Was Gash's Fourth and Three catch OPI [Edit: Answered]
First post, but need/want a clarification. My understanding is that downfield blocking is legal if the pass is caught behind the LOS. Am I mistaken? Seems it happened earlier in the year with one of our opponents and OPI was called due to the catch being made beyond the LOS>
FROM THE EDITOR (Seth):
No it wasn't OPI. It was past the line of scrimmage so blocking isn't allowed. The question is about blocking versus getting jammed, and this falls in the category of getting jammed.
The most important aspect here is the Illinois CB initiated the contact. Note the position of the CB's arms versus those of Loveland at the release.
At that point the receiver is allowed to try to get out of that contact and the CB is expected to release him after 5 yards. Loveland did anchor for a second, which if he had continued that it becomes OPI, but he came off that contact immediately to fight inside and did not impede CB once he started going for the ball. Earlier in the game they ran the same route combination and Loveland made a catch on it. Michigan used Illinois's aggressive bump n run coverage against them but it was Illinois that created the contact and the Illinois nickelback who sat inside instead of replacing when he's in man and his buddy is initiating contact with a tight end.
Illini fans just want something to complain about. I'm charting this game and Illinois got the better of a not well officiated game. It's particularly disingenuous for Bert to be leading the Sparting because he trained his OL to put their hands outside the shoulders every play. But the guy's mom died this week so he's probably not in the best spot emotionally--when I lost a parent I wasn't in any shape to be representing myself, let alone an entire institution. And the Illini were absolutely hosed by officiating vs MSU and Purdue so they were primed to gripe. They just don't have a gripe here. This is on them.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:45 AM ^
Did they call it?
November 21st, 2022 at 10:01 AM ^
Pardon me.
Fuck OSU.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:04 AM ^
No pardon necessary, since there is never a wrong time for this sentiment.
If I could get away with having "Fuck OSU" chiseled on my tombstone, I'd do it.
November 21st, 2022 at 2:44 PM ^
I’m pretty sure you could get away with it, with no consequences for you.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:40 AM ^
Here's a way to think of it. A penalty should not be called based on the outcome of the play, but should exist in a vacuum that only considers the observed behavior. If this had occurred on any other passing play, and the ball had been thrown elsewhere, would this have any whiff of a penalty or even a complaint from Bert or Scott Frost's mom? Absolutely not.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:45 AM ^
Short answer: No, because it wasn’t flagged. Also, this is a bad post.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:16 AM ^
I respectfully disagree about it being a bad post. I didn't catch this in live action, and found both the question and Seth's answer to be interesting and educational. We've got a long stretch of time before Saturday, and this filled up a few minutes of it.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:28 AM ^
it was a bad post whose edit made it a good one
November 21st, 2022 at 10:29 AM ^
I respectfully disagree about it being a bad post. I didn't catch this in live action, and found both the question and Seth's answer to be interesting and educational. We've got a long stretch of time before Saturday, and this filled up a few minutes of it.
November 21st, 2022 at 1:15 PM ^
Take your tomatoes like a man!
November 21st, 2022 at 10:32 AM ^
Post-Quality Police have taken their valuable time to weigh in. Thank god.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:35 AM ^
Sure, if it wasn't flagged it was perfectly legal. And I'm Fielding Yost.
Hugs n' smooches,
-Every Michigan D-lineman who's had their jersey torn off without a whistle
It was legal, but B1G refs have very little to do with what's legal and what's not.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:36 AM ^
If debating one of the most critical plays in a game that keeps our conference, playoff, and National Championship hopes alive is not post-worthy, then what is?
November 21st, 2022 at 9:46 AM ^
The pass was not caught behind the LOS so downfield blocking was not allowed on that play. But IMO, the defender is the one who initiates the contact to jam the receiver at the LOS, and because of that, I don't think it was OPI. Illinois was very aggressive in man-to-man coverage at the LOS, and Michigan took advantage of it.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:54 AM ^
This is what I subscribe to. The defender clearly engaged first - not only did he raise his arms to engage, he stepped into Loveland's path. Loveland did nothing more than hand check his defender while running his route. Would have been pretty easy to redirect the corner out of the receivers path, but he didn't do that. If he had, I'd bet that OPI would've been called. Credit to the true freshman TE!
And credit to the 4th string walk-on RB for making a play.
EDIT: And credit to JJ for making a good throw! The same thing happened in the Oregon-Utah game around 2AM Sunday morning (PAC12 After Dark continues to ROCK fun football!). Same situation - really late drive to try for a game tying FG, 4th down, and a short throw to an open RB on the left flat with the TE running interference, literally the same thing! Only the moment got to senior QB Cam Rising, and he dumped in the dirt at the RB's feet. Nice job, JJ!!!
November 21st, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^
The defender stepping into Loveland's path was subtle but it is the entire key here. It doesn't matter that the two players were battling and it looked like a blocking situation, what matters is that OPI requires the offensive player to initiate contact, like if they are hunting out a defender. But in this case it was the defender hunting out the receiver
November 21st, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^
The contact is also within a yard of the line, where the receiver is usually allowed to anticipate being jammed and preemptively wrestle out of it. Never gets called.
Even that is moot since the DB initiated contact.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:54 AM ^
This was my read as well. If I'm an Illinois fan, this isn't the hill I'd choose to die on.
Meanwhile, Witherspoon was early on nearly every throw that he defended. I think some of those plays were much more black-and-white than the 4th down in the OP.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:01 AM ^
There were calls missed on both sides, especially holding (but holding is missed a lot). Honestly to me, the biggest missed call was the defensive offsides on Illinois on 4th and 6. That is almost always called even if it was close. Michigan would have retained possession for a 4th and 1 or a potential long FG. For Illinois, I think the catch by Johnson on the final drive was probably not a catch and should have been overturned. I don't think that would have made a difference on that final FG though.
November 21st, 2022 at 2:06 PM ^
I agree, I think it is fairly clear that the Johnson catch was not a catch. 5 yards wasn't making a difference for Money Moody anyways.
On the potential 4th down offside, I'd like to get upset with the official, but I can't get past how that wasn't caught for a touchdown. Sign.
Michigan also could have easily been flagged for offside on a number of our kickoffs. I was just waiting for it on that last one with 9 seconds left.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:01 AM ^
This is exactly right, despite Beilema's incredible whining on Twitter. I'll bet our coaches knew they were pressing and therefore knew we could get away with this. Great play call.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:29 AM ^
The coaches expected to "get away with" a legal play, yes.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:06 AM ^
Eh, like you said above, "being legal" and the refs getting the called right aren't the same thing. Continuing with contact that the DB initiated is risky for that reason. I wouldn't describe the situation exactly as "getting away with it", but we know what was meant here.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:04 AM ^
I don't know how one looks at the play and thinks that Loveland was not clearly blocking. You have to put on the most maize-colored glasses possible to pick up some subtleties about who initiated the contact and spin some narrative off that. Just look at Loveland. My man is not out there to run a route. He is blocking (and doing a damn fine job of it). Should it have been a penalty? Yep! Was it called? Nope! These things happen and it's usually us on the getting screwed end. We can just call this what it was, believe McCarthy would have converted the ensuing 4th and long anyway, and move on with the W.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^
I agree, but all that matters is whether the defender initiated contact, which he did. Once he initiates contact and if Loveland doesn't touch the second defender, it's not OPI.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^
I agree, but all that matters is whether the defender initiated contact, which he did. Once he initiates contact and if Loveland doesn't touch the second defender, it's not OPI.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:12 AM ^
Agree to disagree. Go look at the receiver on the other hash (Ronnie Bell?) on the same play being jammed at the LOS. Is he blocking too? LOL. Illinois was jamming our receivers hard at the LOS and got burned by it. Rubbing is racing here, and this is one of the downsides of playing aggressive man-to-man in a short yardage situation. A variation of this play is run all the time especially on the goal line (LSU used it to beat Alabama on their 2 pt conversion).
November 21st, 2022 at 10:51 AM ^
The “subtleties” matter about whether it was OPI though. Defender initiates jam within 5 yards of line of scrimmage. TE can try to run him over to beat jam, or push him to beat jam, or run around him. TE did not just run at defender matched up against Gash and try to hit him. Legal play.
From article linked below:
If the receiver comes out and clearly blocks on the defender and the other receiver cuts off that block, then it's offensive pass interference. What we saw was the contact was either initiated by the defense or mutually initiated. It wasn't a play where the offensive player clearly came out and blocked on them."
If defender initiates contact, or contact is mutually initiated, then no OPI. That clearly happened here.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:25 AM ^
The reason it’s not usually called is because it’s allowed.
If you go target a defender on a pass, that’s a different story.
November 21st, 2022 at 12:06 PM ^
I love posts that can be summed up as “I don’t know the rules at all, but it looked like a penalty to me!” I bet you think “running it up the middle” is a play call too.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^
Just to support this, a link from the Bama-Clemson title game clarifying that this is the correct reason for the no call: https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2017/01/pick_plays_rules_experts_weigh.html
November 21st, 2022 at 10:34 AM ^
The initiation of contact by Illinois absolutely makes it not a penalty. But even if Colston had initiated the contact by trying to run straight downfield, I still don't think it should be a penalty. He's clearly trying to run a route, not block. And, he did not in any way touch or interfere with the man trying to cover Gash.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:05 AM ^
The defenders outstretched arms cover the receivers outstretched arms. There was plenty of inept officiating on display yesterday, but people complaining about the receiver in this play are idiots.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:50 AM ^
Moved on. Illinois had more than their share of favorable calls including a critical holding call on a nothing burger and some pretty generous spots. Win The Game.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:01 AM ^
I thought Witherspoon too committed DPI at least twice prior to the final DPI called so the whining about that call (in which he was holding Bell's arm) was particularly eye rolly. Witherspoon was playing super aggressive all day
November 21st, 2022 at 11:41 AM ^
The first one across the middle was a bad no-call because it's not the arm being around the player, it's the fact that he ran through the WR's back before the ball got there.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:51 AM ^
Why post on a Michigan fan blog a "possible" Michigan football "infraction" that was not called under the guise of learning the rules?
Seeking more venom for our enemies (oops, I mean media, opponents, rivals)?
Don't you really want to post about the tunnel?
Go Blue.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:42 AM ^
You sound paranoid.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:51 AM ^
It could be. But it often isn't. Much more egregious things than that play have been called/not called in many, many games I've watched in my life.
If that play happened for Illinois and wasn't called I truly would not be mad. Because of the above.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:52 AM ^
I mean...probably. But, it is also a call that is called one out of every five times that it happens. Would I be upset as an Illinois fan? Probably. Did they have plenty of chances to put that game away before that point that had nothing to do with the refs? Also yes.
I would also add that since we ran the pick on Loveland's man and he didn't block Gash's man the flag was even more unlikely (not saying anything about the rules). There is also something to be said about Illinois running press coverage all game and that just kinda being what press coverage looks like for the first five yards
November 21st, 2022 at 9:53 AM ^
I do realize that the mgoboard is a community and we are all friends here, and if we were at the bar having drinks together (or at Applebee's sharing an appetizer sampler, since most of us are in our 30s or older) this question would be totally cool and nobody would gaf. But, since you immortalized the question as a board post, you are about to be destroyed by your loving fellow mgoboard members.
But to answer your main question yeah it probably was but I think that's one of those penalties that rarely gets called unless it's particularly egregious. Like I think they get 5 yards downfield but if it's close they usually won't throw the flag.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:55 AM ^
This question was beaten to death in another thread yesterday. Some posters were adamant it was PI. Others were equally a adamant it was not. It is, of course, wholly academic, just like the question of whether a couple uncalled muggings of Michigan WRs was PI or not.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:57 AM ^
It seemed to me like the DB locked up Loveland as much if not more than Loveland locked him up.
I suppose we could call that a Lovelock.
November 21st, 2022 at 9:58 AM ^
Looks like we found Bert's burner account for Mgoblog...
November 21st, 2022 at 10:01 AM ^
No, it was not OPI, and it should not have been called.
Watch the feet of the defender lined up directly over Loveland. His first two steps are to the outside so that he gets in the way of Loveland, who is trying to release outside his shoulder. The DB extends his arms to jam Loveland, and THEN Loveland's arms come up to fight the press. This is a clear case of the defender going out of his way to disrupt the receiver and the defender initiating contact, so it's not a penalty. It's shady and I'm 100% sure there was no intention to throw to Loveland on a route there but it takes advantage of the aggressive defense they were playing and is pretty much a "congratulations, you played yourself" situation for Illinois
November 21st, 2022 at 10:02 AM ^
It was PI, but only barely.
The rulebook allows the receiver to initiate contact with the defender within one yard of the line of scrimmage. This is what Loveland did. So far, so good.
But the rulebook also states that if you initiate contact within one yard, you must disengage no more than 3 yards past the line of scrimmage. Looking at the video, Loveland started to disengage around 4 yards past the LOS.
It's very difficult for the refs to tell the difference between 3 and 4 yards past the line of scrimmage, all while trying to observe everything else going on in the field of play in real time. It was close and they let it slide. But, technically, according to the rulebook, it was PI, barely.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:37 AM ^
The obvious caveat to apply here however, is that the DB is still engaged, and certainly the receiver is able to continue to fight through that.
November 21st, 2022 at 11:46 AM ^
The DB initiated contact, not the other way around.
November 21st, 2022 at 10:10 AM ^
Did they throw a flag? No? Then it was legal.
The end.