Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Intentional Grounding

InTheBuff

InTheBuff

Club Member
Club Member
I was at the game and haven't seen it replayed on TV.

Can somebody please explain to me why CSU's QB didn't get called for intentional grounding but Wood did ?

From what I saw it looked like both QBs threw the ball in the vicinity of a receiver.
CU getting called on the drive at the time was a real killer.
 
I was confused as well. Wood's pass seemed closer to the receiver then the CSU QB's. Only difference I can see was that Wood was in the grasp as he threw it. The CSU qb was still scrambling.
 
I was more pissed about the 3 passes to PRich where he had a Ram draped on him and no PI call...
 
BuffClass90 said:
That was one of the worst officiated games I've ever seen. They were terrible.
Click to expand...

The only call they got right was the Targeting call. Glad they didn't eject the kid. On one of Connor's scrambles he stepped out about half way through the run and they didn't review it. I saw it in the one quick replay they showed.
 
Where was the officiating crew from?

FlatironsBuff said:
Was a bs call. Either both are bad or both are good. Was very poor one sided officiating
Click to expand...

Mtn West crew or Pac 12?

I thought the let them play for the most part. I would of liked a flag for taunting, but that is just my fandom seeping through.
 
pcbuff said:
Mtn West crew or Pac 12?


I thought the let them play for the most part. I would of liked a flag for taunting, but that is just my fandom seeping through.
Click to expand...

MWC. I thought it was Pac-12 by how poor the officiating was.
 
I just thought it was bad to let Grayson's slip but then call it late in the game giving csu another chance.
This was just after csu had gone for it on 4th down at mid-field and was stuffed.
 
If I remember correctly, Grayson's pass went past the LOS and Wood's didn't. I thought you had to get outside the tackles and pas the LOS to avoid intentional grounding. Not sure what happens if you hit your target in the feet behind the LOS though (Wood was close).
 
It was the wrong call both times. Grayson's pass hit his o-lineman on the fly without being batted, which I believe is an automatic penalty, is it not? Not to mention the "intended receiver" was blocking at the time of the pass. Wood's pass was short of the mark, but there was a receiver coming back to the ball when it hit the ground. Just a terrible call.

I did think the officiating was terrible, I didn't think it was one-sided, though. There were some blown calls both ways.
 
XIIfan said:
If I remember correctly, Grayson's pass went past the LOS and Wood's didn't. I thought you had to get outside the tackles and pas the LOS to avoid intentional grounding. Not sure what happens if you hit your target in the feet behind the LOS though (Wood was close).
Click to expand...

Grayson's pass didn't cross the LOS either. It hit his o-lineman in the foot.
 
pcbuff said:
Mtn West crew or Pac 12?

I thought the let them play for the most part. I would of liked a flag for taunting, but that is just my fandom seeping through.
Click to expand...
YES!!!! That was another call they didn't make. PRich in the end zone, defender breaks it up, and then is double finger pointing in PRichs face and taunting...and...circkets. Ref right there, nothing done about it. Pissed me off. Some of the worst tauting I have ever seen after a play and they sit on their flags. That was crap.
 
After watching the DVR, both calls were technically correct. The RB was within 1 or two yards of where the ball was thrown by Grayson, on Wood's the ball was more like 10 yards away even though he threw it in the general direction, it wasn't in the vicinity of a receiver. As for illegal touching (pass hitting the lineman's foot), the touching must have been intentional according to the rule book.
 
In film I would make him a hero as we watched that.

FlatironsBuff said:
YES!!!! That was another call they didn't make. PRich in the end zone, defender breaks it up, and then is double finger pointing in PRichs face and taunting...and...circkets. Ref right there, nothing done about it. Pissed me off. Some of the worst tauting I have ever seen after a play and they sit on their flags. That was crap.
Click to expand...

Seriously, I would have punched the guy. PRich seems to be doing it right!
 
AeroBuff99 said:
After watching the DVR, both calls were technically correct. The RB was within 1 or two yards of where the ball was thrown by Grayson, on Wood's the ball was more like 10 yards away even though he threw it in the general direction, it wasn't in the vicinity of a receiver. As for illegal touching (pass hitting the lineman's foot), the touching must have been intentional according to the rule book.
Click to expand...

This is exactly right.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
After watching the DVR, both calls were technically correct. The RB was within 1 or two yards of where the ball was thrown by Grayson, on Wood's the ball was more like 10 yards away even though he threw it in the general direction, it wasn't in the vicinity of a receiver. As for illegal touching (pass hitting the lineman's foot), the touching must have been intentional according to the rule book.
Click to expand...

But the ball doesn't have to be in the vicinity of a receiver. It has to have been INTENDED to be in the vicinity of a receiver. Wood was clearing attempting to get the ball to Murphy, but due to the pressure made an inaccurate throw. I didn't think either play was IG....
 
Junction said:
But the ball doesn't have to be in the vicinity of a receiver. It has to have been INTENDED to be in the vicinity of a receiver. Wood was clearing attempting to get the ball to Murphy, but due to the pressure made an inaccurate throw. I didn't think either play was IG....
Click to expand...

Nope, rule 7.3.2.h clearly states "A forward pass is illegal if the passer to conserve yardage throws the ball forward into an area where there is no eligible Team A receiver."
 
AeroBuff99 said:
Nope, rule 7.3.2.h clearly states "A forward pass is illegal if the passer to conserve yardage throws the ball forward into an area where there is no eligible Team A receiver."
Click to expand...

Except there was a eligible receiver there, and the ball would have made it to him had Connor not gotten hit as he was throwing it.
 
I perceived it as Conner threw it away to avoid the sack. Not that he was throwing it when he got hit.
 
Watching it live, was pretty clear that Wood was going to get called for intentional grounding there. Both were the correct calls.
 
rolandftw said:
Watching it live, was pretty clear that Wood was going to get called for intentional grounding there. Both were the correct calls.
Click to expand...

Apparently you missed the TV camera angle from directly behind wood, showing Murphy crossing on his pattern and the ball thrown in his direction (with Wood's eyes trained on Murphy). It was an inaccurate throw. It was not intentional grounding, certainly no more so than when GiGi threw a ball directly at the feet of a RB engaged in a block for the Rams....
 
The idea that Wood didn't throw it toward a receiver is ridiculous.

By you guys' logic, every time a QB is hit while throwing the ball, it should be grounding - assuming the ball doesn't land at someone's feet.
 
Alfred91 said:
The idea that Wood didn't throw it toward a receiver is ridiculous.

By you guys' logic, every time a QB is hit while throwing the ball, it should be grounding - assuming the ball doesn't land at someone's feet.
Click to expand...

No one said it wasn't thrown towards a receiver. However, the ball landed at least ten yards from the receiver. It wasn't remotely close. Hence, the correctly called intentional grounding penalty.
 
azbuff said:
No one said it wasn't thrown towards a receiver. However, the ball landed at least ten yards from the receiver. It wasn't remotely close. Hence, the correctly called intentional grounding penalty.
Click to expand...

Because he was hit as he was throwing the ball
 
'Tini said:
Because he was hit as he was throwing the ball
Click to expand...

Okay, if you can honestly watch the replay and conclude Wood wasn't just trying to get rid of the ball (i.e., he was actually trying to complete that pass). He threw it in the direction of the receiver to avoid the intentional grounding penalty, he just didn't throw it close enough. I have a sneaking suspicion you would feel differently about the play if the tables were turned.
 
I only saw the play at the game but I thought Wood was getting hit before he started the throw, and before being taken down tried to toss the ball towards a receiver but really didn't get that close.
 
I guess I'm the only one who noticed Wood lost control of the ball and kind of pushed it forward. We may have dodged a bullet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top