End of Wisconsin - Arizona State game

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Delay of game.

Just so you know, it has to be deliberate action to make that call, not confusion. And I bet you have never seen a Delay of Game penalty on a defensive team near the end of the game. You cannot just call this when there is confusion of the ball being loose.

Also a delay of game call would have been a penalty which included yardage and the clock would have started on the snap. Very severe and would have caused ASU fans going nuts, which is something you seem to not want to consider as well. Wisconsin does not have the right to win any game anymore then the other team.

And the Wisconsin QB never had a since of urgency until time was about to run out. He assumed everyone knew what he was doing or wanted. You know what they say when you assume?

Peace

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by hbk314

Instead they rewarded ASU for laying on a dead ball for seven seconds preventing it from being spotted.

Your second paragraph has no relevance. There's no grey area here. The officials were completely in the wrong, and it denied Wisconsin an opportunity to attempt a game winning field goal.

It wasn't the ASU player lying on the ball that prevented quicker spotting of the ball. It was the lack of urgency by the U in finding the ball to get it spotted. This is a foul for DOG if the U is trying to get the ball and the player is not giving it to him. That's why I don't think you can fairly penalize ASU in this situation. The ASU player gave it up as soon as the U asked him. If the U felt the ASU player was intentionally hiding the ball so he couldn't find it then you may have an argument.

This was just a cluster started when the Wisconsin QB made his own mistake in judgment. Nobody is free of criticism and nobody is guilty of a catastrophic error. All parties use this as an opportunity to learn how to address it better next time and move on. It appears the officials are being addressed with sanctions through the league and it's none of our business that those sanctions are. The people who need to know are aware of what they are.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by qcumpire

The reason I ask, is that is has been questioned whether or not the Wisconsin QB's knee was actually down before he placed the ball on the field. After which the ASU player fell on the ball. This would make it a possession question and not a clock issue, and that would be subject to a replay review.

I'm not saying that it should have been reviewed. What I am saying is if they are going to downgrade the deep wings and back judge for this play, even though they are not directly involved, will the conference also look at the replay official for his inaction?

It is not a replay issue because it was not a timing error. Wisconsin ran a play and the clock continues. You cannot go to replay just because you want to. There are very specific situations where replay can get involved and this is not one of them.

And unless there is something I am missing, I doubt seriously the deep wings or BJ were penalized. As I said before this sounds like the crew was mentioned but no comment was made about what specifics were done. If they suspended the crew, I think that would have been mentioned. I think this was about the Referee and the Umpire mostly.

Peace

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by qcumpire

The reason I ask, is that is has been questioned whether or not the Wisconsin QB's knee was actually down before he placed the ball on the field. After which the ASU player fell on the ball. This would make it a possession question and not a clock issue, and that would be subject to a replay review.

I'm not saying that it should have been reviewed. What I am saying is if they are going to downgrade the deep wings and back judge for this play, even though they are not directly involved, will the conference also look at the replay official for his inaction?

So ... you think the replay official should be in trouble for not reviewing the knee-touch? When the replay official had exactly 10 seconds to review it? And when, upon further review, the knee DID touch and the ruling was correct?

I don't follow your logic at all.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Just so you know, it has to be deliberate action to make that call, not confusion.

Where the umpire failed, in my opinion, was when R was signalling him that the play was over and the QB was down - and the umpire, knowing the game situation, needed to come up, tell the player to get off the ball, and then either spot the ball or flag the kid for staying on the ball. Instead, he was entertaining a conversation with another defensive lineman.

You're absolutely right that he could not call DOG given what actually happened. But it was imperative on him to get up there and tell the other guy to get off the ball. If the kid then gets off the ball, he needs to spot it and get out of the way. If he doesn't after being instructed to do so - we have DOG (it then becomes deliberate, and not confusion).

He then further compounds his error by telling the snapper to stay off the ball, with no apparent reason for doing so since there was no substitution.

[OKREF]

This situation never occurs if not for the action of the Wisconsin QB. I have watched the clip about 10 times and I still haven't seen his knee touch the ground, he just lays the ball on the ground, which leads to the ASU player thinking it is a fumble. He should have clearly taken a knee. It really looks like a fumble to me. The umpire is waiting over the ball for the Referee to mark the ball ready for play. Unfortunate ending to a game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This situation never occurs if not for the action of the Wisconsin QB. I have watched the clip about 10 times and I still haven't seen his knee touch the ground, he just lays the ball on the ground, which leads to the ASU player thinking it is a fumble. He should have clearly taken a knee. It really looks like a fumble to me. The umpire is waiting over the ball for the Referee to mark the ball ready for play. Unfortunate ending to a game.

There is a picture in this thread that shows a knee touched the ground. And simulating taking a knee also kills the play. But putting the ball on the ground when it was unclear if he went down caused the confusion. If he holds onto the ball and hands it to the umpire, none of this is at issue IMO.

Peace

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This situation never occurs if not for the action of the Wisconsin QB. I have watched the clip about 10 times and I still haven't seen his knee touch the ground, he just lays the ball on the ground, which leads to the ASU player thinking it is a fumble. He should have clearly taken a knee. It really looks like a fumble to me. The umpire is waiting over the ball for the Referee to mark the ball ready for play. Unfortunate ending to a game.

There is no ready for play call by the R in college in this situation. The play clock starts when the previous play ends. It is ready for play when the U spots is backs out. He was obviously waiting for something but it definitely wasn't waiting for a RFP signal from the R.

[qcumpire]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

So ... you think the replay official should be in trouble for not reviewing the knee-touch? When the replay official had exactly 10 seconds to review it? And when, upon further review, the knee DID touch and the ruling was correct?

I don't follow your logic at all.

No, I'm not saying that at all. I definitely don't think the replay official should be in trouble. I'm just asking the question, will the conference(s) look at this?

[qcumpire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is a picture in this thread that shows a knee touched the ground. And simulating taking a knee also kills the play. But putting the ball on the ground when it was unclear if he went down caused the confusion. If he holds onto the ball and hands it to the umpire, none of this is at issue IMO.

Peace

I agree.

[ddn]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This situation never occurs if not for the action of the Wisconsin QB. I have watched the clip about 10 times and I still haven't seen his knee touch the ground, he just lays the ball on the ground, which leads to the ASU player thinking it is a fumble. He should have clearly taken a knee. It really looks like a fumble to me. The umpire is waiting over the ball for the Referee to mark the ball ready for play. Unfortunate ending to a game.

The video I watched (the one from page 1), you can clearly hear a whistle being blown when he QB puts the ball down. Can't tell who blew it, nor can you see anyone with their hand up, but it is a very clear, loud whistle so someone had them down.

[APG]

Pac-12 Conference reprimands officials from Arizona State-Wisconsin game - ESPN

The Pac-12 on Monday reprimanded officials who worked Saturday's game between Arizona State and Wisconsin for their handling of the bizarre finish.

A statement released by the conference said commissioner Larry Scott was taking "additional sanctions against officials" for their failure to "properly administer the end of game situation and act with appropriate urgency on the game's final play."

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think you are missing the point. The team that wants the officials to put the ball in play quickly, does something that caused confusion. If the Wisconsin player wanted to take a knee, hold on to the damn football so that you can give it to the nearest official. Then no one thinks there is a fumble. No one can take the ball away from being put in play. This is why teams in the hurry up style are now getting tackled and instead of celebrating or doing something silly, they take the football to the nearest official. Why? Because they want the ball put back in play ASAP. What the QB should have done is hand the ball to the Umpire, instead of setting it down where anything could have happened to it. And this has been taught for years in hurry up situations long before the Spread or Oregon played this fast paced offense.

News to me. When you stand up holding the ball, players tend to think it's still live. Why is it any clearer than leaving the ball on the ground, which is what officials have asked players to do since 1905?

[APG]

Arizona State, Wisconsin review bizarre ending

Quote from the Wisconsin QB

Stave told reporters that he is certain he downed the football, but he admitted one mistake: "I've just got to make sure I'm not spotting (the ball) myself," he said. "I've got to hang onto the ball so only me and the ref are touching it."

Graham said he spent the final seconds thinking about how the Sun Devils would try and block the winning field goal. On Sunday, he said they would use Wisconsin's misfortune as a teachable moment.

"That's one of the reasons we always hand the ball to the official, because you hand that ball to that umpire he's going to put it down and spot it,'' Graham said, "so there are a lot of teaching opportunities there."

[APG]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

News to me. When you stand up holding the ball, players tend to think it's still live. Why is it any clearer than leaving the ball on the ground, which is what officials have asked players to do since 1905?

That's not what he suggested...he said the QB, after taking a knee, should have handed the ball to the nearest official, instead of spotting it himself...which the QB even admitted himself.