PAC10 Supervisor Discusses BYU-WA Call

[PeteBooth]

Rut IMO, this NCAA rule is akin to many baseball rules that are "the black letter of the law' so to speak yet as baseball officials we are to use good sound judgement.

Here's a baseball example:

When a player elbows another player it is considered a Malicous act.
Sitch; Player coming home and the ball is coming in from the out-field Player in an effort to protect himself, raises his hands however, he also contacts elbows F2 in the process.

Now the aforementioned ACT in an by istelf as with the player throwing the ball in the air is DEFINED by rule as unsportsmanlike etc. however, if a baseball official called MC on the part of the runner they would be chastized all over the place.

Over on the baseball side Carl Childress has written a book 51 ways to ruin a baseball game. In addition, Peter Osborne wrote an article Third world plays happen to third world umpires.

I am wondering if there is such a book or article for football referees.

i agree the NCAA should re-look at the rule but IMO, the official could have and should have "left it alone" similar to what we as basbeall officials have to judge whenever we toss someone.

Pete Booth

[TXMike]

Bases loaded, 2 outs, top of the 9th, score is Visitors 3 - Home 2. Batter takes a called third strike for the 3d out. What is the catcher supposed to do with the ball? And if he decides to launch it 30 feet into the air over home plate, what do you do?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TXMike

Bases loaded, 2 outs, top of the 9th, score is Visitors 3 - Home 2. Batter takes a called third strike for the 3d out. What is the catcher supposed to do with the ball? And if he decides to launch it 30 feet into the air over home plate, what do you do?

Shouldn't the catcher do whatever it is he does with the ball if the same situation happened in the top of the 8th? Or the 5th?

Is there a rule that says he can't throw it in the air, similar to the NCAA FB rule? If so, what's the prescribed penalty? 20 yards and a loss of down?

[JRutledge]

Pete,

This is not baseball. Baseball has a lot of things we do not have to call because of the nature of the game. And if there is certain celebrations in a baseball game, players tend to think they are Major League Baseball Players and start throwing at each other to correct it. That kind of justice is not something that you see in football circles.

Once again, the NCAA had a directive on how to handle these situations. They made it very clear this was illegal along with several other acts. And the NCAA used video to make that point clearer. This is not about Carl Childress or some book. The sports have different expectations and there is a lot more money and focus on the football side than there ever has been on the baseball side. There are a lot of acts that the football committee has curtailed this way and they are getting very specific. I do not see baseball having the same problem because they do not have a game stop after a score.

Peace

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by TXMike

If the ball had bonked an opponent or an official on the head when it came down, would you concur with flagging that?

I didn't mean physical harm by "harm." Harm to the game. Harm to the proceedings.

A football weighs, what, 16 ounces? The players have helmets on. And if you've not been bonked by a football in the head area as an official, you've been extremely lucky.

I don't care how high you throw it spontaneously or what it does when it comes down. IMHO and IMHO only, it wasn't an attempt to showboat nor was it an attempt to delay the game or do anything that, in my mind, "harms" the game.

That said, yes, it's a rule. I get that. I'm questioning the need for the rule, which is different from questioning the call.

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Excuse me "Over&Back", in the u-tube video, although somewhat conjested when the ball is released, it does look like it was thrown in the air. Watching the game LIVE there was a completely different, unimpeded, much closer view and it appeared he threw the ball over his shoulder, and it went directly down.

Then that should show up on the video, shouldn't it? I mean, Locker doesn't have some strange Lamont Cranston mind control way of making video appear different than reality, does he?

Needless to say, there were several repeats of the end of the play offered by the network, and they all looked the same.

Yeah. The ball going up.

If the ball was thrown high up in the air, I've got no problem with the call that was made, but that's not what I saw (or believe I saw)

There's a reason eyewitness testimony isn't the #1 choice of lawyers in a courtroom. It's notoriously unreliable.



Where's the ball? Just curious.

My polite suggestion is that you didn't see what you thought you saw.

You don't suppose the networks realize that by showing the tight shot they can manipulate opinions do you??? The media are the ones who are the most vocal whiners right now about the call. The video has to support what the talking heads are saying to enhance their credibility.

They may be lazy, but (by and large) they're not clever enough to be conspiratorial.

Plus, this'll be forgotten by this Sunday. It'll get some play on Saturday's pregame shows because it fills time and is sexy. But "the media" who has this grand house of cards to prop up, will be on to something else very shortly.

Look, seriously, Occam's Razor here:
1. Kid scored and tossed ball in air in celebration.
2. Official made a call that he was told to make. Sorry for your luck, but that's the rule.
3. Media goes nuts because media knows eff-all about officiating and because controversy sells.
4. Kid won't do it again.
5. Bunch more games this weekend and for the rest of the season.

No grand conspiracy. No overthinking necessary. Just sensationalism and blowing everything about major college football up to gigantic proportions (if this had happened in a game featuring Baldwin-Wallace, nobody would care).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

I didn't mean physical harm by "harm." Harm to the game. Harm to the proceedings.

A football weighs, what, 16 ounces? The players have helmets on. And if you've not been bonked by a football in the head area as an official, you've been extremely lucky.

I don't care how high you throw it spontaneously or what it does when it comes down. IMHO and IMHO only, it wasn't an attempt to showboat nor was it an attempt to delay the game or do anything that, in my mind, "harms" the game.

That said, yes, it's a rule. I get that. I'm questioning the need for the rule, which is different from questioning the call.

Well it is not your opinion or my opinion that matters. I think the NCAA has the right to outlaw acts they feel are inappropriate. It happens all the time with leagues or organizations. This situation is not different. I know in all my sports there are things that are clearly outlawed. I also do not work on national TV with the level of scrutiny these guys go through. If they would have not applied the rule, they could get in trouble or suspended. Now I do not know about you, but I have never worked a game where the money I make can be taken because of a call I make or do not make.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

I don't care how high you throw it spontaneously or what it does when it comes down. IMHO and IMHO only, it wasn't an attempt to showboat nor was it an attempt to delay the game or do anything that, in my mind, "harms" the game.

That said, yes, it's a rule. I get that. I'm questioning the need for the rule, which is different from questioning the call.

The act of launching the ball 40' into the air is, even if spontaneous, showboating. There is no other reason to do it.

If you start splitting hairs about whether it was spontaneous or if it was an "attempt" to showboat, you'll create more of a mess than you fix.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

They may be lazy, but (by and large) they're not clever enough to be conspiratorial.

...

No grand conspiracy. No overthinking necessary. Just sensationalism and blowing everything about major college football up to gigantic proportions (if this had happened in a game featuring Baldwin-Wallace, nobody would care).

The point about conspiricy is that if the teams were reversed, they wouldn't be pitching such a fit. Just like the media has a favored political party, there are "favored" conferences/teams. When a BCS conference team gets the short end of a controversial decision, it's a outrage. When a non-BCS conference team gets the same, it gets mentioned (maybe) and passes. Or they'be be saying...but look how high he threw it....you simply can't ignore that. The refs are neutral, the media has favorites.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The point about conspiricy is that if the teams were reversed, they wouldn't be pitching such a fit. Just like the media has a favored political party, there are "favored" conferences/teams. When a BCS conference team gets the short end of a controversial decision, it's a outrage. When a non-BCS conference team gets the same, it gets mentioned (maybe) and passes. Or they'be be saying...but look how high he threw it....you simply can't ignore that. The refs are neutral, the media has favorites.

I have favourites, too. Lots of them. One favourite takes me to this website. Another to refstripes. Another to.......

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The point about conspiricy is that if the teams were reversed, they wouldn't be pitching such a fit. Just like the media has a favored political party, there are "favored" conferences/teams. When a BCS conference team gets the short end of a controversial decision, it's a outrage. When a non-BCS conference team gets the same, it gets mentioned (maybe) and passes. Or they'be be saying...but look how high he threw it....you simply can't ignore that. The refs are neutral, the media has favorites.

I do not think it has anything to do with the media picking favorites. I think it has to do with the media is ignorant about how officials make decisions and the possible consequences to those decisions. I was watching 1st and 10 on ESPN just a few minutes ago and one of the individuals suggested that the officials ignore the rule and eat the flag. Now what people like that do not know, if an official ignores this call that has been beat into their head all summer and during meetings, then they might not have a job for a few games and could lead to being released at the end of the season. Just like in politics, when people do not understand all the elements of a group of people, you have sports commentators that run off at the mouth about things they do not understand. It is a lot harder to go find out the facts than just spout off about it. The same applies in this situation and the same applies in this political campaign. And it also does not help when you have people talking about these things that have no background in those areas. And the last I checked I have not seen a commentator in sports have an officiating background. I also do not see many political commentators have the background of the people or issues they are trying to cover either. Saying they have favorites is too simplistic.

Peace

[JasonTX]

Did anyone notice the freshman football player from Kansas State. He scored his first college touchdown this past weekend. Being a young, undisiplined kid we should have expected him to throw the ball high into the air especially given the back that it was his first ever TD. Well, he did not do that. He acted like he had been there before and tossed the ball to the nearest official and went to his sideline.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I have favourites, too. Lots of them. One favourite takes me to this website. Another to refstripes. Another to.......

I always pegged you as a FireFox user.

So does the Canadian version of IE say "Favourites" instead of Favorites?

[JRutledge]

But the emotion of the game is so high with a game on TV. I cannot believe a kid actually handed the ball to an official, that has never happened in the history of football.

Peace

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But the emotion of the game is so high with a game on TV. I cannot believe a kid actually handed the ball to an official, that has never happened in the history of football.

Peace

[Sarcasm]We cannot expect them to act rationally and to control themselves. This is football we're talking about, not chess. It's amazing Locker didn't throw the ball into the crowd, strip down to his underwear and give the entire BYU bench the middle finger. But if he did, the refs should've eaten their flag on that too. After all, look at that drive he orchestrated.[/Sarcasm]