ACC Championship Offside Call

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Rich

No.
Why don't you stop thinking that officials can't make mistakes? It ruins our credibility. Sometimes you just have to look in the mirror and say, "I made a mistake."

Having YET to meet any official who has actually worked a perfect game, I'm well aware officials make mistakes. Having made far too many myself, I've also learned that "perfection" is an absolute delusion.

I'm very much interested in any "constructive" criticism offered regarding an official making a mistake, that might have some (any) value in helping that official, or any one of us, from making the same mistake.

What I'm uncomfortable with is people with no idea what they're talking about lecturing others about doing a difficult job to try and make themselves sound smarter, or those who actually may know better demeaning someone who may have made a mistake, to try and polish their own halos.

Those of us who actually do, what we do, should understand all about the difference between real time at ground level inside the eye of a hurricane and repeated slow motion, stop action reviews of a play from the comfort of an easy chair, and should offer their critiques either constructively, or not at all.

[Just4Kicks]

Originally Posted by Rich

No.

"Offsides is not a reviewable play,” the ACC said in a statement. “The officiating team saw a member of the kicking team break the plane (of the 35-yard line) before the ball was kicked.”

And one did. There are two planes that cannot be broken on the kickoff, one is the 35-yard-line (which the statement does not specify), the other is the 9-yard hash mark. The UNC player closest to the ref who threw the flag clearly broke that plane. That being the case, the play should come back--and since it did, no problem--except with the sore losers who think that the call somehow equates to "being robbed," even though the TD (not to mention a 2-point conversion try, one of which had already failed earlier) would have somehow been an automatic UNC win. It's doubtful they would even have scored, and even more doubtful the 2-pointer would work, and even more doubtful they would have won the game after that.

[umpjim]

Originally Posted by Just4Kicks

And one did. There are two planes that cannot be broken on the kickoff, one is the 35-yard-line (which the statement does not specify), the other is the 9-yard hash mark. The UNC player closest to the ref who threw the flag clearly broke that plane. That being the case, the play should come back--and since it did, no problem--except with the sore losers who think that the call somehow equates to "being robbed," even though the TD (not to mention a 2-point conversion try, one of which had already failed earlier) would have somehow been an automatic UNC win. It's doubtful they would even have scored, and even more doubtful the 2-pointer would work, and even more doubtful they would have won the game after that.

Not a football guy. Didn't the UNC coach indicate that a ref said there were three players that he could indicate as offside. Would that suggest the 35 yard line?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by ajmc

What I'm uncomfortable with is people with no idea what they're talking about...

You mean people saying things like "Holy cow, is it possible an "article" may actually have gotten details WRONG?" as opposed to researching the situation to learn the the conference has acknowledged what the call was?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Just4Kicks

And one did. There are two planes that cannot be broken on the kickoff, one is the 35-yard-line (which the statement does not specify), the other is the 9-yard hash mark. The UNC player closest to the ref who threw the flag clearly broke that plane. That being the case, the play should come back--and since it did, no problem--except with the sore losers who think that the call somehow equates to "being robbed," even though the TD (not to mention a 2-point conversion try, one of which had already failed earlier) would have somehow been an automatic UNC win. It's doubtful they would even have scored, and even more doubtful the 2-pointer would work, and even more doubtful they would have won the game after that.

That's the weakest argument I've seen on this forum in a long time. Please don't jam some rule technicality down our throat as a defense for a flag that shouldn't have been thrown.

No, it didn't cost them the game but it did cost them an opportunity. And on national TV with millions watching, such an simple mistake that shouldn't have been made reflects negatively on officiating.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by umpjim

Not a football guy. Didn't the UNC coach indicate that a ref said there were three players that he could indicate as offside. Would that suggest the 35 yard line?

The ACC has acknowledged that the call was for offside at the 35 yard line, not a 9 yard mark infraction.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Just4Kicks

And one did. There are two planes that cannot be broken on the kickoff, one is the 35-yard-line (which the statement does not specify), the other is the 9-yard hash mark. The UNC player closest to the ref who threw the flag clearly broke that plane. That being the case, the play should come back--and since it did, no problem--except with the sore losers who think that the call somehow equates to "being robbed," even though the TD (not to mention a 2-point conversion try, one of which had already failed earlier) would have somehow been an automatic UNC win. It's doubtful they would even have scored, and even more doubtful the 2-pointer would work, and even more doubtful they would have won the game after that.

I like how you talk to me like I've never officiated a football game. I have (unlike you).

I have been on the kicker's line in an NCAA football game, so I actually know the rule and, more importantly, the spirit of it. That foul wouldn't get called in this situation in a million years and wasn't what the official threw the flag for in this instance, either.

That rule is to prevent a player from hiding out on the sideline or using a substitution to hide out on the field. If those players are clearly on the field, they aren't calling it. Ever.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The ACC has acknowledged that the call was for offside at the 35 yard line, not a 9 yard mark infraction.

Isn't that what I said above?

On Facebook, I have a Clemson-grad-friend who is *still* trying to justify this call. When I actually put substance in front of him, he just replies, "OK, whatever." OK, whatever.

But in my opinion it doesn't help officiating when people double down on obviously incorrect calls.

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Rich

Isn't that what I said above?

On Facebook, I have a Clemson-grad-friend who is *still* trying to justify this call. When I actually put substance in front of him, he just replies, "OK, whatever." OK, whatever.

But in my opinion it doesn't help officiating when people double down on obviously incorrect calls.

Yep....it's a fairly simple thing. He missed it. Yea, it's unfortunate but it happened. IMO it should be reviewable - it's a point of fact thing, like 12 men on the field, not judgment like holding. Now, angles may mean that it would take an egregious miss to get overturned. But this was one of them - and replay could have saved that official from being the story of the week.

The call isn't getting nearly as much indignation as the Miami-Duke because a) something crazy didn't happen immediately after, and b) no one outside of Chapel Hill really wanted to see UNC crash the CFP party and were fine how it turned out. But it still was missed. Life goes on.

[CT1]

Originally Posted by scrounge

no one outside of Chapel Hill really wanted to see UNC crash the CFP party and were fine how it turned out.

According to the "experts", that wouldn't have happened anyway. It would have come down to Stanford, Ohio State, or (gasp!) Clemson for the 4th spot.

[Just4Kicks]

Originally Posted by Rich

I like how you talk to me like I've never officiated a football game. I have (unlike you).

I have been on the kicker's line in an NCAA football game, so I actually know the rule and, more importantly, the spirit of it. That foul wouldn't get called in this situation in a million years and wasn't what the official threw the flag for in this instance, either.

That rule is to prevent a player from hiding out on the sideline or using a substitution to hide out on the field. If those players are clearly on the field, they aren't calling it. Ever.

I like the way you talk to me as though I will just concede to your personal authority just because you declare yourself to be so. "They aren't calling it. ever."

But your declaration is not true. Fact is, it gets called all the time. I'm not the only one who saw it either. Here's a description of the same thing

https://www.tigernet.com/forums/mess...ageID=18492748

and in the comments here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moqJFO6o_fM

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Just4Kicks

I like the way you talk to me as though I will just concede to your personal authority just because you declare yourself to be so. "They aren't calling it. ever."

But your declaration is not true. Fact is, it gets called all the time. I'm not the only one who saw it either. Here's a description of the same thing

https://www.tigernet.com/forums/mess...ageID=18492748

and in the comments here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moqJFO6o_fM

You say it gets called "all the time" but offer no other instances. And really...are we really reduced to posting a fan forum thread and youtube comments as support? Really??

[Just4Kicks]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The ACC has acknowledged that the call was for offside at the 35 yard line, not a 9 yard mark infraction.

The ACC announcement was most likely drawn up without even talking to the official who made the call. The 9 yard mark infraction is an offside just as the 35 yard line infraction. Some folks have tried to say it would be called illegal formation, but if that were true, then so would the "normal" offside, which in the rule book is included in a section of rules that technically fall under illegal formations.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Just4Kicks

I like the way you talk to me as though I will just concede to your personal authority just because you declare yourself to be so. "They aren't calling it. ever."

But your declaration is not true. Fact is, it gets called all the time. I'm not the only one who saw it either. Here's a description of the same thing

https://www.tigernet.com/forums/mess...ageID=18492748

and in the comments here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moqJFO6o_fM

It gets called all the time? OK, prove it. If I had called this, I'd probably find myself not on the field the next week.

You mistakenly think that everyone's opinion is equal. I would hope that you'd take my post over the posts of fans on a fan forum. I actually worked as an NCAA football official and know what we were expected to call and not call.

By the way, this is a forum for officials, not for fanboys. You're welcome to stay and learn from officials, but we're really not interested in the rest.

Originally Posted by Just4Kicks

The ACC announcement was most likely drawn up without even talking to the official who made the call. The 9 yard mark infraction is an offside just as the 35 yard line infraction. Some folks have tried to say it would be called illegal formation, but if that were true, then so would the "normal" offside, which in the rule book is included in a section of rules that technically fall under illegal formations.

Really? Now you're assuming that the conference's statement was just made up?

Never mind my previous post. Just go away.

[Just4Kicks]

Originally Posted by scrounge

You say it gets called "all the time" but offer no other instances. And really...are we really reduced to posting a fan forum thread and youtube comments as support? Really??

Wasn't posting it as "support." The comments were made to me as though I made the whole idea up. The links were to show this is not the case, others are on top of this as well.