When Replay Fails

[BoBo]

I am a Sooner fan and yes i am biased but this somes it up.

you watch this video and decide

http://russellarch.com/blah/OREGON.mov

My rule question is the kicking team allowed to hit the receiving team before the ball crosses the 10 yard free kick line. It appears two OU players were being contacted by the Oregon kids.

I give the stripes the benefit of the doubt alot since i wear them 4 nights a week. But this is an embarassment to the Pac 10 crew, the repaly official and the NCAA concept on replay

[TXMike]

Contact that I see is from players competing for the ball, not from blocking.

And even if they had blocked, I don't believe the crew could have assessed a penalty as the foul after video review as foul was not called.


The better argument you Okie fans should make is on the recovery of the loose ball.

[Warrenkicker]

Originally Posted by BoBo

you watch this video and decide

http://russellarch.com/blah/OREGON.mov

First a disclaimer. I am not an OU or Oregon fan. I really don't usually care who wins the game if it is called properly unless a bad call or two helps Notre Dame to lose.

This video shows two things. First, you can't use the numbers ABC puts on the screen for the actual play clock. The play clock is on the field and whomever is watching it looks to see that it has expired and then sees if the snap has been made. Some conferences are more strict about when the clock has run out than others. The Big XII has normally been a bit more forgiving with the play clock than some other conferences.

Second you can clearly see on replay that the Oklahoma player stepped OOB at the OU 48. The sideline official had his view blocked by a defender at the moment the player stepped OOB. The OU 47 is two yards beyond the line and not three. You can also see from the interesting coloring of the Oregon field that he was running in the first 5 yards of a dark colored area of the field and that there were 10 yards of dark field there. So that means he must not have yet made it to mid-field. ABC even had a great screen shot of the moment he stepped OOB showing the numbers on the field and that it was the OU 48 and not the Oregon 47. So the replay booth was not clear as to where they wanted the ball placed so the officials on the field put it at the OU 47 because they suspected that was the spot requested. Replay gave OU an extra 5 yards.

As for the onside kick, I only saw it once at full speed on an ESPN replay and the instant I saw it I said that someone touched the ball about 7 or 8 yards into the kick. I couldn't tell who had done it but I didn't see any OU players in that area right then. I would like to see another replay but my initial thought was that something wasn't right on that one.

[mcrowder]

It irritates me as a football official that the immediate response to someone who makes a legitimate complaint about an officiating problem is immediately dismissed as "fanboy".

I'll admit allegiance as well - I was rooting for Oregon. Hook Em Horns. Screw the Sooners ... but not like this.

The DPI was borderline and surely no conclusive evidence existed to change that call...

But the onsides kick replay WAS conclusive, and to me, our brethren in stripes botched the call - badly.

[bluezebra]

I'm not a fan of either school. Depending on which replay angle was shown, there was inconclusive evidence to overrule the call on the field. One angle looked like K touched first. Another looked to me that the ball hit an R player in the helmet.

These guys GAVE the game to Oregon...

The Oakies had a chance to play good defense, and DIDN'T. By the way, how much money did you lose?

Bob

[OverAndBack]

To me, it's not when you question a call that makes you a fanboy.

It's when you say the officials GAVE a game to somebody that you become a fanboy.

When I was 13, I used to think that all refs were incompetent and that if they blew a call that I could obviously see from my couch with my teenage eyes was wrong, they wanted the other team to win or they were being paid off.

Having grown up, and now having done this for a few years, I can see how childish that attitude was.

And it still is.

Officials make mistakes. They don't GIVE games to anyone, and to imply otherwise is immature.

To be unable to accept the defeat of 53 (or 85, or however many it happens to be) guys you've never met and to blame it on an official's call is the height of fanboyism.

[Raymond]

My question concerns the actions of the "???? judge" nearest to Bob Stoopes following the DPI. Stoopes runs up to him saying and gesturing that the ball was tipped. The official is clearly shaking his head from side-to-side in response to Stoopes' remarks and gestures.

Perception is that the official is saying "No" to Stoopes' claim that the ball was tipped. Would it not have been better for the official not to react to Stoopes?

I know on the B-ball side of the house we get flak sometimes for the "perception" our body language and non-verbals give off when communicating with coaches. Is there a lot of emphasis on the football side?

BTW, in watching the replays ABC showed, it appears to me the defender about 1 yard off the line-of-scrimmage clearly tipped the ball.

[rickref872]

I did not see the game but I saw the plays. I have a question. What and why did they give the ball to Oregon on the kick? What was the explaination? Seems pretty cut and dried to me who should have the ball but this was a hard one to see if you think about the officials postioning and where it occurs. In a 7 man set up how could the HL get any help on this?

On the PI play am I mistaken or was some contact being made before the tip? If so could that not warrant illegal use of the hands? I know the video I have seen that it is hard to tell, but it appears the DB was hindering the wr during the route just before teh ball was tipped? Thoughts

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rickref872

I did not see the game but I saw the plays. I have a question. What and why did they give the ball to Oregon on the kick? What was the explaination? Seems pretty cut and dried to me who should have the ball but this was a hard one to see if you think about the officials postioning and where it occurs. In a 7 man set up how could the HL get any help on this?

I am not a NCAA Official and I am not as knowledgeable about what is a penalty in many cases in the NCAA code. But if the Oregon players had touched the ball that had not traveled less than 10 yards, is that not a penalty? If it is a penalty you cannot review a penalty.

I also think this was very close and was not very conclusive if you ask me. The ball was right near the line and it is not like we had a shot right down the line.

Originally Posted by rickref872

On the PI play am I mistaken or was some contact being made before the tip? If so could that not warrant illegal use of the hands? I know the video I have seen that it is hard to tell, but it appears the DB was hindering the wr during the route just before teh ball was tipped? Thoughts

If you are talking about LSU-Auburn play, I have no answer. This was such a close call it could have gone either way. I think the officials did a good job to at least come together and discuss the situation. I am not saying it is right, but I really do not know what else they could have done. Remember this was not a play they had slow motion replay to decide and several angles in slow motion to draw a final conclusion.

Peace

[GPC2]

It is always interesting how different eyes see the same video footage in COMPLETELY different ways. I saw the visual evidence as totally conclusive that K touched the ball prior to the ball reaching R's restraining line. JRutledge, you saw it differently - which is fine.

But, obviously there is no factual conclusion of right and wrong, which is my main reason for hating instant replay. If the game is held up for a ruling which still is not conclusive, I fail to see the purpose of replay. Let's let the officials officiate, and keep the cameras out of the (officiating aspect) game. Mistakes will be made, but the world will go on.

[BoBo]

See on the OU message board that the crew and the reply official all will be suspended for one week, and there were incorrect calls made.

Will try and find a link to the official article