The Official Forum - usc vs. nd

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Football (https://forum.officiating.com/football/)

- - usc vs. nd (https://forum.officiating.com/football/22661-usc-vs-nd.html)

I disagree with the changing your mind part. The important thing is to get the call right. If you realize you made a mistake, don't stick with the first call just because that's what you called first.

It's the announcers/media (who NEVER know the rules) that made this even more inflamatory.

The ball was ruled to have been fumbled backwards. So the ball is spotted where it went out of bounds, and the clock starts on the snap.

Several days later, and the media is still talking about how they think Leinart should have spiked the ball, or a fake-spike play or something. There's no reason to spike the ball, the clock was not running.

Funny how hitting Leinart so hard, and knocking the ball out cost ND the game. If he hadn't fumbled, the clock would have expired before another play could have been run.

Quote:

Originally posted by Zebra29
I disagree with the changing your mind part. The important thing is to get the call right. If you realize you made a mistake, don't stick with the first call just because that's what you called first.

Agreed. Get the call right. Sitchs like these separate the great refs from the exceptional refs. Just get the call right in the first place.

Quote:

Originally posted by Zebra29
Funny how hitting Leinart so hard, and knocking the ball out cost ND the game. If he hadn't fumbled, the clock would have expired before another play could have been run.

Let me think back to a time where the refs "went back to get the call right"...

Umm...

Ummmmm.....

1972 Olympics - Mens Basketball ???

Quote:

Originally posted by JugglingReferee
http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/5000806

Don't ever do this:

Quote:

Originally posted by Associated Press
Weis said the referee first told him Leinart had fumbled the ball forward, then ruled he had fumbled it backward. He said he was told by the referee that the official who had made the ruling had changed his mind.

As an official, don't ever change your mind. Just make the right call to begin with.

I don't think the problem is so much with changing a call. Obviously, this is one that you want to SELL, but you want to get it right in the end.

If Weis's quote is accurate, then I think the bigger problem is how the R explained this - that the official "changed his mind." That makes it sound like the forward/backward fumble is an arbitrary decision and the HL is pulling it from his a**.

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
I don't think the problem is so much with changing a call. Obviously, this is one that you want to SELL, but you want to get it right in the end.

Yes, we want to get it right in the end. That's why we have IR. Sure the HL should sell the call. (Did he?)

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
If Weis's quote is accurate, then I think the bigger problem is how the R explained this - that the official "changed his mind." That makes it sound like the forward/backward fumble is an arbitrary decision and the HL is pulling it from his a**.

Which Weis quote are you talking about? I think you might mean the claim Weis made about the R's comments of the HL changing his mind.

Granted the R should have used different language, such as "re-evaluated what happened," "accepted definite knowledge from other officials," etc... but I'm not sure about the fumble's direction decision being arbitrary. I think at the time the HL made the call he thought was right at the time.

I don't think the HL pulled the call from his a$$. I think he was unprepared for the situation. He did not rise to being a great official.

Quote:

Originally posted by JugglingReferee

I don't think the HL pulled the call from his a$$. I think he was unprepared for the situation. He did not rise to being a great official.

I didn't say he was pulling the call from you-know-where, just saying that a coach will think you're making it up when those words are used.