man Hawk]

From another angle, it looked as much like the receiver had grabbed Higgins.

Regardless, a moot point as they ended up punting anyways.

I could see an argument that their player initiated the contact and then Higgins grabbed back.

Or possibly their receiver fell down because he was trying to drag Higgins, but even as I type that it sounds kind of silly to me.

At any rate, as I said above, if there is contact and a receiver falls down, it’s probably going to draw a flag more often than not so I’m not going to complain so much about this one…