a bit of assistence please

[misplacedsooner]

help me out here, i have some poke fans and a couple of sooner fans that are doubting that demarcos leap outside the pylon was actually a td. ive tried to explain the rule to them but they just dont seem to get it. anyone know where in the rulebook it discusses this so i can link and quote it??

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

honestly i don't think it was a TD but there wasn't a good enough angle on the replays to overturn it. the key is you have to take off with both feet inbounds and the ball has to break the plane of the goal line. one key point in this scenario is that their are actually 2 goal lines in play - the front line and the end zone boundary. if the ball broke either one after he took off in bounds, it is a TD. murray's problem was that he was following proper football technique and had the ball in the outside arm making it hard as crap to get that ball back over the plane.

[starrca23]

Didn't think he got in either...no big deal in the grand scheme of the game.

[OUHOMER]

The plane of the goal extends on forever. As long as both feet were inbounds when he leaves the ground and the ball goes over the extended plane it is a touchdown.

[Frozen Sooner]

Interesting. I thought jkm was wrong, but according to the NCAA official approved rulings, the ball should have been declared dead at the point it went out of bounds.

[Curly Bill]

Count me in as another that didn't think it was a TD, but they didn't have a good enough angle to overturn it.

[Jello Biafra]

screw em misplaced. they are looking for a silver lining in an *** whoopin. no matter how you try to explian it, they will always and forever be like "but but but you guys cheated again" bottom line, all we needed was a safety to win the game and they can't handle that fact. let them know it could have been worse. if it wasnt for 3 personal fouls (stupid on 2 of them fantom on the one against alexander) that kept their drives going, it could have been 49-0...


just tell it is is karma for the rashaun woods push off in the endzone against roy williams.

[jumperstop]

Do you need some assistANCE spelling? Sorry had to play grammar Nazi...

Really though I didn't think it was a TD, as explained above.

[OUinFLA]

tell them we will give them double the points scored back.

you still lose and you still got shutout.

[BoulderSooner79]

That situation will rarely have a camera angle to make a ruling, so it is almost always going to stay with the call on the field. By that logic, they called it a TD on the field, so it was a TD. He clearly didn't step out before leaping and landed way beyond the goal line out of bounds, so it would take 3D GPS triangulation to know for sure. I think they should change the rule so it could be determined. Either extend the goal line past the out of bounds and make DM's play a sure TD or require the player (or the ball) to land in bounds in the endzone and move it back to his launch point if he doesn't

[oupride]

Close enuf, TOUCHDOWN OKLAHOMA!!!!
http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/1375/dm2u.jpg (http://img37.imageshack.us/i/dm2u.jpg/)

[Crucifax Autumn]

The only thing I have to add to this is it's becoming a tradition that the sheephumper game includes a crazy acrobatic leap toward the endzone.

I like it and think someone should do it every year.

[SoonerObsession]

If it's not, we get the ball at the 1 and punch it in on 1 of the next 4 downs. Face it Poke fans!

[Jacie]

That situation will rarely have a camera angle to make a ruling, . . . so it would take 3D GPS triangulation to know for sure.

I'd like to get me one of them 3D GPS triangle thingies . . .

[misplacedsooner]

The plane of the goal extends on forever. As long as both feet were inbounds when he leaves the ground and the ball goes over the extended plane it is a touchdown.

this is exactly what i think and am swearing up and down on....ive seen this happen a couple times before and understand this to be the rule but i need proof to shove their noses in it. they already concede we would of scored but thats not even the point now,lol.

[MeMyself&Me]

If it's not, we get the ball at the 1 and punch it in on 1 of the next 4 downs. Face it Poke fans!

This is the biggest point they should think about. It may not have been a legit TD but in all likely hood, a TD was going to be scored in any case. This call was not a game changer in any way.

[MichiganSooner]

If the ball broke the plane it is a TD. Not sure if it actually did because of camera angles.

However, I think this is a dumb rule. He should have been ruled out at about the 2 or 3. Why does a runner get to be pushed out at the 1, 2, or 3 yard line, extend the ball to the side, and be awarded a TD? I know what the rulebook says but it is stupid and not fair for the following reason. The same rulebook, requires a pass receiver catch the ball with at least one foot in bounds (in college) and retain possesion of the ball even though he is blasted to the ground by a defender. If he drops the ball, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS CLEARLY BROKEN THE PLANE of the goal line, after being blasted by a cornerback....and drops the ball even though the GROUND caused the fumble...the poor receiver is not awarded a TD. Why aren't running backs treated the same way? Or, why aren't receivers treated the same way as a running back?

[Frozen Sooner]

If the ball broke the plane it is a TD. Not sure if it actually did because of camera angles.

However, I think this is a dumb rule. He should have been ruled out at about the 2 or 3. Why does a runner get to be pushed out at the 1, 2, or 3 yard line, extend the ball to the side, and be awarded a TD? I know what the rulebook says but it is stupid and not fair for the following reason. The same rulebook, requires a pass receiver catch the ball with at least one foot in bounds (in college) and retain possesion of the ball even though he is blasted to the ground by a defender. If he drops the ball, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS CLEARLY BROKEN THE PLANE of the goal line, after being blasted by a cornerback....and drops the ball even though the GROUND caused the fumble...the poor receiver is not awarded a TD. Why aren't running backs treated the same way? Or, why aren't receivers treated the same way as a running back?

Because he did not have possession.

If a running back begins to lose control of the ball before he breaks the plane and crosses the plane with the ball not back under his control then drops the ball, that is a fumble, not a touchdown.

To catch a football, you must establish possession. To establish possession, a receiver must control the ball all the way to the ground. If he does not have possession of the football inside the end zone it is not a touchdown because it is not a catch. It's ruled the exact same way all the way up and down the field.

If it were ruled a fumble when the receiver loses possession of the ball when he goes to the ground, you'd have a point, but it's not.

[BoulderSooner79]

I'd like to get me one of them 3D GPS triangle thingies . . .

They had them at half price on black Friday at bestbuy, but you had to be at the front of the line at 5am ;)

[BoulderSooner79]

In the pros, the runner needs to have the ball cross goal line inside the pylon even if his body does not. That's why you see guys try to tap the pylon with the ball if they can. It's still a judgement call that is difficult to review - and if you conclude it's not a TD, where do you place the ball? I think they should change the rule so it is easier both on the refs and lends itself to video review. I wouldn't care how they changed it since it is not a huge part of the game and the players will adjust to what they have to do.

[sooner59]

Most of us where I was sitting watched the replay and didn't think he was in. The problem for pokes, was that the ref at the goalline called it a TD. When you go to the replay booth, there is no clear angle to get anything substantial enough to overturn the ruling. Therefore, it just stood. If they want to believe we only won 20-0, then let them, and I will still laugh and snicker. We could have won 3-0 and the fact remains that they lost and got shut out.

[BoulderSooner79]

The players are going to try this because they often get the call and there is little chance for a reversal in the booth. Playing the game the way the rules are actually interpreted is smart football. What DM did was a real TD because it was called a TD and usually is called a TD. Also, it is a safe play because even if he fumbles, it is out of bounds with little chance of losing the ball.

[BoulderSooner79]

I should add that if a Poke player performed a similar leap, he would have been awarded a TD. But it is very difficult to leap over the goal line from your own side of the 50 :D

[misplacedsooner]

this is what i find, seems it used to be a rule forever before 2007.
http://www.east-coast-bias.com/2007/10/plane-of-goal-line.html