[Farm93]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15566.msg169769#msg169769 date=1472939438]
Yeah I have no idea why anyone thinks that should've been flagged, maybe it should've been offsetting PIs, but when the receiver stiff-arms the defender before the defender touches him, you really want it to only be DPI? People were just salty.

The color guy on the TV broadcast was totally certain that it was defensive PI for "tackling" the receiver before the ball arrived. He kept harping on that throughout the rest of the game right to the end. "K-State should have had 4 more points", etc. Perhaps he influenced some folks to see it his way.
[/quote]

FS1's Team was far from broadcasting excellence for their first game of the season.  They often were too busy talking about things to realize flags were thrown and/or downs were replayed.  So I am not too worried about what they think was the right call.

FWIW - The 4 more point argument is flawed.  Why?  There were only 6 seconds left in the half.  Even if PI was called.  KSU would have had to opt to run a play and risk the clock falling to zero.  Also, they would have actually needed to gain those yards.  My guess is even with PI they would have kicked the ball as six seconds might not be enough.  To put it a different way...the LACK of a flag may have prevented K-State from going to the locker room with nothing.

Also watching it live, in the stands.  It looked wrong.  I thought the K-State receiver fell and Holder fell on top of him.  That's not quite what happened, but it didn't seem like it was a simple DB takedown.  And if I didn't listen to the FS1 commentary the TV replays would have reinforced my initial thought that it was not a DC takedown.  Offensive PI, Illegal hands to the face or no call were all options.  Defensive PI was too, but a team doesn't just get 7 points for that foul.  And I doubt they get a TD or even go for a TD with only 6 seconds left.

[Farm93]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=15566.msg169769#msg169769 date=1472939438]
Yeah I have no idea why anyone thinks that should've been flagged, maybe it should've been offsetting PIs, but when the receiver stiff-arms the defender before the defender touches him, you really want it to only be DPI? People were just salty.

The color guy on the TV broadcast was totally certain that it was defensive PI for "tackling" the receiver before the ball arrived. He kept harping on that throughout the rest of the game right to the end. "K-State should have had 4 more points", etc. Perhaps he influenced some folks to see it his way.
[/quote]

FS1's Team was far from broadcasting excellence for their first game of the season.  They often were too busy talking about things to realize flags were thrown and/or downs were replayed.  So I am not too worried about what they think was the right call.

FWIW - The 4 more point argument is flawed.  Why?  There were only 6 seconds left in the half.  Even if PI was called.  KSU would have had to opt to run a play and risk the clock falling to zero.  Also, they would have actually needed to gain those yards.  My guess is even with PI they would have kicked the ball as six seconds might not be enough.  To put it a different way...the LACK of a flag may have prevented K-State from going to the locker room with nothing.

Also watching it live, in the stands.  It looked wrong.  I thought the K-State receiver fell and Holder fell on top of him.  That's not quite what happened, but it didn't seem like it was a simple DB takedown.  And if I didn't listen to the FS1 commentary the TV replays would have reinforced my initial thought that it was not a DC takedown.  Offensive PI, Illegal hands to the face or no call were all options.  Defensive PI was too, but a team doesn't just get 7 points for that foul.  And I doubt they get a TD or even go for a TD with only 6 seconds left.