VIDEO: Auburn RB Michael Dyer's Wrist Was Down, But Does That Matter?

Jan 11 12:36a by Jason Kirk

The play from the 2011 BCS National Championship Game that Oregon Ducks fans are going to replay over and over — the all but game-sealing 37-yard run by Auburn Tigers RB Michael Dyer, during which Dyer initially appeared to be down. He hopped up and ran deep into field goal territory once Auburn’s sideline realized the whistle hadn’t blown. Upon further review, Dyer kind of, well, was down:

via BubbaProg via SB Nation Seattle

That wrist is clearly down, and there’s a clear precedent in a BCS bowl game from last week featuring an SEC team -- and a Big Ten team, too, with tonight's game reffed by Big Ten officials -- that a downed wrist counts as a play-ending event. Plus it's, you know, in the rule book.

Does it really matter? Probably not. These things happen anyway. Dyer showed just a few plays later that he was likely going to break another run anyway, as he nearly scored a touchdown later in the drive. And Wes Byrum could’ve certainly made the game-winning field goal from farther away than one yard out. But try telling that to a Ducks fan right now.

Do you like this post?

Comments

wrist down

Hands (wrist) on the ground does not constitute a player being down.

by Delmarnut on Jan 11, 2011 7:22 AM EST reply actions

Wrist is part of the hand

It doesn’t matter that his wrist hit the ground, because the definition of wrist states that the wrist is a part of the hand.
Here are the details all spelled out.
http://www.illegalshift.com/2011/01/11/review-of-dj-williams-michael-dyer-wrist-plays/college-football/

by Illegal Shift on Jan 11, 2011 9:03 PM EST up reply actions

Doesn't look down

The white tape/wristband is the best indicator of where his wrist is. Looks like the lowest part of his hand is on the ground but not necessarily the wrist. I certainly don’t think you can look at that and say, “Oh, his wrist is definitely in contact with the ground. Overturn the call on the field.”

by TitanTiger on Jan 11, 2011 3:13 PM EST reply actions

Dyer Was Tackled, According to Rule Book

If the NCAA Football Rule Book had been enforced properly, Michael Dyer would not have made his 37 yard run.

NCAA Football RULE 4
Ball in Play, Dead Ball, Out of Bounds
SECTION 1. Ball in Play—Dead Ball
Ball Declared Dead
ARTICLE 3. A live ball becomes dead and an official shall sound his whistle
…or declare it dead:
b. When any part of the ball carrier’s body, except his hand or foot, touches
the ground or when the ball carrier is tackled . . . .

NCAA Football RULE 2
Definitions
SECTION 26. Tackling
Tackling is grasping or encircling an opponent with a hand(s) or arm(s).

Michael Dyer was tackled. He was both grasped and encircled by the opponent.

That should end the argument—we don’t even need to note that Michael Dyer’s forward progress had been stopped by virtue of the fact that Michael Dyer was tackled, but it does serve to strengthen the case that Michael Dyer was tackled.

Michael Dyer was tackled according to the rules. That should have caused the play to be blown dead, regardless of whether any part of Dyer’s body touched the field.

by LibertyDefender on Jan 11, 2011 4:48 PM EST reply actions

Not so fast my friend ...

You are misreading – and thus misapplyitng the rules.

Rule 4-1-3-b, which you cite in part, states a ball is dead “[w]hen any part of the ball carrier’s body, except his hand or foot, touches the ground or when the ball carrier is tackled or otherwise falls and loses possession of the ball as he contacts the ground with any part of his body, except his hand or foot.”

Assuming Dyer’s wrist didn’t touch the ground, the appropriate rule is 4-1-3-a which states that a ball is dead “[w]hen a ball carrier is so held that his forward progress is stopped.” Thus, Dyer could run until his forward progress was stopped. Simpling tackling is not sufficient to stop the play as long as he continued to make forward progress.

As far as Dyer’s wrist, it doesn’t appear to me that his wrist touched the ground. From the available video, it looks like the heel of his hand that is on the ground.

Certainly, from my vantage point, there is not indisputable to evidence to overturn the call on the field – and if it takes slowing the video down to a single frame or a couple of frames to even suggest that his wrist touched the ground, one can’t fault the referee for not calling the play dead.

by auburnite on Jan 12, 2011 10:29 PM EST reply actions