ESPN.COM article about the "Fifth down" game..

[SirFozzie]

I considered entitling this: "Ping: MBBF *ducks*, but.. rather interesting story behind the Fifth Down game and its fallout.

ESPN - OTL: Fifth-and-goal - E-ticket

[molson]

It's interesting - was this a travesty, or was it a classic college football moment? I really think it was the latter. Which definitely explains why I'm generally against instant replay, and I've never felt the desire to murder a ref after a bad call. A sports world where everything went perfectly from the administrative/officiating point of view would be pretty boring to me.

Sports has an entertainment aspect, and a competition aspect, and I've never been able to see sports as just true competition, because it's really just manufactured competition. Sports is rarely man v. man, or country v. country, there's a huge random element that puts people on different teams and different times. I mean, why is it so damn important that Missouri beat Colorado anyway? They're just a bunch of random people distributed to different teams largely through chance. The fact that that randomness exists makes sports largely entertainment to me, rather than a competition where I'm going to think a referee mistake is some kind of unforgiveable, moral sin.

[SirFozzie]

I'd rather the game was decided BY the players, not by a mistake.

[molson]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

I'd rather the game was decided BY the players, not by a mistake.

But the players made probably hundreds of mistakes in that game. And the teams made hundreds of mistakes recruiting the wrong players or starting the wrong players. And some players weren't there because they were injured, or they transfered to another school. Some of the players might have been there because they took the right performance ehancing drugs, or because they got paid by a booster, or because another team's booster didn't pay them enough. Some of the players might have played poorly because they were sick, or because their girlfriend dumped them the night before. It's all pretty much a crapshoot anyway.

Why is it that in all this chaos, a referee making a MISTAKE is this one, crazy, unforgiveable thing, that we consider forever, more important than any of the millions of elements that went into the outcome of that game between teams and players who are all there kind of randomly in the first place?

Maybe too deep. Good article.

[SirFozzie]

because the fans pay to see the players contest the game, and not the referees try for a perfect game? (Although Ed Hoculi seems to have demollished that..)

[molson]

It was also always crazy to me that Missouri was pretty much just like, "ya, this is 5th down, but hey, whatever." Easy to judge in retrospect, of course, but if they ran off the field (and onto the field from the bench) after the 4th down spike, the refs might have straightened it out.

[SirFozzie]

I think also that it's because this wasn't a judgment call. This was not The Tuck Rule, or the Holy Roller, or even stuff like the Snowplow game. This is the fundamental, basic rules of the game. You have four downs to make ten yards (or to score if you are inside the ten). The last MAJOR time it happened, the team benefiting from the fifth down forfeited the game (1940)

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by molson

Why is it that in all this chaos, a referee making a MISTAKE is this one, crazy, unforgiveable thing, that we consider forever, more important than any of the millions of elements that went into the outcome of that game between teams and players who are all there kind of randomly in the first place?

Why bother even watching a game where you don't affect the outcome? Why even bother caring if you win a game when so much of the outcome depended on events outside of your control?

too deep. Good article.

Basically.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

It's a part of history. It really wouldn't have changed Mizzou as a program. It obviously was much bigger for Colorado given how the rest of their year panned out. It seems so long ago.

[molson]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Why bother even watching a game where you don't affect the outcome? Why even bother caring if you win a game when so much of the outcome depended on events outside of your control?Basically.

It's entertaining.

I think this outcome would have been INCREDIBLE if it happened in a national championship game. Just unbelievably entertaining. (As long as I believed that it was in fact, a mistake - same as a dropped pass or something - and not say, gambler intervention).

[SirFozzie]

The interesting thing is that the downs guy, who started the chain of events, by not confirming third down.. still runs the downs stick at Mizzou 20 years later.

[digamma]

If McCartney hadn't been such a douche following the game, it would be much easier to call it a piece of college football history.

[molson]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

The interesting thing is that the downs guy, who started the chain of events, by not confirming third down.. still runs the downs stick at Mizzou 20 years later.

And I'm sure if this happened today, he'd have been fired immediately, and probably wouldn't work again in college football again.

[SirFozzie]

Believe it or not, in the story, one of the refs of the game was being watched by the NFL for a possible NFL job.. needless to say he never got the call.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by molson

And I'm sure if this happened today, he'd have been fired immediately, and probably wouldn't work again in college football again.

Why? It wasn't his fault. By rule, he can't change the marker until told to do so by the refs on the field. The down marker is there for convenience; the referees are responsible for tracking the downs.

[Dr. Sak]

Originally Posted by digamma

Why? It wasn't his fault. By rule, he can't change the marker until told to do so by the refs on the field. The down marker is there for convenience; the referees are responsible for tracking the downs.

I'm a headlinesman in college and part of my instructions to my box guy are to repeat the down to me each and every time I come back to the sideline. Those chain guys are technically part of the crew...the refs should have caught it but the box guy is not completely blameless.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by molson

But the players made probably hundreds of mistakes in that game. And the teams made hundreds of mistakes recruiting the wrong players or starting the wrong players. And some players weren't there because they were injured, or they transfered to another school. Some of the players might have been there because they took the right performance ehancing drugs, or because they got paid by a booster, or because another team's booster didn't pay them enough. Some of the players might have played poorly because they were sick, or because their girlfriend dumped them the night before. It's all pretty much a crapshoot anyway.

Why is it that in all this chaos, a referee making a MISTAKE is this one, crazy, unforgiveable thing, that we consider forever, more important than any of the millions of elements that went into the outcome of that game between teams and players who are all there kind of randomly in the first place?

Maybe too deep. Good article.

That was an amazingly awesome post molson. One of the best arguments for anything I've seen in a long time. You convinced me of your point

[panerd]

Originally Posted by molson

But the players made probably hundreds of mistakes in that game. And the teams made hundreds of mistakes recruiting the wrong players or starting the wrong players. And some players weren't there because they were injured, or they transfered to another school. Some of the players might have been there because they took the right performance ehancing drugs, or because they got paid by a booster, or because another team's booster didn't pay them enough. Some of the players might have played poorly because they were sick, or because their girlfriend dumped them the night before. It's all pretty much a crapshoot anyway.

Why is it that in all this chaos, a referee making a MISTAKE is this one, crazy, unforgiveable thing, that we consider forever, more important than any of the millions of elements that went into the outcome of that game between teams and players who are all there kind of randomly in the first place?

Maybe too deep. Good article.

Well it did partially decide a national championship but I am with you there on the general message. I think Mizzou fans would tell you they are more upset about the Nebraska kicked ball (again another national championship saving fluke) then the fifth down just because we actually had a really good team that year and it kind of took the wind out of our sails. The fifth down year our team wasn't anything special.

[TroyF]

Horrific mistake. Horrific.

I think in some cases it's overblown how important it was though. Watch the You Tube clip. The announcers didn't catch it. They thought it was second down and was telling Johnson to spike the ball.

The key thing is that CU got the spike play off. With 2 seconds to spare. If the marker is correct, they run an actual play, not spike the ball. Would the play have scored a TD? We'll never know. But it is important to note CU would have been able to run that play. It likely wouldn't have been much different of a play than the one they actually ran for the winning score.

It's the one part of that play I think is continually missed. If the marker is right, CU runs everything differently.

Still, it was a disaster. A complete blown call and I don't care what molson says, calls should never decide games like that. Ever. The players should be the ones deciding the game. The fact the refs screwed up and CU didn't run a phrantic play with 2 seconds left instead of spiking the ball is a travesty.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I read that article before seeing the link here, and what it reminded me that I had forgotten was the role of the spike rule being new.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I read that article before seeing the link here, and what it reminded me that I had forgotten was the role of the spike rule being new.

Yeah, it seems comical now that QB's used to have to throw the ball over the WR head on the sideline, doesn't it?

[Sgran]

I remember watching Sports Center a while back, and there was a DH at the plate who reached a count of 4-2. He then doubled to the gap. Anyone remember that?

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by digamma

If McCartney hadn't been such a douche following the game, it would be much easier to call it a piece of college football history.

And really, that's the only thing I took away from the story. I don't look back at that game and rage - probably in large part because I had no experience of Mizzou when it happened - but McCartney's rant makes me twitch. It almost feels like a search for justification. And then to apologize 20 years later? If it took you that long, it's not an apology. It's more justification.

[MizzouRah]

Oh the memories... *shudders*

Great read though...

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I always thought the worst part wasn't that they got five downs. The worst part was that it was obvious that they didn't break the goal line on that fifth down run. He was down before the ball was stretched across the goal line. If you ask most Mizzou defenders who were on the field for that final play, that was their biggest beef with the end result.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

It's a part of history. It really wouldn't have changed Mizzou as a program. It obviously was much bigger for Colorado given how the rest of their year panned out. It seems so long ago.

I don't know. It was HUGE for Colorado -- no national title without the Fifth Down. But for Mizzou -- Stull had just beaten a top 25 team the week before and this would have been two in a row. After that game, the team, the campus -- everybody was in the bag. It was Stull's second season, and he had the team ready for a move that season. The Fifth Down ended it, and probably sealed his doom at Mizzou.

It probably changed the course of some other moments too. Gary Barnett desperately wanted to be head coach at Missouri, and a big reason he never got the job is that a lot of people didn't want anyone associated with the Fifth Down from Colorado running the program.

Originally Posted by digamma

If McCartney hadn't been such a douche following the game, it would be much easier to call it a piece of college football history.

Exactly. McCartney is a Missouri alum, and he is still hated by Missouri. It took him 20 years to finally acknowledge he was a douche and apologize. There are plenty of people (me included) who have zero respect for him after that game and the way he handled it, and I've always had a dim view of Promise Keepers because of him. That's not how a man behaves.

Originally Posted by TroyF

I think in some cases it's overblown how important it was though. Watch the You Tube clip. The announcers didn't catch it. They thought it was second down and was telling Johnson to spike the ball.

Dave Armstrong was doing the Big 12 PBP and he kept fumbling over it -- he had the down right at one point, then second guesses himself when he saw the marker. They did mention that down confusion thought. However, the Missouri radio PBP guy was screaming his head off. The color guy headed down to the field, and you can see him on the sideline screaming at the chain gang and the officials that it's fifth down. On the video you can hear the students around the field chanting "fifth down." Missouri had a time out left but Stull didn't use it because he was afraid if he was wrong and Colorado still had a down, McCartney would have time to setup a pass play.

Originally Posted by TroyF

The key thing is that CU got the spike play off. With 2 seconds to spare. If the marker is correct, they run an actual play, not spike the ball. Would the play have scored a TD? We'll never know. But it is important to note CU would have been able to run that play. It likely wouldn't have been much different of a play than the one they actually ran for the winning score.

Of course, with 36 seconds left the officials inexplicably added two seconds to the clock to 38 seconds for no real reason. If the officials don't add that time, game is over. Plus, McCartney complained to the officials about letting Missouri players keep Colorado down trying to reset the ball. However, instead of letting the clock run and only stopping it in Missouri was slow to get up, JC Louderback IMMEDIATELY stopped the clock and let Colorado reset. It was almost like stopping the clock for a first down. If the refs let the clock run as they should, game ends.

Originally Posted by TroyF

It's the one part of that play I think is continually missed. If the marker is right, CU runs everything differently.

Possibly. Colorado may chose to throw on 3rd down instead of run. Missouri was selling out against the run, and if Colorado threw the ball, CU probably scores. It was crazy for McCartney not to throw the ball.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

I always thought the worst part wasn't that they got five downs. The worst part was that it was obvious that they didn't break the goal line on that fifth down run. He was down before the ball was stretched across the goal line. If you ask most Mizzou defenders who were on the field for that final play, that was their biggest beef with the end result.

THAT is the worst part of it all that completely gets overlooked. Johnson didn't score. He landed on his back with his shoulders on the goal line. Only problem is that that he was holding the ball in his gut/chest. It wasn't until after he was down that he raised his arms over his head and roll into the end zone. HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SCORE! The official only made the call after coming over and seeing where Johnson was lying after he rolled over -- he didn't call it based on where Johnson landed.

The Columbia newspaper has a perfect photo of Johnson on his back with the ball short of the goal line. SI has a photo after he rollover with the ball in the endzone. It was clear he was down.

I've put on a few pounds over the years, but I talked my wife into wearing my Fifth Down t-shirt to the game yesterday with the scoreboard on the back showing Missouri winning the game 31-27.

I for one am VERY SAD to see Colorado go to the Pac 10. Gary Pinkel has Dan Hawkins number. No one has beat the crap out of Colorado more the last five years than Missouri.

[OldGiants]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Yeah, it seems comical now that QB's used to have to throw the ball over the WR head on the sideline, doesn't it?

What is comical about the refs enforcing the Intentional Grounding rule? Is that not what this thread is all about, refs doing a better job?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by OldGiants

What is comical about the refs enforcing the Intentional Grounding rule? Is that not what this thread is all about, refs doing a better job?

I think it's the rule itself that was comical, not the enforcement of it.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by molson

But the players made probably hundreds of mistakes in that game. And the teams made hundreds of mistakes recruiting the wrong players or starting the wrong players. And some players weren't there because they were injured, or they transfered to another school. Some of the players might have been there because they took the right performance ehancing drugs, or because they got paid by a booster, or because another team's booster didn't pay them enough. Some of the players might have played poorly because they were sick, or because their girlfriend dumped them the night before. It's all pretty much a crapshoot anyway.

Why is it that in all this chaos, a referee making a MISTAKE is this one, crazy, unforgiveable thing, that we consider forever, more important than any of the millions of elements that went into the outcome of that game between teams and players who are all there kind of randomly in the first place?

Maybe too deep. Good article.

The players and referees perform different functions. The players are for entertainment, and the officials are for enforcing rules. Compelling drama comes from watching players perform under pressure and throughout the game to determine the outcome. An official's job is simply to observe the game and "record," if you will, what the players do. They use judgment when necessary, but only in interpreting and carrying out the rules of the game.Therefore, their mistakes should not be a part of the game, because they have no role in the game for either team, nor a stake in the outcome of the game.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Therefore, their mistakes should not be a part of the game, because they have no role in the game for either team, nor a stake in the outcome of the game.

Good luck with that though - the refs are going to make mistakes. Lots of them, every game, just like everyone else associated with the game. (and the greater our TV technology gets, the more of those mistakes you're going to catch - I don't buy for a second that referees are worse now than any other time, they're actually probably much better because of the greater scrutiny)

You can either be tortured by that evey game you watch (like TroyF, who I kind of feel bad for, he always sounds miserable in any football thread) or just accept it as part of the game, and even enjoy the very-rare "fifth down" kind of situation as a part of college football history.

My choice is the latter, that's all.

[TroyF]

What Ksyrup said.

Yeah, molson, I understand officials make mistakes. But when the technology is there to correct them, it should be used. On the other side of it, there ARE some incompetent refs out there who consistently suck. We know who a lot of those guys/girls are. (yes, I'm looking at you Violet, you are one of the top five worst refs in all of sports)

We also see plenty of calls that are "decisions", not missed calls. An example is a ref calling the game differently with 10 seconds left in a basketball game vs. how he has called it the rest of the game. We see this on a game to game basis in all sports. Those type of things need to be purged from the game.

To most people the Jordan shot over Russell was a moment frozen in time. A wonderous, beautiful thing for all of sports. I see a group of officials who simply chose not to follow the rules of the game. They didn't "miss" the call. They chose not to call the clear offensive foul on Michael Jordan.

You don't have to feel sorry for me. I enjoy sports immensely and even when the refs blow call after call, I still love watching the games. I always will. I will also always crusade for better reffing, more use of technology to get things right and more consistency in the enforcement of the rules from crew to crew.

As Ksyrup said, the job of the refs is to be an impartial observer and enforce rules when they are broke. It's not to decide the outcome of a game by making improper calls (Jeffrey Mayer turning an out into a HR) or worse, by making a decision to call something one way. (Jordan's shot, Pippen getting abused by every Knick, including those on the bench) etc.