Holgorsen era starts with WVU win in weather-shortened game
MORGANTOWN, W.Va. – This was some West Virginia welcome for Dana Holgorsen.
The Mountaineers were victorious in his coaching debut, riding quarterback Geno Smith past Marshall, 34-13, Sunday night when heavy rain, hail and lightning cut the game short with 14:36 left in the fourth quarter. The schools` athletic directors decided after the second of a total of four hours and 22 minutes that it was getting too late, with no letup anticipated in the weather.
The athletic directors had four options, per NCAA rules:
1. Resume the game at a later date.
2. One team forfeits.
3. The final score stays.
4. Declare no contest.
By evening`s end, only a tiny portion of the original crowd of 60,758 at Milan Puskar Stadium remained.
The game initially was halted by nearby lightning at 5:46 p.m., bringing a delay of three hours, four minutes.
During that delay, according to a report on ESPN attributed to West Virginia State Police, a fan was struck by lightning in the second deck of the stadium, in Section 202, shortly after 6 p.m. There was no further word on that fan. Local 911 dispatchers said they never got a call.
Game officials tried for a restart at 8:05 p.m., but that was thwarted by more nearby lightning strike, and the teams were sent back to their locker rooms.
Next, after the National Weather Service assured game officials no more lightning was coming, and play resumed at 8:50. But, at 9:05, nearby lightning chased everyone yet again.
Beer was sold at the stadium for the first time, but sales were cut off at 7:30 p.m.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.