BYU - Washington

[kdf5]

Originally Posted by johnSandlin

I saw it and it was the wrong call to make at any point in the game.

I understand the rule, but officials need to really hide the flag on something like this especially at that point of that game.

Believe me, this will be a hot topic for pregames in officiating crews in the coming weeks in all conferences across the country.

There is nothing stupider than the old "you can't flag that at this point of the game" comment.

[wolfgang70]

Originally Posted by kdf5

There is nothing stupider than the old "you can't flag that at this point of the game" comment.

QFT. In regards to ESPN, when in the hell are they going to hire a retired official as a commentator so they can finally get this stuff right?

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by wolfgang70

QFT. In regards to ESPN, when in the hell are they going to hire a retired official as a commentator so they can finally get this stuff right?

Probably never. Even if they did it wouldn't make much of a difference. I remember a NFL Official Review segment from 2 years ago. The NFL has a grasp and control rule which says that if the QB is grasped and controlled by a team B player and another defender is coming towards the QB then the ball is dead (or something like that). That play came up in a game, after the QB was grasped and controlled he fumbled; the ball was dead before the fumble. So Rich Eisen and Pereira argue back and forth about the call after Pereira explained the rule. He even said that it was a perfect example of the rule and Eisen still argued. These announcer guys just don't get it and having someone on TV who knows the rules and officiating wouldn't change that.

[Texas Aggie]

This was a no-brainer USC, and thus, call. Truthfully, anyone suggesting otherwise is being either ignorant or foolish. Besides, if a college kicker can't keep a game tying kick from being blocked, that's their problem. If he makes it, we don't hear about this at all.

[mikesears]

I felt the call was a great call. We can't ignore fouls simply because they happen late in a game and a player is excited. I am guessing that ESPN would have backed the player even if he spiked the ball into the ground and ESPN would have said that he just "dropped the ball".

Besides, this call didn't cause anyone to lose. They still had a chance to tie and it was poor execution by their field goal/extra point team that caused them to lose.

UW take on it is here:

http://gohuskies.cstv.com/sports/m-f...090608aaa.html

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by mikesears

Besides, this call didn't cause anyone to lose.

Penalties aren't causes, they're effects.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Penalties aren't causes, they're effects.

The point remains that the PAT was blocked, not missed. The distance added due to the penalty was inconsequential and irrelevant to the loss.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The point remains that the PAT was blocked, not missed. The distance added due to the penalty was inconsequential and irrelevant to the loss.

That wasn't my point.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The distance added due to the penalty was inconsequential and irrelevant to the loss.

That's an entirely inaccurate statement. Changing a kick from 20 yards to 35 yards is most certainly consequential and relevant...it changes the angle of the flight of the ball, etc., etc...did it "cause" the Huskies to lose? Of course not - that's on them. But to say the added distance is irrelevant and inconsequential is completely inaccurate.

[Bad Mood Risin]

I agree with what has been said, and Mark May really showed his ignorance tonight.

The part that really gets me is some of the guys o ESPN Radio have mentioned that it is the rule -- a dumb rule -- but a rule nonetheless. Then they talk about the Rules Committee as if it's a group of officials making up the rules.

I don't know the exact make-up of the rules committee, but I know there are plenty of coaches on the committee, and they have the most say. Rules are written by what the coaches want. I'd be surprised if there are any officials on there.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bad Mood Risin

I agree with what has been said, and Mark May really showed his ignorance tonight.

The part that really gets me is some of the guys o ESPN Radio have mentioned that it is the rule -- a dumb rule -- but a rule nonetheless. Then they talk about the Rules Committee as if it's a group of officials making up the rules.

I don't know the exact make-up of the rules committee, but I know there are plenty of coaches on the committee, and they have the most say. Rules are written by what the coaches want. I'd be surprised if there are any officials on there.

At the NCAA level, all Rules Committees are made up of only coaches or people affiliated with the schools unless Roger Redding has an officiating background. Redding’s membership is considered in affiliation of the SEC.

Basically, coaches make decisions on rules every year. Officials do not play a significant role at all on these committees. And that is why you get these rules written without consideration of other factors and the officials get the blame when they are enforced as written. This is not just a problem in football; it is the case in other NCAA sports as well.

Peace

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by Bad Mood Risin

I agree with what has been said, and Mark May really showed his ignorance tonight.

Players (and former players) are not the best folks to be giving interpretations of rules that they were very likely ignorant of when they played and have given precious little thought to since they got on TV.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by wolfgang70

QFT. In regards to ESPN, when in the hell are they going to hire a retired official as a commentator so they can finally get this stuff right?

This would not change anything because these people think like fans. And Mark May even tried to suggest that this was a "Pac-10 crew" as to suggest that they went against the home team. Fans are almost never rational because they have never had to make decisions based on rules and interpretations given by the higher ups.

Peace

[IceGator8]

I was at the game and knew instantly that there would be a flag. The ball went 30-40 feet in th air. When Locker threw it he had enough time to high five, chest bump, and attempt another high five before the ball came back down and hit him.

Seriously, the throw was high enough it gets called 100 times out of 100. Locker as a team leader needs to know this stuff and not commit the infraction.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by IceGator8

I was at the game and knew instantly that there would be a flag. The ball went 30-40 feet in th air. When Locker threw it he had enough time to high five, chest bump, and attempt another high five before the ball came back down and hit him.

Seriously, the throw was high enough it gets called 100 times out of 100. Locker as a team leader needs to know this stuff and not commit the infraction.

Exactly. That is completely clear on the video.

I mentally counted approximately 3, maybe 4 seconds, between the release and when it hit him in the head. 3 seconds equates to 36 feet. 4 seconds, 64 feet. Even it my count was fast and it was really only 2 seconds, it would have been 16 feet above his head. If that is not high, I don't know what is. Simply put, Locker was guilty of an act that drew the flag. Whether or not you like the fact that the official called it, Locker unnecessarily took that risk by throwing the ball.

And even more interesting was the fact that the PAT was blocked, not missed. It's not like the extra distance is what made the block possible. Kicking from the 35 is a pretty basic FG distance. The PAT would have been blocked even in absence of the penalty. So, the penalty is essentially irrelvant.