[goBIGblue82]

I agree with EKU, the original video did show the facemask. I would also love to know why it was edited.

Well considering it was a highlight made by the Central coaching staff only they have the ability to edit it. If it was so obvious why would they edit it?

[EKUAlum05]

I agree with EKU, the original video did show the facemask. I would also love to know why it was edited.

I dont know enough about how Hudl works to hazard a guess. The whole thing is foreign to me. The fact there were 4 camera angles alone initially even complicates it. I am pretty sure Central wouldn't have 4 cameras set-up.

One would think that at least 1. most likely 2 of those cameras were Corbin's cameras. Could Corbin have removed it? Is it even possible since it is on the Central page? I have no clue.

[Demarcus ware]

Well considering it was a highlight made by the Central coaching staff only they have the ability to edit it. If it was so obvious why would they edit it?

No clue why. That's what we ALL would like to know

[Demarcus ware]

I dont know enough about how Hudl works to hazard a guess. The whole thing is foreign to me. The fact there were 4 camera angles alone initially even complicates it. I am pretty sure Central wouldn't have 4 cameras set-up.

One would think that at least 1. most likely 2 of those cameras were Corbin's cameras. Could Corbin have removed it? Is it even possible since it is on the Central page? I have no clue.

Like you I'm not exactly sure. BUT I would almost guarantee not all camera's were Central's...

[goBIGblue82]

I dont know enough about how Hudl works to hazard a guess. The whole thing is foreign to me. The fact there were 4 camera angles alone initially even complicates it. I am pretty sure Central wouldn't have 4 cameras set-up.

One would think that at least 1. most likely 2 of those cameras were Corbin's cameras. Could Corbin have removed it? Is it even possible since it is on the Central page? I have no clue.

2 of the angles were from Corbin and 2 from Central. I'm assuming it was mutual to share the footage with the other team whether a win or loss. The highlight was made by the Central account and therefore can only be edited by Central.

[pjdoug]

As mentioned the facemask was blatantly obvious on the original video posted on Hudl.
You cant see the facemask form the angle of the youtube video but I can outline when everything happens.

-The tackle starts off innocent as the Corbin player wraps one arm around the back up top and the other around the chest.

-The Redhound player's hand slips off the chest and he seemingly begins to bring the Central receiver down from the top of the shoulder pads.

- At just before :12 you see the Central player take a step backwards (which is technically up field) and at this point the Corbin defender is on the ground but still gripping up top.

-The Corbin defender pops off the ground and at this point on the other video is when he uses his right hand (which was now free since it was on the ground) to firmly grasp the facemask. Due to the camera being field level and #5 for Corbin coming into the picture to assist you cannot see it on the Youtube video.

The key here is it was not the initial contact where the facemask came... it was on the second effort when the Central receiver did not initially go down.

The reason the Central coaches were begging for the flag was because it was very clear to them what they were seeing.

Bull Butter:lame:

[goBIGblue82]

Like you I'm not exactly sure. BUT I would almost guarantee not all camera's were Central's...

The camera behind the Central sideline and behind the Central offense were Central cameras.

[EKUAlum05]

2 of the angles were from Corbin and 2 from Central. I'm assuming it was mutual to share the footage with the other team whether a win or loss. The highlight was made by the Central account and therefore can only be edited by Central.

That's what we don't know though. That would seem to make sense but I was hoping someone who knows Hudl can confirm.

Does Corbin have access to edit when they contribute video?

Could Corbin have mandated Central to edit the video since they were sharing it and the video was their property?

No clue. What I do know with 100% certainty is there was a clear facemask shown that just happens to be edited out now. The fact the best camera was the one on that sideline also suggests it was a Central camera then... which muddies the water even more.

[William Muney]

Really, you want to go there. Do I need to post the video of Bell County's TD in overtime? You do realize the officials admitted to missing the call on that TD. Bell County's TE on the play was an ineligible receiver, yet that didn't stop him from running a route on that play.

Go look at where the ball was thrown on that play. The route was not deep enough for them to call an illegal man down-field. Very similar to a screen pass.

Anyway, tough loss for the Hounds. Central always seems to come up "lucky."

[SEKYFAN]

Go look at where the ball was thrown on that play. The route was not deep enough for them to call an illegal man down-field. Very similar to a screen pass.

Anyway, tough loss for the Hounds. Central always seems to come up "lucky."

I'm not sure if there should have been a penalty or not on that play, but the pass was thrown about 3 or 4 yards into the endzone. I'm not sure what the TE did on that play, but on a couple of earlier passes, he was setting screens down field, actually looked more like he was blocking out for a rebound. Does he play basketball, may be a good addition to the team if not.

[pjdoug]

I'm not sure if there should have been a penalty or not on that play, but the pass was thrown about 3 or 4 yards into the endzone. I'm not sure what the TE did on that play, but on a couple of earlier passes, he was setting screens down field, actually looked more like he was blocking out for a rebound. Does he play basketball, may be a good addition to the team if not.

nicker:

[goBIGblue82]

Go look at where the ball was thrown on that play. The route was not deep enough for them to call an illegal man down-field. Very similar to a screen pass.

Anyway, tough loss for the Hounds. Central always seems to come up "lucky."

I apologize for saying illegal man down field. There were only 6 men on the line of scrimmage. The covered TE that was ineligible was on another play. So with only 6 on the line it doesn't matter what play you run it is an illegal formation.

[goBIGblue82]

That's what we don't know though. That would seem to make sense but I was hoping someone who knows Hudl can confirm.

Does Corbin have access to edit when they contribute video?

Could Corbin have mandated Central to edit the video since they were sharing it and the video was their property?

No clue. What I do know with 100% certainty is there was a clear facemask shown that just happens to be edited out now. The fact the best camera was the one on that sideline also suggests it was a Central camera then... which muddies the water even more.

That's what I do know though. I have a HUDL account I know what can and can't be done. These camera angles in question were Central cameras. Corbin has no access to edit Centrals footage or the highlight Central posted. The two Corbin angles are shown in entirety on the highlight, only one Central angle is shown and the other Central angle is cut short before the conclusion of the play.

[goBIGblue82]

Go look at where the ball was thrown on that play. The route was not deep enough for them to call an illegal man down-field. Very similar to a screen pass.

Anyway, tough loss for the Hounds. Central always seems to come up "lucky."

Watched the video at your request and with all due respect if you know the rules of the game a screen pass is behind the line of scrimmage. If the ball is thrown behind the line you may have linemen blocking down field. However, if the ball is thrown past the line an ineligible receiver may be no more than 1 yard down field. If the ball is thrown into the endzone from the 4 yard it is not considered a screen pass. Like I said this was a mute point because it was an illegal formation either way.

[EKUAlum05]

That's what I do know though. I have a HUDL account I know what can and can't be done. These camera angles in question were Central cameras. Corbin has no access to edit Centrals footage or the highlight Central posted. The two Corbin angles are shown in entirety on the highlight, only one Central angle is shown and the other Central angle is cut short before the conclusion of the play.

Thanks for the clarification!

In that case I will simply continue to wonder why Central would edit that out?

[goBIGblue82]

Thanks for the clarification!

In that case I will simply continue to wonder why Central would edit that out?

I mispoke only 1 Central angle is shown and it is cut short before the conclusion of the play. I have yet to see their endzone angle camera which is the one I assume shows the angle that everyone said had a good view.

[baseball1974]

I think what most people are upset about and rightfully so is the game as a whole and how it was officiated. I didn't want to comment on it until I seen the whole game, and after just now watching it, it is clear to me the call should not have been made. I'm not saying it wasn't a penalty because it was. What I am saying is the officials missed several tackles similar to this one. If they were not concerned about it during the game then they shouldn't have been concerned about it at the end. I seen several pass interference, holding, block in the back, etc. that should have been called and wasn't on both sides. The official should have asked himself, "would he have been tackled regardless of the penalty," and if the answer is yes then he should've left his flag in his pocket. At the end of a game deep in the playoffs is not the time to start getting all high and mighty on penalties when they were not a concern to him throughout the game. In my opinion, it was a mistake by the official and he probably knows it.

[EKUAlum05]

I think what most people are upset about and rightfully so is the game as a whole and how it was officiated. I didn't want to comment on it until I seen the whole game, and after just now watching it, it is clear to me the call should not have been made. I'm not saying it wasn't a penalty because it was. What I am saying is the officials missed several tackles similar to this one. If they were not concerned about it during the game then they shouldn't have been concerned about it at the end. I seen several pass interference, holding, block in the back, etc. that should have been called and wasn't on both sides. The official should have asked himself, "would he have been tackled regardless of the penalty," and if the answer is yes then he should've left his flag in his pocket. At the end of a game deep in the playoffs is not the time to start getting all high and mighty on penalties when they were not a concern to him throughout the game. In my opinion, it was a mistake by the official and he probably knows it.

Respectfully I disagree to an extent. A penalty is a penalty and needs to be called if it occurs. Based off the original video it was a blatant facemask and since the runner was still on his feet until the facemask finished him off you have to call it.

With that said.. I also agree with the general premise of your post. If penalties were being ignored then that is wrong. This penalty creates controversy because of when it happened and how it happened, but a missed facemask in the 3rd Quarter that stalls a drive or a missed block in the back at the start of the 4th Quarter (both hypotheticals) that springs a key 3rd Down conversion may have been just as significant.

The official made the right call to extend the game, but if he missed other critical calls he is just as guilty.

[mayfield_9]

This must be the first bad call in the history of football.

GAME OVER.

[justapasserby]

If anyone has seen the video from the sideline that is on youtube right now, known as "the catch heard round corbin", I videoed that video. There was no facemask as seen in the video. He jumped on his back and had his arm around his neck. No horsecollar either. #25 was a runningback, therefore Corbin's defender had to do whatever he could to bring him down. Great game ruined by a terrible call.

[baseball1974]

Respectfully I disagree to an extent. A penalty is a penalty and needs to be called if it occurs. Based off the original video it was a blatant facemask and since the runner was still on his feet until the facemask finished him off you have to call it.

With that said.. I also agree with the general premise of your post. If penalties were being ignored then that is wrong. This penalty creates controversy because of when it happened and how it happened, but a missed facemask in the 3rd Quarter that stalls a drive or a missed block in the back at the start of the 4th Quarter (both hypotheticals) that springs a key 3rd Down conversion may have been just as significant.

The official made the right call to extend the game, but if he missed other critical calls he is just as guilty.

You're exactly right, that penalty should be called every time it happens. An official knows what they've been hard on and knows what they've been lax on, and they also know the way their crew members have called the game to that point. If they know they have let that penalty slide during the game then it should come down to whether or not the runner would have been tackled regardless of the penalty. In this case he would have and probably knocked out of bounds too. However, the only thing I don't know, only the players know, is if these officials were warning them during the game about thise types of tackles. If they were, then I have no issue with the call.

[EKUAlum05]

If anyone has seen the video from the sideline that is on youtube right now, known as "the catch heard round corbin", I videoed that video. There was no facemask as seen in the video. He jumped on his back and had his arm around his neck. No horsecollar either. #25 was a runningback, therefore Corbin's defender had to do whatever he could to bring him down. Great game ruined by a terrible call.

Once again he didnt go down on initial contact. We already covered this. It was on his second effort that the facemask occurred and it is obstructed in your video. Was not a terrible call... official made the absolute correct call.

[jamesdeane]

Respectfully I disagree to an extent. A penalty is a penalty and needs to be called if it occurs. Based off the original video it was a blatant facemask and since the runner was still on his feet until the facemask finished him off you have to call it.

With that said.. I also agree with the general premise of your post. If penalties were being ignored then that is wrong. This penalty creates controversy because of when it happened and how it happened, but a missed facemask in the 3rd Quarter that stalls a drive or a missed block in the back at the start of the 4th Quarter (both hypotheticals) that springs a key 3rd Down conversion may have been just as significant.

The official made the right call to extend the game, but if he missed other critical calls he is just as guilty.

Here is what i was told today by an official that I know and was at the game. The ref that called the facemask penalty is from the Somerset area and he called 7 penalties against Corbin and 0 against Central. He was also the official who didn't throw the flag on the very blatant block in the back on the punt return. The guy also told me the that was a "super crew" put together for the playoffs. He then said he texted their supervisor after the game about how the game was officiated and the supervisor told him he was at the game watching.

I am a big Corbin fan, but not the type who is blinded. In the end, Corbin was given many opportunities to win the game, but couldn't get the job done. I am not willing to give a pass to such poor officiating as Corbin AND Central deserved better. But at the end of the day, if Corbin wants to know why they lost, they only need to look in the mirror.

As far as replaying the Corbin-Bell game, its over. It was a great game between 2 great teams and it was a shame someone had to lose.

[buzz]

I was not at the game but after talking to some die hard redhounds that have stood on the hedges on that end of the field before these kids where even born, the right call was made they said the corbin kid had the facemask and made the tackle. What sucks is the kids having to lose in this fashion but when your up 26-0 and then get beat 36-33 its more than that one play that beat them. The lack of a defensive adj. by Greer is what beat Corbin and nothing else.

[Craze JACKET man]

Buzz, how would you have adjusted? Central has 4.5 speed and your team has 4.9
I can tell you how Boyle Co. Would have adjusted. Play the 4-4 and try to smack them in the mouth.
I would like to see them blitz and lock up man on central.. Could not cover them.. Much better athletes...

[goBIGblue82]

Buzz, how would you have adjusted? Central has 4.5 speed and your team has 4.9
I can tell you how Boyle Co. Would have adjusted. Play the 4-4 and try to smack them in the mouth.
I would like to see them blitz and lock up man on central.. Could not cover them.. Much better athletes...

If you cant cover them with 9 guys back in coverage you have to try to pressure the QB and hope for sacks or bad throws.

[Coachdad]

The two times we lost all we said was congrats,
Those two times it was our fault for not being dominant where the refs can have no effect on the game.
Much like in the movie "Remember the Titans" where you sooo dominant ( especially defensively ) where the refs are a non factor

[William Muney]

If you cant cover them with 9 guys back in coverage you have to try to pressure the QB and hope for sacks or bad throws.

I agree.

[Mark_my_words]

Tough loss by the redhounds. I was really hoping to see a Corbin/Belfry game!

[The Spread]

If all we are going to do is talk officiating, let's talk about the MOST obvious. The absolute, most blatant no call hasn't even been mentioned. That would be the central defender who threw a block in the back 4 yards in front of the ball- and in front of the ref on a fair catch punt. Don't really know if it had an effect on the game or not. But Geez, that zebra's eye and mind was NOT on football. It was 5 yards in front of him. That was the one that made me go WOW.

And to be clear, I don't think if necessarily affected the game. It was just RIGHT IN FRONT of the referee. Can't comprehend how he could miss it.