question about the O.T. Pick

[Bully13]

since the OT rules state " each team gets a possession from it's opponent's 25 yd line", didn't the game actually end when Calhoun gained possession on the INT? upig's possession definitely ended at that point.

so would it have mattered if Calhoun had fumbled during his attempt to score? and had he scored, would those points have counted?

oh and by the way, #76 for upig was impressive getting downfiled to tackle calhoun on the play. how in the hell he got down there to do that I'll never know. big nasty's usually don't have those kind of wheels. especially white ones.

[engie]

Yes, it was over as soon as we gained possession and the play was blown dead. I was yelling at the TV for Calhoun to fall down or run out of bounds the whole time. Was a very dumb football play on his part...

I think, technically, he could have fumbled -- and they could have still scored on the play...

[Fader21]

The ball is still alive I believe. So if he fumbled then yes they could have scored. This might not be right though but I did not hear a whistle also

[gravedigger]

I can only guess, but I think that if he fumbled and ark got it back, it would have been ruled 1st down Arkansas with a chance again to score. However you make a great point. One possession means one possession, not two and the fact we possessed the ball should have nullified that opportunity.

The other answer is yes, the 6 points would have counted if Calhoun had scored.

I think it would be a great question to ask on the air to see how many different responses you'd get.

[gravedigger]

I think you are right Engie, but had he fumbled and they regained possession, that stadium would have been in riot mode when the decision that the game was over came down.

[Quaoarsking]

I can only guess, but I think that if he fumbled and ark got it back, it would have been ruled 1st down Arkansas with a chance again to score. However you make a great point. One possession means one possession, not two and the fact we possessed the ball should have nullified that opportunity.

The other answer is yes, the 6 points would have counted if Calhoun had scored.

I think it would be a great question to ask on the air to see how many different responses you'd get.

They would have had to pick it up and score on the same play. They would not have gotten a fresh 1st down.

[Bully13]

"one possession each" means "one possession each" maybe they need to update the rule book.

I don't see how they could have given us points if calhoun scored because that was our 2nd possession of O.T. and upig had only 1. seems to be outside the rules. also, I don't see how they could have picked up the ball in the event calhoun fumbled and scored because based on the way the rules are written, the game ended once calhoun gained possession from the pick. once one team has completed their possesion (which in this case was us), then once the other team completes their possession, the game should be over based on the way the rule is written. unless there are some other written o.t. rules I'm not aware of.

[WeWillScrewItUp]

They would have had to pick it up and score on the same play. They would not have gotten a fresh 1st down.

This is also my understanding of the rule.

[engie]

This is also my understanding of the rule.

Same here... Essentially, they had to score on that 4th down play...

[BoomBoom]

since the OT rules state " each team gets a possession from it's opponent's 25 yd line", didn't the game actually end when Calhoun gained possession on the INT? upig's possession definitely ended at that point.

so would it have mattered if Calhoun had fumbled during his attempt to score? and had he scored, would those points have counted?

oh and by the way, #76 for upig was impressive getting downfiled to tackle calhoun on the play. how in the hell he got down there to do that I'll never know. big nasty's usually don't have those kind of wheels. especially white ones.

From the NCAA rulebook, overtime section:

"Possession series: Each team retains the ball during a possession series until
it scores or fails to make a first down. The ball remains alive after a change
of team possession until it is declared dead. However, Team A may not have
a first and 10 if it again possesses the ball after a change of team possession
(A.R. 3-1-3-I-IX)."

So yes, they could have recovered a fumble from Calhoun and scored if the play never became dead, but they would not have gotten a fresh set of downs.

[Ronny]

...Calhoun made the INT MSU had won the game.

Calhoun was a nut for running down field with the ball; he was essentially running down the field in a game that was finished.

Our coaches need to educate our players on stuff like this. Calhoun should have immediately gone to the ground after he made the INT. His INT was synonymous with the game being over. Hope the coaches convey this tidbit to the MSU players before Thurs.

[smootness]

I think you are right Engie, but had he fumbled and they regained possession, that stadium would have been in riot mode when the decision that the game was over came down.

No, they wouldn't have been. It's a pretty commonly known rule that if you turn it over in OT and the other team scores on their possession, the game is over.

[Bully13]

No, they wouldn't have been. It's a pretty commonly known rule that if you turn it over in OT and the other team scores on their possession, the game is over.

I think what engie was talking about is if calhoun had fumbled and upig recovered but not scored, they would not have had a fresh set of downs. ball game would have been over.

[Martianlander]

From the NCAA rulebook, overtime section:

"Possession series: Each team retains the ball during a possession series until
it scores or fails to make a first down. The ball remains alive after a change
of team possession until it is declared dead. However, Team A may not have
a first and 10 if it again possesses the ball after a change of team possession
(A.R. 3-1-3-I-IX)."

So yes, they could have recovered a fumble from Calhoun and scored if the play never became dead, but they would not have gotten a fresh set of downs.

Absolutely correct. Would have been unusual but Calhoun should have gone down immediately. Saw this kind of play (not in OT) cost San Diego a playoff game against New England a few years ago.

[Sienfield]

Yep, everybody knows that.