ESPN just showed the Duke td and the said "Miami ran back the kickoff but it was called back." Great reporting. Even if it had been called back, how do you not show it?
Amazing that there were no penalties. What a play. It's a bonus to see another "top" team in the ACC fall - especially to a team beaten by an AAC school.
whaler11 said:No penalties called. There are two blatent blocks in the back. One early and one at the end.
No penalties called. There are two blatent blocks in the back. One early and one at the end.
you thought the one in the end was a block in the back? I thought it was decleater. Clean. Didn't see the one early.No penalties called. There are two blatent blocks in the back. One early and one at the end.
I see it now near the sideline.you thought the one in the end was a block in the back? I thought it was decleater. Clean. Didn't see the one early.
I see it now near the sideline.
It was a poorly officiated game but let's please not make it sound like Duke got screwed. They had some calls go their way earlier that put them up, and there is really no excuse for allowing that to happen regardless of whether there were some missed calls.
I had no idea you could review penalties. Seems like the refs were just making s*** up as they went along in that replay.
I was thinking the same thing when i saw it, but Cutcliffe wasn't going crazy so maybe there was something I didn't know. I looked it up, and it appears that only Targeting Penalties are reviewable, and only from the perspective of whether to disqualify someone from the game.
The strange thing is that not a single sports journalist that I have found has commented either way on whether penalties are reviewable, which means most of them have no idea and are too lazy to look it up. Isn't that their job?