Concurrent Holding Call on Roughing the Snapper
While it’s a moot point as far as the final score is concerned (and with how the game proceeded overall), I am genuinely curious about this.
On the “roughing the snapper” penalty, there was also a holding penalty against #27 on Wisconsin. I checked the video and he was not back on the return, nor did the ref state during the call that the hold occurred after the punt/during the return. In fact, the punt was fair caught.
I only ask because if the “roughing the snapper” penalty was not called (Wisky fans are apoplectic to the point that they assert it turned the game), if it occurred before the punt, the drive would have continued anyway. Thus, it’s not as critical of a call as some think. However, it’s probably less than likely for a defense to hold before a punt.
Does anyone have any insight as to whether it occurred before or after the punt?
October 14th, 2018 at 12:27 PM ^
Holding penalties are pretty much never called before the punt anymore. I can't even remember the last one that was called. Wisconsin fans are right, it did turn the game. It continued a drive that led to Michigan getting an insurmountable two-score lead with the way the defense was playing. In any case, it was a clear as day roughing the punter penalty, as you're not allowed to make contact with the snapper at all and they bowled Cheeseman over.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:35 PM ^
It didn't turn the game. Wisconsin didn't look like winners before then either. It merely worked to cement the direction in which the game was going anyway.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:50 PM ^
Yes, Michigan was clearly the superior team to that point. Wisconsin would've still been getting the ball back down just one score. Does Michigan go on to win the game in either case? Yes, probably, but the game without question took on a different tenor after the score.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:00 PM ^
But "turned the game" means it was headed in one direction, and that event "turned" that direction. We were already looking like the better team to that point. it certainly helped our cause, but it didn't turn anything.
October 14th, 2018 at 9:03 PM ^
Yeah, plus they fair caught that punt inside the 10. Am I supposed to believe that is where they were going to turn it around and none of the 24 points we scored after that would have happened?
October 14th, 2018 at 12:38 PM ^
Was the unspeakable MSU punt tragedy something similar along the lines of what happened yesterday?
October 14th, 2018 at 12:52 PM ^
In my opinion having seen both on TV, the MSU was far worse.
October 14th, 2018 at 9:17 PM ^
It was. Fowler even mentioned that it should have been called on that play, if only to show how seldom it is called.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:46 PM ^
That's not quite right. You can't directly hit the snapper (in an obvious kick formation) until 1 full second after the snap.
https://longsnap.com/2010/08/28/nfl-and-ncaa-rules-regarding-snappers/
October 14th, 2018 at 12:56 PM ^
Thanks for the clarification. In this case, Wisconsin still hit him immediately.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:29 PM ^
The flag was thrown near the line of scrimmage, toward the sideline. It’s possible he was trying to jam the gunner and grabbed him; if that were the case, it could well have happened before the punt.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:38 PM ^
Well, while it did change the dynamic of the game to waaaaaay worse for Wiscy, the game was gonna probably end with UofM winning by pretty much the same score.
Unlike that one year somebody roughed UofM's snapper, and it wasn't called, and in 7 seconds our win probability dropped by 835,000% and instantly it was 0-1 against rivals.
This is Karmatic regression to the mean!
October 14th, 2018 at 9:18 PM ^
Regression maybe, but a LONG way to go before I stop feeling mean about it!
October 14th, 2018 at 12:43 PM ^
I don't know but personally I can't stand how draconian football rules are in that they award unearned yardage and a fresh set of downs for a penalty like that. I know we benefited from it but its not a good feeling as a fan. It should be a personal foul to the player. The only thing worse is when teams get stopped on 3rd down then get rewarded for something that the other team did after the play or away from the ball/play.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:53 PM ^
I get that it feels bad, and that there's no sense of just deserts for the benefiting team, but that's how penalties work: by penalizing. If you don't want to extend a drive, don't rough the snapper, don't jump offsides on 4th and 4, don't hold a tight end away from the play, etc. Boneheaded penalties are frustrating, but that's not an argument for giving them all mulligans.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:53 PM ^
So you want the soccer yellow card system? I'm not sure that would work. So a defense could rack up 11-14 yellow cards a game and no yardage? We're trying to make the game safer.
The roughing the snapper is a player safety concern. It wasn't a strong call, but it probably needs to be called
October 14th, 2018 at 1:03 PM ^
So you're proposing a personal foul on the player that doesn't penalize the team at all? I don't understand. What would keep special teams players from going buck wild and attacking the snapper or punter on a kick like that? If I got a personal foul that didn't penalize the team (I don't even know what that would be) I would rough the kicker on every single punt.
October 14th, 2018 at 9:05 PM ^
Screw the kicker, every receiver is getting tackled on 3rd down and long
October 14th, 2018 at 1:04 PM ^
Nothing's as bad as the pass interference rules when applied to a terrible pass that the WR sees first and stops and comes back to, forcing the defender into pass interference.
Unlike roughing the snapper, this happens all the time.
The offense gets rewarded for a terrible pass.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:21 PM ^
Why is that a terrible penalty? DB needs to look at the ball, if he was doing that, that penalty would never happen. The rules aren't written for "good" throws. The DB can't interfere with the receiver regardless of how good the throw was.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:28 PM ^
I think that the defense should be allowed their own momentum. If the pass forces you to stop and run into the defender who is running in a straight line, it should just be a no call
October 14th, 2018 at 1:36 PM ^
That's ridiculous. It's the defender's responsibility to track the ball just like the WR. You can't write rules assuming a perfect pass every time. The answer to your issue is to have the defender play the ball not the receiver. When you play the receiver, you get yourself in PI trouble. If you play the ball, you'll slow down just like the receiver.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:55 PM ^
Unless you’ve been living as a hermit for the last 5 years. You would never feel bad as a Michigan fan for any penalty called. Because for three whole quarters yesterday Wisconsin was not called for one hold and Chase was held, basically all night! It’s ridiculous to feel bad for a real penalty to be called for your team. If, it’s your team.
October 14th, 2018 at 2:11 PM ^
It's a fairness issue as well; the act of snapping a ball that hard and that far behind you and then re-dressing your stance sufficiently to have a reasonable chance to absorb a rusher has to be one of the hardest jobs in football. If it weren't a yardage penalty, every team would exploit it every chance they got, ala sparty in 2015.
Screw that. It definitely should carry a yardage penalty.
October 14th, 2018 at 12:52 PM ^
I don’t know but I think it cool that the name of our long snapper is Cheesman. Perfect for this game. How did Wisconsin not recruit him?
October 14th, 2018 at 12:56 PM ^
A Cheeseman direct snap to Wildgoose is the Platonic ideal of trick plays.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:50 PM ^
But only after a BiadAsz block clears the way.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:10 PM ^
Cheeseman owns Wisconsin.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:15 PM ^
I never understand the over aggressiveness on punting unless it is your last chance or your offense is totally incompetent. It is nice to block a punt but the risk of running into the punter is far more than blocking it. And what is the point of pushing the long snapper back.
October 14th, 2018 at 1:39 PM ^
I believe the ref said it occurred during the return. The lack of consultation with Harbaugh also indicates the hold occurred during the return and the decision was a no brainer.
October 14th, 2018 at 2:27 PM ^
It would be a no-brainer either way because roughing the snapper carries more yards. That said, I don’t recall seeing a holding call ever being called before the punt when it’s holding a gunner like that. Not only would it be moderately hard to figure out if it was before the punt in real time, but I think refs give the benefit to the returning team since that kind of hold doesn’t negatively impact the punt at all (just like how holds that are away from, and not impacting the play, are usually ignored, per NCAA guidance).
October 14th, 2018 at 1:45 PM ^
I haven't seen a replay, but live it looked like two Badgers tackled Watson right off the line of scrimmage. He didn't get far, so it was near the line of scrimmage and possibly before the ball was kicked.
October 14th, 2018 at 2:22 PM ^
I don’t know about the nuances of what should have been called and when, but this penalty did change the momentum of the game. Glad that we were finally the beneficiary of such a call in a big game. Normally we are on the other end of such circumstances.
October 14th, 2018 at 2:42 PM ^
Speaking of apoplectic, the Wisconsin fan in front of me last night damn near lost his mind when that call was made.
October 14th, 2018 at 7:38 PM ^
Roughing the snapper? I don't believe in violence against women...
Ba BOOM boom!
I'll show myself out...