Game Protest Brewing in California

[bisonlj]

Was the ball still loose when there was an IW? If yes, there should have been a re-kick. No options for R. If they ruled the IW took place after R gained possession, they have the choice to take the ball where it was declared dead or re-kick. If they ran the next play from the 50, are they saying the squib kick was picked up at the 50? Where was it kicked from?

[ajmc]

A couple of years ago, I would have been completely shocked if anyone on an official's forum immediately took the word of a newspaper report, over what sounds like a common sense answer to an extremely loaded question. Sadly, I'm not surprised today, so many are so quick to presume the very worst about the officials in this instance.

Granted, this sounds like a really, really bad IW incident, but what Referee, worth his salt, would throw a crew member under the bus by identifying him to an irate, justifyably or not, coach on the spot? The fact that the Referee chose not to point out who was the particular official who actually sounded the IW shouldn't suggest, at least to other officials, that the crew was unsure that a whistle was inadvertently blown.

For those of you have yet to experience an irate coach not listening to what he's been told and then screwing up the retelling of what he should have heard to match what he concluded before anyone told him anything, you shouldn't have to wait very long for the next opportunity.

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by ajmc

what Referee, worth his salt, would throw a crew member under the bus by identifying him to an irate, justifyably or not, coach on the spot?

I think that's what we're all aghast about.

Doesn't mean it didn't happen that way. Doesn't mean it did.

The fact that the Referee chose not to point out who was the particular official who actually sounded the IW shouldn't suggest, at least to other officials, that the crew was unsure that a whistle was inadvertently blown.

If there was no IW, they'd have had to let the touchdown stand, though, wouldn't they?

Agreed, we don't know the whole circumstance, and likely never will.

I'd like to believe the best about my brothers in stripes. But I don't know what to think about this. And if I can't trust the Sacramento Bee, I don't know what I can trust.

[wwcfoa43]

I would like to gather a room full of coaches and ask them two questions:

1. Did you know coaches that football is played by fallible humans and that it is possible that you could lose the biggest game of your career due to an error by one your human players such as them dropping a ball?

The heads would nod and wonder why I aksed such a stupid question.

2. Did you know coaches that football is officiating by fallible humans and that it is possible that you could lose the biggest game of your career due to an error by one of the human officials such as them blowing their whistle accidentally?

Then shock would set in as the coaches expressed disbelief, anger and starting to imagine the lawsuit that they would have to bring (of course in Canada they would not imagine the lawsuit because here if you spill coffee on yourself you don't get any money...)

It is interesting that coaches can understand the answer to the first question but not the second even though the answers are identical and for the same reason!

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by wwcfoa43

I would like to gather a room full of coaches and ask them two questions:

1. Did you know coaches that football is played by fallible humans and that it is possible that you could lose the biggest game of your career due to an error by one your human players such as them dropping a ball?

The heads would nod and wonder why I aksed such a stupid question.

2. Did you know coaches that football is officiating by fallible humans and that it is possible that you could lose the biggest game of your career due to an error by one of the human officials such as them blowing their whistle accidentally?

Then shock would set in as the coaches expressed disbelief, anger and starting to imagine the lawsuit that they would have to bring (of course in Canada they would not imagine the lawsuit because here if you spill coffee on yourself you don't get any money...)

It is interesting that coaches can understand the answer to the first question but not the second even though the answers are identical and for the same reason!

I don't buy this so much: too many disanalogies, at least for HS football.

1. Only the officials are adults.
2. Only the officials have had years of training.
3. Only the officials get paid (well, security too).
4. Only the officials are officiating.

By that last one I mean that the players are actually playing the game, and if they make mistakes that's part of the game. When officials screw up, that's a disruption of the game.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I don't buy this so much: too many disanalogies, at least for HS football.

1. Only the officials are adults.
2. Only the officials have had years of training.
3. Only the officials get paid (well, security too).
4. Only the officials are officiating.

By that last one I mean that the players are actually playing the game, and if they make mistakes that's part of the game. When officials screw up, that's a disruption of the game.

Oh my mistake (insert sarcasm):

1. Adults don't make mistakes. (!)
2. All officials have years of training at officiating. (What about the officials who are new!)
3. Getting paid means you don't make mistakes. (I wonder what's wrong with the people I work with at my day job then...)
4. Not even sure what #4 implies.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I don't buy this so much: too many disanalogies, at least for HS football.

1. Only the officials are adults.
2. Only the officials have had years of training.
3. Only the officials get paid (well, security too).
4. Only the officials are officiating.

By that last one I mean that the players are actually playing the game, and if they make mistakes that's part of the game. When officials screw up, that's a disruption of the game.

I understand what wwcfoa43 is saying but I agree there is a difference between players and coaches. First, we don't have an opponent that can cause us to make errors. Second, our mistakes are mostly mental while players mistakes can be both mental and physical. Even if our mistakes could be deemed physical (looking in the wrong place, being in the wrong position, blowing an IW), they are caused my mental errors.

[wwcfoa43]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I understand what wwcfoa43 is saying but I agree there is a difference between players and coaches. First, we don't have an opponent that can cause us to make errors. Second, our mistakes are mostly mental while players mistakes can be both mental and physical. Even if our mistakes could be deemed physical (looking in the wrong place, being in the wrong position, blowing an IW), they are caused my mental errors.

Players can make mistakes without opponents being involved. A wide open receiver can drop a pass after all.

There are many factors that go into who wins the game. Sports would be different if the assumption was made that all players will execute perfectly, that the weather will cooperate, that no one will be injured, ... , and that yes officials will work a perfect game.

The team tries to ensure that their players play to their potential but there are no guarantees.
The players will try not to get injured but their are no guarantees.
The home team will try to make the weather or other environmental conditions not a factor (by say shoveling the snow off the field) but their are no guarantees and we have had to play on snow covered fields and it is a factor.
And yes the officials will try and work a perfect game but again there are no guarantees.

To expect that all the possible factors are "part of the game" EXCEPT that the officials errors are not part of the game but should be expected to be perfect is naive in my opinion.

While participants should not necessarily be happy about any of the impacts on the outcome, they should understand that they can happen and not be incessed.