Intentional Grounding

[94VegasCat]

WTF

Does anyone have a good explanation as to why we were called for intentional grounding? Piss poor Big Sky refs is not a valid answer

[MSU01]

The criteria for grounding were definitely met, but I felt watching the play live that the throw was affected by Tommy being hit as he let the ball go. Would probably need to watch a replay to get a better idea.

[94VegasCat]

The criteria for grounding were definitely met, but I felt watching the play live that the throw was affected by Tommy being hit as he let the ball go. Would probably need to watch a replay to get a better idea.

Watching live I thought Mellott was hit on the arm as he threw. Watching on TV, with several replays there’s nothing evident. Why would Mellott just throw it away? I know Vigen was furious.

[GoldstoneCat]

The criteria for grounding were definitely met, but I felt watching the play live that the throw was affected by Tommy being hit as he let the ball go. Would probably need to watch a replay to get a better idea.

Watching live I thought Mellott was hit on the arm as he threw. Watching on TV, with several replays there’s nothing evident. Why would Mellott just throw it away? I know Vigen was furious.

It was a miscommunication. Tommy threw the route to be a stop, receiver ran a go. Tommy didn't "ground" but the circumstances made it the correct call.

[MSUBRONCO]

Didn't watch game live, but watching replay right now, it was the right call, it was grounding

[cat22[2010]]

From our angle in the stands could not tell how far apart Ty and the ball were. But from what I could see, it was 100% the right call.

[91catAlum]

I haven't watched it back, but from 15 rows up in the stands, it sure looked like Tommy got hit before he got a full follow-through on the throw. I thought it was a weak call watching it live.

[catsrback76]

From my angle watching it on tv in Kazakhstan, it was clear that he was hit on the elbow as he was throwing. It was a bad call!

[technoCat]

I just feel like if they are going to call IG on that play, they could call it 20 times a game. They could have called it 3 times on Sac later in the game.

It really ticked me off because the next day in the Broncos/Chiefs game, Mahommes was being sacked and as he was being spun down, he hucked the ball way downfield without looking. Obviously, he was just trying to throw the ball away and not take a sack and had no intention of completing it but by the rules it wasn't called but the one against Tommy was "correct by the rules". Well, if that's the case the rules need to change...

[Prodigal Cat]

The intentional grounding rule reads this way.

. For a foul to be called it should be clear to everyone that the passer throws the ball into
an area not occupied by an eligible receiver. Do not be overly technical.

To me it was obvious who Tommy was throwing it to and he got hit in the arm during the throwing motion that affected the throw. It shouldn't have ever been a foul.

[wbtfg]

Just watched this again. It’s a judgement call, but I thought it was poor judgement. Tommy was hit as he threw, and there could be an argument made that Tommy was expecting the receiver to break off his route.

[catscat]

Haven't watched replay, but from my view in the stands (and the play was right in front of me) Tommy got hit on the arm before follow through. The high looping trajectory of the pass was consistent with that observation and I was flabbergasted at the call. I'll rewatch.

[cats2506]

I don't know if Tommy got hit before the ball was out of his hands but I definitely think that he was throwing a back shoulder throw and the receiver didn't see it. Simple miscommunication and happens in almost every game, basically it is never called but this ref wanted to slow down MSU from stomping SAC any worse.

The holding call was almost as bad. flag landed some 30 yards from the foul and came out way after the play had gone by. Technically its is possible to call that holding but it looked like a pretty good block to me.

This reffing crew is not good.

[49thparallel]

That call was a head scratcher for me, as well. The other really questionable call appeared to be the holding on Marcus Wehr. Never seen him hold before and playback didn't look convincing, either. Maybe someone who was there can provide some additional context. Gotta love that Big Sky officiating

[MSU01]

That call was a head scratcher for me, as well. The other really questionable call appeared to be the holding on Marcus Wehr. Never seen him hold before and playback didn't look convincing, either. Maybe someone who was there can provide some additional context. Gotta love that Big Sky officiating

I went back and watched the play again, and I believe the hold was called against Conner Moore who takes the guy he was blocking down to the ground during the play. The flag was thrown from way back in the secondary, so I'm guessing the ref maybe just saw the 7 on the jersey and thought it was #76 Wehr instead of #72 Moore.

[St George]

I have seen a lot of intentional grounding non calls lately that were more intentional than this one.