ACC Championship Offside Call
 

UNC called for offside on what would have been a recovered onside kick. Replay shows it was clearly an incorrect call.

How in the world is this call missed?

I bet the NCAA makes this is a reviewable play in the offseason.

It was a very bad call from my seat and.view. no better on the replay

I believe it's already reviewable in NCAA.

Not sure, but I believe that in the NCAA rules you have to have at least 4 players on each side of the kicker (I know it is true in NFHS) and if you look at a pic UNC only had 3 players on one side at the time of the kick

Watch the video. There are four on each side. Don't use a still frame.

It's not. Why would they not review it if it was reviewable?

Just a wild guess, admittedly based on a number of unsubstantiated presumptions, but ASSUMING the officials selected for the ACC Championship game were highly qualified, with considerable experience and were thoroughly cognizant of ALL the applicable rules, and ASSUMING that the replay officials had access to any and all replay angles and views, and ASSUMING that the other game officials on this (Championship selected) crew accepted the call as made, that just possibly they (ALL) saw , or understood, something that you, despite your view from your chair and any TV replays you had access to, didn't see and didn't understand or were aware of?

Look, they blew it....it's not reviewable, and it's not really even close. You don't need to Zapruder it from 15 angles at 1/32 speed to see this one. No amount of weird capitalization or excessive commas or self-righteous preaching will change that. Just admit it.

Of course they're highly qualified, much better than me. And this play SHOULD be reviewable - it's more like an out-of-bounds call than a judgment like a hold - so they never should have been in this position to be blasted. But they are. And they are because this one was big, easy to see, and obvious.

I just hope they don't kneejerk to public opinion and suspend them all for this. Recent history suggests otherwise.

They need to suspend the entire crew, even though only 2 officials would have been able to make this call. Just like they did in the Miami-Duke game. :rolleyes:

Peace

It's crazy that this isn't reviewable. This is hardly a judgment call. I bet it will become reviewable the next time the NCAA makes new rules.

I don't think that anyone can technically be "suspended" because, correct me if I'm wrong, none of these officials in question would be eligible to work a bowl game, anyway.

Of course, I suppose some punishment could "carry over" to next season. But I don't know much about college officiating, so I have no idea really.

If it was reviewable, it would be another review most would not agree with. The rule does not say anything about what foot is to cross, your body cannot cross. There is no angle that shows a definitive if it were very close. "

Again if people want 5 hour games they can have it with more reviews. But this was just a bad miss by officials that either was not prepared for that kind of game or was not looking at what they were supposed to look at. I do not see plays like this get missed in freshman football with one guy on the kicking line.

Peace

Suppose I told you that the foul was announced incorrectly, and that it was actually an illegal formation foul?

I don't think they had four on each side when the kick took place.

Yes this is a still frame, but pretty evident they were in an illegal formation.

Because it's a still frame.

If you actually watch the video, you will see that there's a 4th player who is directly behind the player visible at the top of the screen. It's just freaky how he managed to be directly behind the player at that exact instant.

If there were only three on that side of the kick, that means there's only 10 players in the kick formation, and I don't think there's an R in existence in NCAA football who would blow the RFP on a free kick if one team only had 10 players on the field.

Interesting quote (emphasis mine):

Offsides is not a reviewable play," said the spokesperson. "Dennis Hennigan (ACC director of officiating) said that mechanically the officials were in the correct position. The rule as it relates to to an onside kick that the 35-yard line is treated as a plane and if any part of a player breaks that plane before the ball is kicked it's offsides. The officials saw a member of the kicking team break the plane before the ball was kicked.

Fans react to controversial call in ACC Championship | abc11.com

Is there such an interpretation regarding onside kicks? If your index finger breaks the plane it is offsides?

It's been that way about 110 yrs. Previously it'd been foot position.

The video is clear. They had 4 on each side. My mistake. If the penalty was actually an illegal formation, then he thought he saw it that way, but why would he throw the flag for that when it was on the opposite side of the field. Seems like he just flat out missed the offside.

I went to bed Saturday night because it appeared that all the teams in the lead appeared to have it in the bag, save Iowa.

I've perused the Raleigh News And Observer for two days and very little mention of it after a small initial article. They went bonkers after the Duke loss to Miami and Carolina is THE school so apparently the hubbub isn't that big a deal.

I was wondering the same thing as I did not see the game. But since it appears that this was an offsides call, it was clearly not right.

Peace

I see 4 (look at the shadows - there's a player directly behind the top player).

The rule is breaking the plane, right? I have not seen a camera angle that absolutely could not be suffering from parallax issues... nothing straight down the line. If anything did break the plane, it was most likely #30's fingers, but none of the on-line replay videos that I can find (besides not being at the correct angle) allow for a frame-by-frame look.

There were at least four on each side. Count the players at the top of the screen after the kick. Clearly four players moving behind the kicker.

ACC refs ruin UNC’s chance to upset Clemson

I mean with regard to onside situations, which seems to be the distinction the ACC official is making. Seems a ticky-tacky cop out to me.

Not surprising. You don't find much about Carolina in the N&O anymore unless the words "NCAA investigation" are also included.

^. I already corrected myself.

We always treat onside situations as an absolute plane. On deep kickoffs, they're fine unless a foot lands offside before the ball is kicked.

That said, I can't see how anyone could possibly be offside based on the screen shots I've seen, even accounting for parallax issues.

NCAA rules, RULE 6, Section 1, Article 2.c.5:

All players of Team A must have been between the nine-yard marks
after the ready-for-play signal [S19].

Take another look at the video, only don't make the mistake others have made in considering it a violation of the 4-men-per-side rule, which draws everyone's attention away from the actual infraction by focusing attention on the upper part of the screen. Instead, focus on the lower part of the screen, and you will see that the closest player to the near side of the field in the video is lined up outside the hash marks, in violation of this rule.

Now I'm no expert on what the call technically should be for this violation, i.e., whether that is still called an offsides infraction, or perhaps illegal formation or something else. But the official got it right, he was looking right at him when he threw the flag. At worst, he would be guilty of calling it by the wrong name, not making a bad call.

But I'm guessing that the call would still be offside rather than illegal formation, because the infraction is basically the same thing that happens with the normal offside call, it simply involves being offside in regard to the width of the field rather than the length.

Except that's not what he was calling -- articles have clearly said what was called and why.

Holy cow, is it possible an "article" may actually have gotten details WRONG?

I am starting to wonder the same thing as the media often goes off and tangents about things with rules when they clearly do not have all the details or never seem to talk to people that would know.

Peace

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.”

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.

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?

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?

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.

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

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.

Isn't that what I said above? :D

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.

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.

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??

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.

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.

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

Never mind my previous post. Just go away.

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.

"It gets called all the time? OK, prove it."

How about "aren't calling it. ever." Can't help but notice that's not exactly provable either.

If you can't find one instance anywhere on the Internet, that's good enough for me.

Likewise

How about from your own forum? From Football/9-yard marks thread, comment #13:

High school. Different animal. And you'll find it enforced differently in various areas of the country. We only flag it if the defense fails to match up.

Just to clear something up, the 9 yard nine marks infraction is not an offside foul, it is a foul for illegal formation.

The announced foul was offside. I guarantee you that if it was an illegal formation foul, they would have announced it as such.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6oC...ature=youtu.be

Here is the video of the play. Notice that the tick marks at the bottom? Those are the 9 yard marks. You have maybe one or two players not inside them.

Perhaps a technical infraction but not one you'll see called on a kickoff in college. The approved mechanic is if you're going to do anything about it, is to tell the players to get inside the nine yard mark to make them legal.

You need to trust the people that have actually officiated games using NCAA rules (I have as well) when we say that isn't the call.

That's also something specific to North Carolina because in high school, there's not even a 9 yard mark requirement on free kicks.

Yup.

For someone who's never, EVER, been anywhere near a situation like this, I find it odd you think you have the perspective to tell us what "most likely" happened.

As someone more familiar to this situation ... I promise you the ACC did not announce ANYTHING before talking to the officials - likely for quite a long time.

OK... you're on a forum where the vast majority of the people posting have either BEEN in this situation, or have talked often to people who have been in this situation, and have likely discussed this sort of situation in numerous clinics and training sessions.

You have NO perspective to offer here other than that of some guy on a couch who thinks he knows better.

Yet you insist you are right without any shred of evidence (no ... another forum filled with other guys on couches does not count as evidence). Do you realize how ridiculous this sounds?

You're being told, by people who WOULD KNOW, that this doesn't get called in the scenario being discussed.

My confusion is that this wasn't an error of omission (not seeing something that is there), but error of commission (seeing something that isn't there). When a hold happens, it's easy to say an official "missed" it because he didn't see it. But when a hold doesn't happen, and there's a flag on the ground..? These, I think, are the most frustrating and confusing.

So, the official saw something. I don't know what it is, but he saw something. Like in a hold, the official saw a ball of jersey in a player's hand. Or the sometimes case where you see a player go flying onto his face, and the official turns and assumes that he was pushed in the back. And it wasn't a "miss," at least how I see it. (I know, I know, "miss" is a generic term for not seeing something there and for seeing something not there, but I'm not a fan of the terminology.)

And frankly from the replay, I don't know what he could have seen. Perhaps he thought the kicker's foot was some other player's foot?

Also, the kick was boxed in (like we always do for onside kicks). So there was an official on both sides of the ball. Since the far side official didn't throw a flag, I suspect it had to be a player on the near side. And the closest one is the second from the bottom. Perhaps he saw a hand or finger break the plane at the kick?

Anyway, without a camera looking down the 35 yard line, and no statement forthcoming from the official with the flag, we'll never know what he saw or what he thought he saw.