Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

This has been analysed to death and yet generally very poorly (O’Hara included). Guehi makes a failed challenge (fails to connect with the ball) that then turns into an attempted block. In doing so, he stands on Solanke’s standing foot before anything else occurs (which ends up costing Solanke... his balance). Solanke makes contact with Guehi’s leg AND with the ball but it’s inconclusive which contact was made first. Even if you slowed it down frame by frame, it might not be clear. Given a goal was awarded and there was inconclusive video to clearly and obviously demonstrate a foul from Solanke, you go with the on field decision. If the video had clearly and obviously shown contact on Guehi’s leg first (before Solanke kicks the ball) then the correct decision would actually be penalty kick given Guehi’s initial challenge was careless (which occurred first). Man City players are claiming corruption (insane levels of irony) for a totally correct decision.show more

Magic hat 🎩

29,171 subscribers

155,187 views • 8 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Education Sports

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🚨🔵Ex-PGMOL chief reveals why Chelsea were not awarded a penalty According to former PGMOL chief and FIFA referee Keith Hackett, the decision not to give Chelsea a penalty was correct because there was not enough evidence that the ball actually struck Ajayi’s hand. Referee Farai Hallam dismissed the claims, with VAR deciding not to intervene. “It is evident that the penalty kick was not awarded because it is not definitive that the ball came into contact with the hand,” Hackett told Football Insider. “So correct decision not to award a penalty kick. Clearly, had contact been made, then the extended arm away from the defender's body would be a signal for the referee and VAR to award a penalty kick. “No contact with the hand/arm therefore there is no offence - no penalty kick.”

🚨🔵Ex-PGMOL chief reveals why Chelsea were not awarded a penalty According to former PGMOL chief and FIFA referee Keith Hackett, the decision not to give Chelsea a penalty was correct because there was not enough evidence that the ball actually struck Ajayi’s hand. Referee Farai Hallam dismissed the claims, with VAR deciding not to intervene. “It is evident that the penalty kick was not awarded because it is not definitive that the ball came into contact with the hand,” Hackett told Football Insider. “So correct decision not to award a penalty kick. Clearly, had contact been made, then the extended arm away from the defender's body would be a signal for the referee and VAR to award a penalty kick. “No contact with the hand/arm therefore there is no offence - no penalty kick.”

Trinity

112,228 views • 18 days ago

“Was it a conscious decision not to pit or just an error or missed the moment?” Andrea Stella: “It was a decision. It was a decision not to pit and in fairness we didn't expect everyone else to pit. Obviously everyone else behind you pits then it makes it pitting like definitely the right thing to do. Obviously when you are the lead car you don't know exactly what the others are going to do. There could have been a loss for Lando in pitting in case we were pitting both cars with the double stack. But effectively the main reason was related to not expecting everyone else to pit. So it was a decision but as a matter of fact it wasn't the correct decision.” #QatarGP

“Was it a conscious decision not to pit or just an error or missed the moment?” Andrea Stella: “It was a decision. It was a decision not to pit and in fairness we didn't expect everyone else to pit. Obviously everyone else behind you pits then it makes it pitting like definitely the right thing to do. Obviously when you are the lead car you don't know exactly what the others are going to do. There could have been a loss for Lando in pitting in case we were pitting both cars with the double stack. But effectively the main reason was related to not expecting everyone else to pit. So it was a decision but as a matter of fact it wasn't the correct decision.” #QatarGP

naenia ¹ ⁶³

250,486 views • 10 months ago

A number of you have asked about the call at the end of the 1st Half of the Bethel Football game at NCC Football in which there was a potential fumble/TD wiped off the board for Bethel that eventually led to no score by the Royals. The full play and a breakdown of issues with the call are in the video below. To be clear, though: 1) It appears that the receiver did not possess the ball at or past the NCC 8, which was needed for the 1st Down (the officials gave the ball to Bethel at the 8 after the overturn, awarding a 1st down). 2) It seems like the wing official was marking forward progress but may not have blown his whistle. It is unclear how he affected the overturn decision in the first place. What is clear is that the officials on the field awarded a fumble and TD, meaning they did not rule forward progress had been stopped. As a result, this aspect of the play is NOT reviewable by rule, as it is a judgment call in real time. 3) No TD should have been awarded before the review in the first place, as the ball clearly was fumbled to the lineman, and fumbles on 4th down in college football can only be advanced by the fumbling player. The ball would have been marked at the spot of the fumble in that case. 4) The officials missed a clear Roughing the Passer call, as the NCC defender went for the Bethel QB's legs while he was in his passing stance. This would have been a half-the-distance and automatic-first-down foul. If this play was called correctly in the first place, it should have been called dead with forward progress stopped at the 8 1/2 yard line and the Roughing foul pushing the ball to the 4 1/4 yard line, 1st & Goal Bethel, with the clock stopped due to penalty. No matter what, though, the Roughing penalty would have ensured Bethel had the ball closer to the goal with 16 seconds left (when forward progress stoppage should have been called). In The (D3FB) Huddle #d3fb

A number of you have asked about the call at the end of the 1st Half of the Bethel Football game at NCC Football in which there was a potential fumble/TD wiped off the board for Bethel that eventually led to no score by the Royals. The full play and a breakdown of issues with the call are in the video below. To be clear, though: 1) It appears that the receiver did not possess the ball at or past the NCC 8, which was needed for the 1st Down (the officials gave the ball to Bethel at the 8 after the overturn, awarding a 1st down). 2) It seems like the wing official was marking forward progress but may not have blown his whistle. It is unclear how he affected the overturn decision in the first place. What is clear is that the officials on the field awarded a fumble and TD, meaning they did not rule forward progress had been stopped. As a result, this aspect of the play is NOT reviewable by rule, as it is a judgment call in real time. 3) No TD should have been awarded before the review in the first place, as the ball clearly was fumbled to the lineman, and fumbles on 4th down in college football can only be advanced by the fumbling player. The ball would have been marked at the spot of the fumble in that case. 4) The officials missed a clear Roughing the Passer call, as the NCC defender went for the Bethel QB's legs while he was in his passing stance. This would have been a half-the-distance and automatic-first-down foul. If this play was called correctly in the first place, it should have been called dead with forward progress stopped at the 8 1/2 yard line and the Roughing foul pushing the ball to the 4 1/4 yard line, 1st & Goal Bethel, with the clock stopped due to penalty. No matter what, though, the Roughing penalty would have ensured Bethel had the ball closer to the goal with 16 seconds left (when forward progress stoppage should have been called). In The (D3FB) Huddle #d3fb

Frank Rossi

28,468 views • 9 months ago

Croatia was kicked out of the match because Matanic touched the ball with his hair AND the referee had to decide if Viega’s contact with the ball is considered “deliberate play”. If yes, the goal was correct, but the referee decided “no”. But what are the rules saying? In FIFA and IFAB Laws of the Game, deliberate play is when a player has control of the ball and attempts to pass, gain possession, or clear it. *‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of: •passing the ball to a team-mate; •gaining possession of the ball; or •clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it) ➡️clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it) And that’s what Viega did. He cleared the ball. But a Croatian player managed to intercept the ball before it went out of play; that led to the goal. Croatia was robbed. Source in comments.

Croatia was kicked out of the match because Matanic touched the ball with his hair AND the referee had to decide if Viega’s contact with the ball is considered “deliberate play”. If yes, the goal was correct, but the referee decided “no”. But what are the rules saying? In FIFA and IFAB Laws of the Game, deliberate play is when a player has control of the ball and attempts to pass, gain possession, or clear it. *‘Deliberate play’ (excluding deliberate handball) is when a player has control of the ball with the possibility of: •passing the ball to a team-mate; •gaining possession of the ball; or •clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it) ➡️clearing the ball (e.g. by kicking or heading it) And that’s what Viega did. He cleared the ball. But a Croatian player managed to intercept the ball before it went out of play; that led to the goal. Croatia was robbed. Source in comments.

Goran Majić

35,165 views • 2 months ago

This shows it perfectly FOUL 1- OUTSIDE penalty area and DOGSO. Should be red card for this 🔴 • Mikey Moore plants his LEFT foot • Livingston player comes from behind so can’t win the ball without taking the player first • Livi player kicks Moore’s left leg, fouling him and gets nowhere near the ball • Moore is swinging his leg back to try get a shot at goal • For this alone, it should’ve been a free kick and a red card for DOGSO 🔴 But then you have- FOUL 2- INSIDE the area • The Livi players right leg fouls Mikey Moore inside the box as he’s getting his shot away and stops the shot by fouling him • You can clearly see the Livi players LEFT hand is ON the line while his RIGHT leg trips Moore up INSIDE the box • Even the Livi players LEFT foot clips Moore AGAIN on the way down The outcome • It’s a clear penalty as he’s clearly fouled INSIDE the box at least ONCE • It’s a yellow card 🟡 and not red as he’s made a genuine attempt for the ball and missed so there can’t be double jeopardy But the ref and VAR could’ve took the easy way out and said it’s a foul outside and a red card but they went down the cheating route and gave nothing 😂

This shows it perfectly FOUL 1- OUTSIDE penalty area and DOGSO. Should be red card for this 🔴 • Mikey Moore plants his LEFT foot • Livingston player comes from behind so can’t win the ball without taking the player first • Livi player kicks Moore’s left leg, fouling him and gets nowhere near the ball • Moore is swinging his leg back to try get a shot at goal • For this alone, it should’ve been a free kick and a red card for DOGSO 🔴 But then you have- FOUL 2- INSIDE the area • The Livi players right leg fouls Mikey Moore inside the box as he’s getting his shot away and stops the shot by fouling him • You can clearly see the Livi players LEFT hand is ON the line while his RIGHT leg trips Moore up INSIDE the box • Even the Livi players LEFT foot clips Moore AGAIN on the way down The outcome • It’s a clear penalty as he’s clearly fouled INSIDE the box at least ONCE • It’s a yellow card 🟡 and not red as he’s made a genuine attempt for the ball and missed so there can’t be double jeopardy But the ref and VAR could’ve took the easy way out and said it’s a foul outside and a red card but they went down the cheating route and gave nothing 😂

Rangers Spares

82,683 views • 7 months ago

Cam Skattebo not on the field for the Giants to end the first half has my mind in a pretzel. The Giants started the drive after a turnover with Tracy on the field. This may have been because it was an outside run design they liked for him. They swap in Skattebo, who clearly would be fresh for a 1st and 5 run. Nothing there but run for 0. 2 Minute warning. With the long timeout, clearly Skattebo would be fresh. They swap in Najee Harris and run the ball from 22 personnel on 2nd and 5. You would think a heavy personnel run against a tough look would be a Skattebo specialty. Gain of 3. 3rd and 2, Skattebo still not in. Najee Harris stays in the game. They decide to run the ball against a cover 0 look that had basically no chance. Loss of 3. Giants could have called timeout before the snap and discussed because this play was dead before the snap by alignment. If I was running into a bad look, I certainly would want Skattebo in as his yards after contact skill would be helpful.

Cam Skattebo not on the field for the Giants to end the first half has my mind in a pretzel. The Giants started the drive after a turnover with Tracy on the field. This may have been because it was an outside run design they liked for him. They swap in Skattebo, who clearly would be fresh for a 1st and 5 run. Nothing there but run for 0. 2 Minute warning. With the long timeout, clearly Skattebo would be fresh. They swap in Najee Harris and run the ball from 22 personnel on 2nd and 5. You would think a heavy personnel run against a tough look would be a Skattebo specialty. Gain of 3. 3rd and 2, Skattebo still not in. Najee Harris stays in the game. They decide to run the ball against a cover 0 look that had basically no chance. Loss of 3. Giants could have called timeout before the snap and discussed because this play was dead before the snap by alignment. If I was running into a bad look, I certainly would want Skattebo in as his yards after contact skill would be helpful.

Ryan Paganetti

44,345 views • 9 days ago

My take: the ball hitting a hand is not always a handball offence. You have to either 1.) deliberately touch the ball with your hand, or 2.) ball hits your hand/arm when it's made your body unnaturally bigger. This isn't deliberate, and if the ball hits his hand - which is on his forehead in the middle of a normal footballing challenge - he hasn't made his body unnaturally bigger. Because the ball would have hit his head anyway, so his hand on his head does not make his body unnaturally bigger. Furthermore, VAR can only recommend an on-field review for a clear and obvious error. There is only one camera angle available, which does not show that the referee has missed a clear and obvious error. We can't see clearly where the ball hits. This is categorically not what VAR was brought in for, and it all needs ripped up in the summer. This is a really poor look for Scottish football, as you can see from the international condemnation online since the game. You really have to feel for Hearts. Unless you're a Celtic fan of course, that must have been class. But if you're not a Celtic fan. Deary me. Could be a generation defining decision, never mind season defining!

My take: the ball hitting a hand is not always a handball offence. You have to either 1.) deliberately touch the ball with your hand, or 2.) ball hits your hand/arm when it's made your body unnaturally bigger. This isn't deliberate, and if the ball hits his hand - which is on his forehead in the middle of a normal footballing challenge - he hasn't made his body unnaturally bigger. Because the ball would have hit his head anyway, so his hand on his head does not make his body unnaturally bigger. Furthermore, VAR can only recommend an on-field review for a clear and obvious error. There is only one camera angle available, which does not show that the referee has missed a clear and obvious error. We can't see clearly where the ball hits. This is categorically not what VAR was brought in for, and it all needs ripped up in the summer. This is a really poor look for Scottish football, as you can see from the international condemnation online since the game. You really have to feel for Hearts. Unless you're a Celtic fan of course, that must have been class. But if you're not a Celtic fan. Deary me. Could be a generation defining decision, never mind season defining!

Scotland’s Coefficient

421,017 views • 4 months ago

Caleb Williams Appears to be a right hamstring strain. This is likely to be a significant injury given the fact that it was non-contact (after his right leg was tripped up) and he was writhing in pain and then could not put any weight on that right leg. This is probably a grade 2 hamstring strain, which is a partial tear, but there’s a possibility this is a grade 3, which is what happened to Dak Prescott, that required season-ending surgery. Those aren’t common but possible. Video coming soon on TheInjuryExpertz

Caleb Williams Appears to be a right hamstring strain. This is likely to be a significant injury given the fact that it was non-contact (after his right leg was tripped up) and he was writhing in pain and then could not put any weight on that right leg. This is probably a grade 2 hamstring strain, which is a partial tear, but there’s a possibility this is a grade 3, which is what happened to Dak Prescott, that required season-ending surgery. Those aren’t common but possible. Video coming soon on TheInjuryExpertz

Jesse Morse, M.D.

1,287,263 views • 10 days ago

Iran's as their last minute goal vs Egypt was overturned by VAR denying them a crucial victory that would have guaranteed an advancement out of groups. The player was in an offsides position when the ball was played by the original shooter so he cannot play the ball on the rebound. That is if there is a deflection. There is an exception: If a defending player deliberately plays or controls the ball (such as attempting a back-pass or a controlled clearance) and it falls to you, the offside is reset, and you can legally play the ball. That obviously doesn’t happen here. It’s a clear deflection and rebound in this play and isn’t the defense gaining control and sending it to the originally offsides player. It’s the right call by VAR. Same reason a penalty or free kick taker can’t hit the ball first if they hit the post.

Iran's as their last minute goal vs Egypt was overturned by VAR denying them a crucial victory that would have guaranteed an advancement out of groups. The player was in an offsides position when the ball was played by the original shooter so he cannot play the ball on the rebound. That is if there is a deflection. There is an exception: If a defending player deliberately plays or controls the ball (such as attempting a back-pass or a controlled clearance) and it falls to you, the offside is reset, and you can legally play the ball. That obviously doesn’t happen here. It’s a clear deflection and rebound in this play and isn’t the defense gaining control and sending it to the originally offsides player. It’s the right call by VAR. Same reason a penalty or free kick taker can’t hit the ball first if they hit the post.

Imtiaz Mahmood

808,350 views • 3 months ago

The first clip here depicts when a Morocco player dragged a Senegal player down very close to the Morocco penalty area so he wouldn’t score . The referee was afraid that if he awarded the free kick to Senegal , they might score Morocco so he awarded it to team which committed the foul-Morocco. The Senegal players were bewildered. One even knelt down and put his head on the tuft.

The first clip here depicts when a Morocco player dragged a Senegal player down very close to the Morocco penalty area so he wouldn’t score . The referee was afraid that if he awarded the free kick to Senegal , they might score Morocco so he awarded it to team which committed the foul-Morocco. The Senegal players were bewildered. One even knelt down and put his head on the tuft.

Dr Penking™

119,789 views • 8 months ago

I've been asked to review and provide thoughts on the question of a potential targeting call in the Hardin-Simmons Cowboy Football / UMHB Football🏈 #d3fb game Saturday. I have synced up two videos -- one from UMHB's broadcast and one posted by In The (D3FB) Huddle contributor Riley Conlee (Riley Conlee) (if he could provide credit to the videographer of it, I'd appreciate it). There is a full-speed view and a 20% speed view of the central action included in the video. To evaluate targeting, we have to review both aspects of the rule to see what, if anything, qualifies. I want to provide the entire set of rules (9-1-3 & 9-1-4): "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I) Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: - Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area. - A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground. - Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. - Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to: - A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield. - A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return. - A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A player on the ground. - A player obviously out of the play. - A player who receives a blind-side block. - A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped. - A quarterback any time after a change of possession - A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet- first. - A player attempting to recover a loose ball." We need to start at Note 2 to see if Kyle Brown qualified here as a "defenseless player." If not, then 9-1-4 would not apply to him here. Kyle was not a receiver or a passer per se here -- he was clearly a runner downfield and was not in the grasp of any player. As a result, he was not "defenseless" by definition. That means that the only way targeting can be called here is if the provisions of Rule 9-1-3 were violated. Rule 9-1-3 is VERY specific about the initial requirement before we can go to the question of a required indicator: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet." The crown of the helmet is "the top segment of the helmet, specifically the circular area with a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet." In the videos, we see a couple of telling signs. First, Kyle appeared to actually lower HIS helmet as the contact became imminent, which is something coaches advise against for a variety of reasons, including self-preservation. But what is telling is that the UMHB defender attempted to peel off as he saw the angle of the contact he was heading toward with Brown. Specifically, he appeared to end up perpendicular to Brown, perhaps catching Brown's facemask enough to cause the helmet to fly. Yet, that contact was NOT with the defender's crown. As a result, since Brown was not defenseless by rule and because the crown of the helmet was not used for forcible contact to the head/neck area, the picking up of the flag by the officials was appropriate. That said, I spoke with an official who reviewed the videos without commentary and who landed in the same spot as I did concerning the above. They stated that if immediate replay review was available, crews will generally throw the flag and go to review (here, it likely would have been overturned by review, preserving the defender's eligibility). Since the ASC is not providing the on-field replay review yet, the officials' decision would have impacted the game by ejecting a player for the last 6 minutes of the first half until a Halftime review would have been available. For those wondering about how replay is impacting the game, I think this is a good reminder of the nuances it can impact.

I've been asked to review and provide thoughts on the question of a potential targeting call in the Hardin-Simmons Cowboy Football / UMHB Football🏈 #d3fb game Saturday. I have synced up two videos -- one from UMHB's broadcast and one posted by In The (D3FB) Huddle contributor Riley Conlee (Riley Conlee) (if he could provide credit to the videographer of it, I'd appreciate it). There is a full-speed view and a 20% speed view of the central action included in the video. To evaluate targeting, we have to review both aspects of the rule to see what, if anything, qualifies. I want to provide the entire set of rules (9-1-3 & 9-1-4): "Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I) Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI) Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to: - Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area. - A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground. - Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area. - Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet. Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to: - A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield. - A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return. - A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier. - A player on the ground. - A player obviously out of the play. - A player who receives a blind-side block. - A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped. - A quarterback any time after a change of possession - A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet- first. - A player attempting to recover a loose ball." We need to start at Note 2 to see if Kyle Brown qualified here as a "defenseless player." If not, then 9-1-4 would not apply to him here. Kyle was not a receiver or a passer per se here -- he was clearly a runner downfield and was not in the grasp of any player. As a result, he was not "defenseless" by definition. That means that the only way targeting can be called here is if the provisions of Rule 9-1-3 were violated. Rule 9-1-3 is VERY specific about the initial requirement before we can go to the question of a required indicator: "No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet." The crown of the helmet is "the top segment of the helmet, specifically the circular area with a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet." In the videos, we see a couple of telling signs. First, Kyle appeared to actually lower HIS helmet as the contact became imminent, which is something coaches advise against for a variety of reasons, including self-preservation. But what is telling is that the UMHB defender attempted to peel off as he saw the angle of the contact he was heading toward with Brown. Specifically, he appeared to end up perpendicular to Brown, perhaps catching Brown's facemask enough to cause the helmet to fly. Yet, that contact was NOT with the defender's crown. As a result, since Brown was not defenseless by rule and because the crown of the helmet was not used for forcible contact to the head/neck area, the picking up of the flag by the officials was appropriate. That said, I spoke with an official who reviewed the videos without commentary and who landed in the same spot as I did concerning the above. They stated that if immediate replay review was available, crews will generally throw the flag and go to review (here, it likely would have been overturned by review, preserving the defender's eligibility). Since the ASC is not providing the on-field replay review yet, the officials' decision would have impacted the game by ejecting a player for the last 6 minutes of the first half until a Halftime review would have been available. For those wondering about how replay is impacting the game, I think this is a good reminder of the nuances it can impact.

Frank Rossi

10,688 views • 10 months ago

FT Spurs 2 -2 Man City. What a game this was! How many thought that at HT ? We came into this game with such little hope because of our injuries, and that was realised very quickly. Talk about a game of 2 halves! Nobody can doubt the commitment in pulling it back level . Early doors, Vicario had to save well from Semenyo. Cherki started to terrorise a clearly not match-fit Dragusin, scoring the first and making Vic pull off a brilliant save. Bissouma looked like he was back on the ball with his distribution. Again, another mistake playing out from the back cost us a second. Rodri and Silva controlled the half if only our special guest Vertonghen could play for us today. Romero off at HT injury ? We changed formation to a back 4 and pushed forward. A sublime pass by Simons set up Solanke to score, but Guehi got there first. Simons looked very good in this half, demanding the ball and using it well. Palhinha was immense at the back made some fantastic interceptions to keep us in it. Solanke’s scorpion kick! Wow, what a goal seriously 🔥🔥 City started to lose their heads. Our boys believed they could win this. Great second-hand fight back. Very Proud of the players today.

FT Spurs 2 -2 Man City. What a game this was! How many thought that at HT ? We came into this game with such little hope because of our injuries, and that was realised very quickly. Talk about a game of 2 halves! Nobody can doubt the commitment in pulling it back level . Early doors, Vicario had to save well from Semenyo. Cherki started to terrorise a clearly not match-fit Dragusin, scoring the first and making Vic pull off a brilliant save. Bissouma looked like he was back on the ball with his distribution. Again, another mistake playing out from the back cost us a second. Rodri and Silva controlled the half if only our special guest Vertonghen could play for us today. Romero off at HT injury ? We changed formation to a back 4 and pushed forward. A sublime pass by Simons set up Solanke to score, but Guehi got there first. Simons looked very good in this half, demanding the ball and using it well. Palhinha was immense at the back made some fantastic interceptions to keep us in it. Solanke’s scorpion kick! Wow, what a goal seriously 🔥🔥 City started to lose their heads. Our boys believed they could win this. Great second-hand fight back. Very Proud of the players today.

Jonny H

27,493 views • 8 months ago

Yuji Nishida on the condition of his right leg: “I don’t know yet. For now, I need to get it examined first.” An opposing attacker charged into Nishida while hitting a spike, making contact with him as he was positioned at the block. Nishida lost his balance and fell to the floor.

Yuji Nishida on the condition of his right leg: “I don’t know yet. For now, I need to get it examined first.” An opposing attacker charged into Nishida while hitting a spike, making contact with him as he was positioned at the block. Nishida lost his balance and fell to the floor.

Reese 📸🏐 DONT REPOST TRANS/VIDEOS/PHOTOS

160,264 views • 27 days ago

This is facts and I'd even give two clear examples a lot of Arsenal fans may remember. Last season when we played Brentford at home, Saka was on an attack for us and he did not have a clear chance to shoot the ball, Gyokeres was down in the middle and squaring that pass would have resulted in an easier goal for us but Ska chose to shoot, luckily the ball went in but Kelleher had a bad punch on the ball which is why the ball even went in. Chelsea vs Arsenal Carabao cup semi final, Saka was on an attack again, he could have played the cross first time in for Gyokeres but he decided to cut back before now passing to Ben White who eventually squared it to Gyokeres, luckily for Gyokeres, Robert Sanchez let the ball slip underneath him which resulted in Gyokeres tapping the ball in. If you see Gyokeres's reaction in the buildup to the goal, he got frustrated Saka did not release the ball to him on time. There are many more occassions similar to this from Saka, Martinelli, Odegaard and co where they could have released Gyokeres quickly but chose not to. So yeah, this tweet I quoted is absolutely spot on.

This is facts and I'd even give two clear examples a lot of Arsenal fans may remember. Last season when we played Brentford at home, Saka was on an attack for us and he did not have a clear chance to shoot the ball, Gyokeres was down in the middle and squaring that pass would have resulted in an easier goal for us but Ska chose to shoot, luckily the ball went in but Kelleher had a bad punch on the ball which is why the ball even went in. Chelsea vs Arsenal Carabao cup semi final, Saka was on an attack again, he could have played the cross first time in for Gyokeres but he decided to cut back before now passing to Ben White who eventually squared it to Gyokeres, luckily for Gyokeres, Robert Sanchez let the ball slip underneath him which resulted in Gyokeres tapping the ball in. If you see Gyokeres's reaction in the buildup to the goal, he got frustrated Saka did not release the ball to him on time. There are many more occassions similar to this from Saka, Martinelli, Odegaard and co where they could have released Gyokeres quickly but chose not to. So yeah, this tweet I quoted is absolutely spot on.

Senator Fowosere

74,915 views • 9 days ago

Yankees TV and radio booths destroy Jazz for what might be the dumbest, worst ABS challenge of the year: Kay: “Why would you challenge that? It makes no sense. It was 3-1, it doesn’t change the count. That is not a smart challenge. And then to miss it that much, by the entire width of the ball.….And the certitude of it, he just tapped his helmet and started walking to first base.” Suzyn: “See Jazz needs to learn….Don’t do that, Jazz. I would love to know Jazz’s thinking on that. It’s 3-1, two outs, nobody on.”

Yankees TV and radio booths destroy Jazz for what might be the dumbest, worst ABS challenge of the year: Kay: “Why would you challenge that? It makes no sense. It was 3-1, it doesn’t change the count. That is not a smart challenge. And then to miss it that much, by the entire width of the ball.….And the certitude of it, he just tapped his helmet and started walking to first base.” Suzyn: “See Jazz needs to learn….Don’t do that, Jazz. I would love to know Jazz’s thinking on that. It’s 3-1, two outs, nobody on.”

That’s Baseball, Suzyn

59,196 views • 3 months ago

FT Spurs 1 v 2 Liverpool The referee made himself the star of the show in the first 30 mins every shoulder to shoulder challenge was given against us then came that Simons red at first I thought it was a slip but the replay showed a clear red.what was he thinking he’s let the team down. We fought so well up until that moment and we did so well when we went down to 10 men in the first half. Isak came on as a HT sub and of course he scored soon after but was injured scoring the goal. It was a bizarre Cuti pass that created their chance of course Wirtz got his first assist as well. It was very getting fiery out there Cuti was losing it with the ref and their players.Cuti was again at fault for the second from Ekitike. Then on comes Richy and buries a goal game on and we are thinking could we until Cuti gets sent off he’s cost us big time today . We at least battled which was what the fans wanted and they responded with support throughout the game . #COYS 💙🤍

FT Spurs 1 v 2 Liverpool The referee made himself the star of the show in the first 30 mins every shoulder to shoulder challenge was given against us then came that Simons red at first I thought it was a slip but the replay showed a clear red.what was he thinking he’s let the team down. We fought so well up until that moment and we did so well when we went down to 10 men in the first half. Isak came on as a HT sub and of course he scored soon after but was injured scoring the goal. It was a bizarre Cuti pass that created their chance of course Wirtz got his first assist as well. It was very getting fiery out there Cuti was losing it with the ref and their players.Cuti was again at fault for the second from Ekitike. Then on comes Richy and buries a goal game on and we are thinking could we until Cuti gets sent off he’s cost us big time today . We at least battled which was what the fans wanted and they responded with support throughout the game . #COYS 💙🤍

Jonny H

63,175 views • 9 months ago

Inside the disaster sequence by the Jets at the end of regulation: Jets could have and should have called timeout at 1:01 left and the Packers facing 4th and 5 at the +45. By doing so, the Jets force the Packers to make a decision with 1:01 left, which almost certainly would have been to punt. The average starting field position after a punt from that field position is roughly the 12 yard line. A touchback occurs ~16% of the time which would put you at the 20. For simplicity, assume the Jets have the ball from their own 12 with 51 seconds left and a timeout. One key point here is the Packers only had 2 timeouts remaining, which makes a big difference. The Jets could have run the ball on 1st down and seen what they got. If it went nowhere, they would have the ability to take the clock to 0:00 if needed because the Packers could only stop the clock twice. By not calling timeout, the Jets allowed the Packers to run the clock all the way down to 21 seconds before a delay of game. The clock decay helps one team or the other here, and in this case it clearly helps the Packers. Now comes the next clear mistake by the Jets. Once the delay of game occurred, the Jets could have and should have stopped the clock. By not electing to do so, Green Bay was able to run the clock down to 2 seconds to get a free chance at a Hail Mary. The Jets needed to stop the clock at 21 seconds to force the punt and then take it to overtime. Green Bay would not have been able to run that Hail Mary with 21 seconds. The situation was so chaotic I actually think the Packers missed an opportunity here too. Packers could have called timeout with ~8-9 seconds, tried to get the first down on 4th and 10, and if so called timeout and attempted a game winning field goal. The Packers have had a great long yardage pass offense with Love. If they failed, the Packers would have to defend one play from the ~50. Another Packers option is Trey Smack attempting a ~68 yard field goal with 2 seconds left. For some teams that would have clearly been the best option. Ultimately, this game management by the Jets was objectively incorrect in both of these instances, and the fact it sounds like they did not even talk about it on the headset is beyond alarming.

Inside the disaster sequence by the Jets at the end of regulation: Jets could have and should have called timeout at 1:01 left and the Packers facing 4th and 5 at the +45. By doing so, the Jets force the Packers to make a decision with 1:01 left, which almost certainly would have been to punt. The average starting field position after a punt from that field position is roughly the 12 yard line. A touchback occurs ~16% of the time which would put you at the 20. For simplicity, assume the Jets have the ball from their own 12 with 51 seconds left and a timeout. One key point here is the Packers only had 2 timeouts remaining, which makes a big difference. The Jets could have run the ball on 1st down and seen what they got. If it went nowhere, they would have the ability to take the clock to 0:00 if needed because the Packers could only stop the clock twice. By not calling timeout, the Jets allowed the Packers to run the clock all the way down to 21 seconds before a delay of game. The clock decay helps one team or the other here, and in this case it clearly helps the Packers. Now comes the next clear mistake by the Jets. Once the delay of game occurred, the Jets could have and should have stopped the clock. By not electing to do so, Green Bay was able to run the clock down to 2 seconds to get a free chance at a Hail Mary. The Jets needed to stop the clock at 21 seconds to force the punt and then take it to overtime. Green Bay would not have been able to run that Hail Mary with 21 seconds. The situation was so chaotic I actually think the Packers missed an opportunity here too. Packers could have called timeout with ~8-9 seconds, tried to get the first down on 4th and 10, and if so called timeout and attempted a game winning field goal. The Packers have had a great long yardage pass offense with Love. If they failed, the Packers would have to defend one play from the ~50. Another Packers option is Trey Smack attempting a ~68 yard field goal with 2 seconds left. For some teams that would have clearly been the best option. Ultimately, this game management by the Jets was objectively incorrect in both of these instances, and the fact it sounds like they did not even talk about it on the headset is beyond alarming.

Ryan Paganetti

499,969 views • 10 days ago

My first time coming to twitter about Opta but hopefully we get this awarded sooner rather than later as it’s obviously a mistake IMO Martinez originally got a shot added then took away and Donovan got awarded an offside which is correct, Opta has deemed the offside to be before the shot happens when it’s clearly after The replay shows that after martinez hits his shot the ball hits Donovan about 1 yard away from the goal line and it’s proven by the linesman in the bottom right corner running down to the corner to flag the offside , if it was any possible offside before the shot then the offside would be a lot further out Hopefully OptaJoe Opta Analyst Orbinho overturn this as I know there is quite a few people with Jose martinez for a shot Jay’s Picks Matthew O'Regan AF Tipster @PlayerShots @TheFootieGuys TLBETS Any retweets/likes appreciated to try get this overturned 👍🏻

My first time coming to twitter about Opta but hopefully we get this awarded sooner rather than later as it’s obviously a mistake IMO Martinez originally got a shot added then took away and Donovan got awarded an offside which is correct, Opta has deemed the offside to be before the shot happens when it’s clearly after The replay shows that after martinez hits his shot the ball hits Donovan about 1 yard away from the goal line and it’s proven by the linesman in the bottom right corner running down to the corner to flag the offside , if it was any possible offside before the shot then the offside would be a lot further out Hopefully OptaJoe Opta Analyst Orbinho overturn this as I know there is quite a few people with Jose martinez for a shot Jay’s Picks Matthew O'Regan AF Tipster @PlayerShots @TheFootieGuys TLBETS Any retweets/likes appreciated to try get this overturned 👍🏻

ShaunC bets

70,627 views • 2 years ago

The New Body-Up Collision System Looks Promising In #NBA2K27… But There Were A Few Things That Caught My Attention 💨 I Replayed The Gameplay And I Noticed A Few Times Where Players “Glide Around Each Other” Or Defenders Didn’t Appear To Make “Physical Contact” One Example Was Victor Wembanyama’s Block When I Slowed The Clip Down It Looked Like His Fingers Never Actually Made Contact With The Ball, Yet The Block Was Still Registered Another Example Was Paul George Guarding Jaylen Brown His Hand Appears To Be On Jaylen’s Hip But When You Slow It Down, It Looks Like It’s Floating Instead Of Making Actual Contact That Creates The Feeling Of An Invisible Wall Between The Ball Handler And The Defender Rather Contact... The Key Detail Is The Physical Contact Needs To Look And Feel As Authentic As Possible In #NBA2K27 💯 ❤️➕♻️ GOD BLESS Y’ALL #NBA2K27 NBA 2K 🔗

The New Body-Up Collision System Looks Promising In #NBA2K27… But There Were A Few Things That Caught My Attention 💨 I Replayed The Gameplay And I Noticed A Few Times Where Players “Glide Around Each Other” Or Defenders Didn’t Appear To Make “Physical Contact” One Example Was Victor Wembanyama’s Block When I Slowed The Clip Down It Looked Like His Fingers Never Actually Made Contact With The Ball, Yet The Block Was Still Registered Another Example Was Paul George Guarding Jaylen Brown His Hand Appears To Be On Jaylen’s Hip But When You Slow It Down, It Looks Like It’s Floating Instead Of Making Actual Contact That Creates The Feeling Of An Invisible Wall Between The Ball Handler And The Defender Rather Contact... The Key Detail Is The Physical Contact Needs To Look And Feel As Authentic As Possible In #NBA2K27 💯 ❤️➕♻️ GOD BLESS Y’ALL #NBA2K27 NBA 2K 🔗

R1CH SOSA🔋

596,740 views • 2 months ago

⚽ Day 42 of building my football/soccer game solo in Unreal Engine 5. Tonight, I rebuilt how the ball and the player's feet actually talk to each other while remaining separate meshes. I wanted to get pretty technical with y'all on a Saturday, so enjoy the read if you enjoy this stuff. Otherwise, just watch the video 👍 - Normal dribbling is impulse-based now. The foot arrives, knocks the ball on, the ball is genuinely loose between touches. Stop running and the ball keeps going without you. - We enabled Motion Warping on all 10 turn animations so the montages will now bend the player's path mid-turn so the boot arrives at the ball, instead of the ball being dragged to wherever the animator drew it previously. - Every contact is authored on the animation itself. I track which frame, which foot, which part of the boot, and whether it CARRIES the ball (sole on a drag-back) or STRIKES it (inside-of-the-foot on a 90) - Each contact declares how close the player needs to be. A sole on top of the ball, an inside-foot redirect and an outside-foot push all reach differently — 75 / 63 / 53 units - Touches are credited only to the foot the animation is actually dribbling with - Sideways and forward correction are capped separately. Pushing the ball across your line keeps it. Pushing it forward is how you lose it - Touch strength scales with your speed. The ball has to leave the foot ~1.27× faster than you're running just to stay ahead. This was an annoying bug I kept running into where I overran the ball and left it behind. Have a great weekend. #indiedev #gamedev #soccer #football #unrealengine

⚽ Day 42 of building my football/soccer game solo in Unreal Engine 5. Tonight, I rebuilt how the ball and the player's feet actually talk to each other while remaining separate meshes. I wanted to get pretty technical with y'all on a Saturday, so enjoy the read if you enjoy this stuff. Otherwise, just watch the video 👍 - Normal dribbling is impulse-based now. The foot arrives, knocks the ball on, the ball is genuinely loose between touches. Stop running and the ball keeps going without you. - We enabled Motion Warping on all 10 turn animations so the montages will now bend the player's path mid-turn so the boot arrives at the ball, instead of the ball being dragged to wherever the animator drew it previously. - Every contact is authored on the animation itself. I track which frame, which foot, which part of the boot, and whether it CARRIES the ball (sole on a drag-back) or STRIKES it (inside-of-the-foot on a 90) - Each contact declares how close the player needs to be. A sole on top of the ball, an inside-foot redirect and an outside-foot push all reach differently — 75 / 63 / 53 units - Touches are credited only to the foot the animation is actually dribbling with - Sideways and forward correction are capped separately. Pushing the ball across your line keeps it. Pushing it forward is how you lose it - Touch strength scales with your speed. The ball has to leave the foot ~1.27× faster than you're running just to stay ahead. This was an annoying bug I kept running into where I overran the ball and left it behind. Have a great weekend. #indiedev #gamedev #soccer #football #unrealengine

Josh

18,077 views • 2 months ago