Tennessee---Vandy Whistle or not

What in the world happened in this game? Was this the crew that got in trouble in the SEC a couple of years ago? It looked real bad on the tube.

[bigjohn]

Tennessee vs Vandy whistle ? - YouTube

[Rich]

What a mess.

The white hat should've known this wasn't reviewable. The HL should've owned up to his IW (or if you want to call it a mistaken notion that the runner was down, so be it).

The guy in the booth, supposedly, has no audio of the game. It's merely a visual replay -- so if the R didn't tell the booth that the whistle had blown, he's going to review the play assuming a whistle hadn't blown.

Clearly, the whistle had blown.

I hate IWs. Nothing good comes from them. I hate people trying to cover up IWs more. I'm a white hat on Friday nights and I've told my view time and time again that they need to own up to an IW and we have rules to deal with it. Nothing good comes from not having the stones/integrity to face up to it.

(We've had one IW in 6 years on the crew and I had to drag that information out of the LJ who did it. I heard it, it's obvious others did, too. This prompted another discussion on IWs and owning up to them. To be fair to this guy, it was his first *ever* IW and he was a bit stunned by it and the aftermath.)

[JugglingReferee]

This whole mess started with bad mechanics by the H. I will assume that NCAA keys have him taking the 2nd receiver.

At the snap, he moves immediately downfield. However, this places you out of position when players need to "come back to the ball". At the time of the INT, he was actually closer to the B GL and than the players were. As such, he was not in position to see a bobble that may have taken place, and he was straight-lined in respect to the player's knees.

If he read the play better, he would have held the LS, or at least vacate the LS at a slow rate. Then, he would have seen the action from between the LS and the INT, and he would have properly seen that no knee touched the ground.

[JugglingReferee]

Some harsh words from Pereira.


Pereira: Week 12 CFB call

[JugglingReferee]

ESPN website clip: Tennessee vs Vanderbilt Highlight - ESPN Video - ESPN

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

What a mess.

The white hat should've known this wasn't reviewable. The HL should've owned up to his IW (or if you want to call it a mistaken notion that the runner was down, so be it).

The guy in the booth, supposedly, has no audio of the game. It's merely a visual replay -- so if the R didn't tell the booth that the whistle had blown, he's going to review the play assuming a whistle hadn't blown.

Clearly, the whistle had blown.

Is it possible that the other officials did not know it was an IW? I am not sure how that would be the case, but is it just possible that he ruled a downed player and did not know he was totally and completely wrong at the time.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

This whole mess started with bad mechanics by the H. I will assume that NCAA keys have him taking the 2nd receiver.

Keys have nothing to do with this play. You only follow your key for a moment and once the ball is thrown you are ruling on many things, not just your key. And with this being an interception, he should have gotten off that key long before this play.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

At the snap, he moves immediately downfield. However, this places you out of position when players need to "come back to the ball". At the time of the INT, he was actually closer to the B GL and than the players were. As such, he was not in position to see a bobble that may have taken place, and he was straight-lined in respect to the player's knees.

This is also not the mechanic, you hold and flow for a short wing. You have forward progress, but you also have to make sure the ball has crossed the LOS or the pass based on many actions. He just missed it and should have gotten help from other officials. The deep wings, umpire and even Referee in some cases could have seen the knee down and she should not have assumed which is what I feel this official did and blew the whistle.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Is it possible that the other officials did not know it was an IW? I am not sure how that would be the case, but is it just possible that he ruled a downed player and did not know he was totally and completely wrong at the time.

It's irrelevant whether it's called an IW or whether it's called a missed judgment. The HL signaled and blew his whistle. The play is over.

The HL should've said to the WH -- "I blew my whistle. I signaled. I ruled him down."

If he had done that, I can't *imagine* the WH would go on the microphone and say there was no signal or whistle. The WH may not have heard the whistle or seen the signal and was relying on his guys to tell him what actually happened.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

It's irrelevant whether it's called an IW or whether it's called a missed judgment. The HL signaled and blew his whistle. The play is over.

The HL should've said to the WH -- "I blew my whistle. I signaled. I ruled him down."

If he had done that, I can't *imagine* the WH would go on the microphone and say there was no signal or whistle. The WH may not have heard the whistle or seen the signal and was relying on his guys to tell him what actually happened.

You are right Rich. I was dealing with more with what that official believed at the time. I had a rather big time game that was on TV once where a partner ruled a player down on a fumble and we treated it as a player down and not an IW. Unfortunately no one could help him at the time. But it showed up on tape. What they ended up doing in this SEC game was totally wrong.

Peace

[Berkut]

This actually raises kind of an interesting issue.

When does bad judgement become an IW, by rule?

I mean, if it is a close play, and I judge that the runner is down and blow my whistle, how is that different (if at all) from an IW?

After all, I judged that the runner was down, so it isn't really IW, right? It might be wrong, but that is different (I think) from me seeing a player go down, blow my whistle, and THEN realize that player doesn't even have the ball (for example). In that case, it is clearly an IW, and hence the IW rules should be applied, as opposed to just saying the play is over...right?

I guess what I am getting at is that this isn't necessarily a IW at all - the covering official thought the runner was down. He was wrong of course, but then, officials are wrong sometimes. Sometimes we think the runner stepped out when they did not, that isn't an IW, right? Sometimes we think the pass was incomplete when it isn't, that isn't an IW either. Nobody is going to get the chance to replay the down when the wing guy says the runner stepped OOB even if they did not.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Berkut

This actually raises kind of an interesting issue.

When does bad judgement become an IW, by rule?

I mean, if it is a close play, and I judge that the runner is down and blow my whistle, how is that different (if at all) from an IW?

You are right, it isn't that different. But in this case they should not have allowed a score and the down, "inning" or overtime was over at that point the official blew the whistle.

After all, I judged that the runner was down, so it isn't really IW, right? It might be wrong, but that is different (I think) from me seeing a player go down, blow my whistle, and THEN realize that player doesn't even have the ball (for example). In that case, it is clearly an IW, and hence the IW rules should be applied, as opposed to just saying the play is over...right?

Originally Posted by Berkut

I guess what I am getting at is that this isn't necessarily a IW at all - the covering official thought the runner was down. He was wrong of course, but then, officials are wrong sometimes. Sometimes we think the runner stepped out when they did not, that isn't an IW, right? Sometimes we think the pass was incomplete when it isn't, that isn't an IW either. Nobody is going to get the chance to replay the down when the wing guy says the runner stepped OOB even if they did not.

It is still an IW, but a player not having the ball and a player with possession are going to be handled differently by rule.

Peace

[Berkut]

Actually, by NCAA rule, there is no difference between a player with or without the ball when it comes to IW. The rule doesn't even mention a fumble, except when discussing one of the cases that determine options.

As far as the NCAA rules are concerned, I actually think this *IS* an IW. And I think someone calling someone OOB who was not could also be an IW, by rule. Although I would guess in a practical sense, it doesn't come up often.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Is it possible that the other officials did not know it was an IW? I am not sure how that would be the case, but is it just possible that he ruled a downed player and did not know he was totally and completely wrong at the time.



Keys have nothing to do with this play. You only follow your key for a moment and once the ball is thrown you are ruling on many things, not just your key. And with this being an interception, he should have gotten off that key long before this play.




This is also not the mechanic, you hold and flow for a short wing. You have forward progress, but you also have to make sure the ball has crossed the LOS or the pass based on many actions. He just missed it and should have gotten help from other officials. The deep wings, umpire and even Referee in some cases could have seen the knee down and she should not have assumed which is what I feel this official did and blew the whistle.

Peace

Rut, the exact same play just happened in the MN game.

What did the wing official do? He BACKED UP from the LS, rather than going downfield!

And guess what? He had a great look on the play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Rut, the exact same play just happened in the MN game.

What did the wing official do? He BACKED UP from the LS, rather than going downfield!

And guess what? He had a great look on the play.

I was telling you the mechanic, not debating what officials actually do.

Peace

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Berkut

This actually raises kind of an interesting issue.

When does bad judgement become an IW, by rule?

I mean, if it is a close play, and I judge that the runner is down and blow my whistle, how is that different (if at all) from an IW?

After all, I judged that the runner was down, so it isn't really IW, right? It might be wrong, but that is different (I think) from me seeing a player go down, blow my whistle, and THEN realize that player doesn't even have the ball (for example). In that case, it is clearly an IW, and hence the IW rules should be applied, as opposed to just saying the play is over...right?

I guess what I am getting at is that this isn't necessarily a IW at all - the covering official thought the runner was down. He was wrong of course, but then, officials are wrong sometimes. Sometimes we think the runner stepped out when they did not, that isn't an IW, right? Sometimes we think the pass was incomplete when it isn't, that isn't an IW either. Nobody is going to get the chance to replay the down when the wing guy says the runner stepped OOB even if they did not.

I think it only becomes an IW if someone (i.e. the U) comes to him with absolutely certainty the knee wasn't down and the H decides he was correct. Or the R takes information from both officials and determines the U was correct. Then the ruling of the runner being down is treated as an IW. This would give the team in possession (UT in this case) the option of replaying the down or taking the ball at the spot where the runner was incorrectly ruled down. They would not give the ball back to Vandy so an IW and ruling the runner was down would have the same outcome.