College Football Week 3 Discussion Thread (spoilers possibly)

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by biological warrior

So I just got back from a trip to Borders books -where I chatted with the aforementioned ''future Mrs. Chemicalsoldier,'' and decided to ameliorate my dejection/disgust with ND's loss by buying a new digital camera.
I bought a Sony DSC W 100, anyone have it?

You're biological warrior, not chemical soldier. We already have one of those.

[sooner333]

Okay, so we shouldn't have let them score twice, and the defense was pretty bad in the game. However, I thought it would never again be worse than the booth review of the Texas Tech game. While I would say that in the Tech game the video evidence was indisputable, I can see how Tech fans and maybe some others would maybe have a different opinion. This time the Oregon people even know that the call was messed up. I don't really care about the pass interference call, though it did make a difference. The onsides kick was the game. Not only was it touched by Oregon first (despite "indisputable evidence that Oklahoma touched the ball first"), but Oklahoma picked the ball up before anyone else. How do you look at that replay and think anything differently.

It's a terrible way to lose the game, and I'm glad we don't play anyone good next week because we need to get this team back together. Maybe it will be a rallying point, but it could just as easily be the blow that takes the season down to a 4 or 5 loss season...and at this point, I can't even blame them if it means that.

As to the Peterson vs. anyone else who isn't as good at what Peterson does at RB debate. It's kind of like Bush vs. Peterson. If I had to get a tough yard or two, I would take Peterson and if I could open up holes for anyone, I would take Peterson. However, I would take Bush if I wanted the "big play" or a pass caught. It's really hard to compare the runners based on different styles. Though, if I had the first pick in the draft, I know I'm taking Adrian Peterson.

[timmynausea]

I'll take Steve Slaton.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Not sure if the Scarlet Knight fans on the board have heard but the RUMORS are that there is an interest in a certain HC of a Big East school in New Jersey.

A. When a rumor is started by Kevin Blackistone on Around the Horn, that doesn't give it any reliability.

B. If Schiano wanted the Miami job, he never would've left originally.

C. No matter what Miami fans think, your school isn't a high profile "dream" job that everyone is after.

D. The only school we will ever have to worry about taking Schiano is Penn State when JoePa retires.

[Toddzilla]

Originally Posted by Logan

B. If Schiano wanted the Miami job, he never would've left originally.

While agree with the poster's sentiment that the Rutgers HC is not likely headed out of town, I think you are more off-the-mark on this point than you think. The UM HC job is as sweet of a job as there is in the NCAA.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

While agree with the poster's sentiment that the Rutgers HC is not likely headed out of town, I think you are more off-the-mark on this point than you think. The UM HC job is as sweet of a job as there is in the NCAA.

Pretty sweet job where you can go 54-11, win a national championship, and find yourself about to be fired three games into a season where you've lost to two top 15 teams.

Edit to add: I think you originally meant to quote my "C" point. But anyway...he's not going to Miami, because if he goes there, he closes the door for his possible exit to Penn State. That is the ONLY job that will potentially take him away from Rutgers. I know a lot of people might not understand how that's possible, based on RU's reputation...but it is.

[sooner333]

http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=451&p=2&c=557921 Great article about the OU game...which I thought was pretty unbiased considering the guy ripped OU in his pre-article.

[Swaggs]

The ACC coaches have to be scratching their heads over the AP poll.

Boston College (3-0) is undefeated, including a win over Clemson (2-1), but Clemson leapfrogs them in the polls.

So, then you look at Clemson. Clemson is 2-1 with a win over Florida State (2-1), who won ugly over now unranked Miami and Troy, but they are behind Florida State in the polls.

Too bad the ACC didn't get its initial wish of Syracuse over VT, as I think a Big East with VT, WVU, and Louisville would be clearly better than the current ACC lineup. ACC only has three of its twelve teams undefeated at this point with BE castoffs VT and BC, along with Wake Forest.

Another interesting fact is that after just three weeks, there are only four non-BCS conference teams that are still undefated: Houston (CUSA), TCU (MWC), Boise State (WAC), and Navy (IND).

[Cuckoo]

Hmm... not sure how I feel about this. Yes, Oklahoma's defense gave up a ton of yards. Yes, the calls were horrible and OU should've won the game anyway. But does this do any good? It may end up just sounding like whining for a program that already has enough to worry about.

Originally Posted by Oklahoman

NORMAN -- Oklahoma president David Boren is asking the Big 12 Conference to seek an apology from the Pac 10 Conference following Oklahoma's controversial loss to Oregon on Saturday -- and request the game not go in the record books as a win or a loss by either team.

Oklahoma lost to Oregon 34-33 in Eugene, Ore., following two touchdowns in the final minutes of the fourth quarter.

The Ducks scored following an onside kick, even though replays showed an Oregon player touched the ball first and an OU player recovered the ball after the kick. Replay officials gave Oregon possession of the ball.

"It is truly sad and deeply disappointing that members of our football team should be deprived of the outcome of the game that they deserved because of an inexcusable breakdown in officiating," Boren wrote in a letter to Big 12 Commissioner Kevin Weiberg.

Boren asked that the Big 12 take five actions:

# Seek an apology from the Pac 10.

# Ask the Pac 10 to suspend the officials responsible for the rest of the season.

# Ask the Pac 10 to change a rule in which only their officials are used in non-conference home games.

# Remove the game from the record books.

# Review with other conferences how replay is used during games.

Boren asked that the Big 12 "vigorously demand that our teams be treated fairly when participating in non-conference games."

[IMetTrentGreen]

i say, let it go, unless you also want to protest that 6 out of 7 nc's for ou were the result of blatant, out and out cheating, there was a bad fumble call in the washington game that gave momentum to ou, and the officials blew it on a fumble that would have tied the uab game late in the 4th. i doubt you'll see any internet petitions for that.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

i say, let it go, unless you also want to protest that 6 out of 7 nc's for ou were the result of blatant, out and out cheating, there was a bad fumble call in the washington game that gave momentum to ou, and the officials blew it on a fumble that would have tied the uab game late in the 4th. i doubt you'll see any internet petitions for that.

Shift key. Learn to use it.

ok bye

[Cuckoo]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

i say, let it go, unless you also want to protest that 6 out of 7 nc's for ou were the result of blatant, out and out cheating, there was a bad fumble call in the washington game that gave momentum to ou, and the officials blew it on a fumble that would have tied the uab game late in the 4th. i doubt you'll see any internet petitions for that.

*sigh*

You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Celeval

FWIW, Clemson then drove down and scored with 8s left for the win.

That was pretty sweet. My wife was going to be majorly pissed if Clemson let that one slip away.

But I have been telling her for 4 years now that Tommy Bowden is a terrible coach. The kicking problems in that game just underline that point. There's no excuse to not correct that, especially considering how important the kick was in the previous game. Clemson would've won this game easily if not for the kicking protection problems.

[cschex]

While it's rather ridiculous to think that the result will be set aside (bad calls, even with replay, have impacted football since its beginnings), I think Boren has valid points with the rest of his requests. Those officials SHOULD be suspended (even more so than the Auburn-LSU officials), as they made the wrong calls on the field and then were obviously looking at different video than the rest of the country. As for the officiating crew, would it be possile to get neutral crews like they do in bowl games? Especially at the beginning of the season when most every team is playing a non-conference game, that should be something that college football looks at.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Cuckoo

It may end up just sounding like whining for a program that already has enough to worry about.

I'd say that's a pretty good bet, especially since the laundry list he's seeking is pretty much downright laughable & has zero percent chance of happening. Okay, maybe he'll get a review of the replay policy, but the rest of it ... pfft.

So either the OU President is a completely clueless idiot OR he failed to think through how whiny this sounds OR he just doesn't give a damn & wanted to vent.

[Cuckoo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

So either the OU President is a completely clueless idiot...

Close. He was a politician.

In all honesty, I did a lengthy interview with him once, and he's a sharp guy. I just think he's getting a lot of pressure from OU fans and feels like he has to do something.

I agree it's all pointless, though. The best that can happen is that they'll actually admit the mistake, but I doubt even that will happen.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

i say, let it go, unless you also want to protest that 6 out of 7 nc's for ou were the result of blatant, out and out cheating, there was a bad fumble call in the washington game that gave momentum to ou, and the officials blew it on a fumble that would have tied the uab game late in the 4th. i doubt you'll see any internet petitions for that.

I know you're a smart guy, IMTG, and I'm sure you know the difference between those situations.

The UAB call robbed UAB of A CHANCE to beat OU. It was a bad call. Unfortunately, this happens to all teams from time to time. UAB would still have to score a touchdown, then they would have to keep OU from scoring to send the game into overtime, then they would have to win it in overtime.

In the OU/Oregon game, if the officials make the obvious correct call, the game is over with. This type of thing happens very rarely, like the 72 Olympic basketball game between the USA and USSR, or the 5th down in the Missouri/Colorado game.

[dawgfan]

Aside from the request to void the game from the record books, I don't disagree with any of Boren's other requests. And if I'm an AD from another conference, I'm going to seriously reconsider scheduling any Pac-10 teams at their stadiums until some improvements happen with Pac-10 officiating or neutral refs are brought in for those games.

[ISiddiqui]

Is there a more unlucky team in college football than Louisville? First game they lose their Heisman hopeful and perhaps best back in the country, Michael Bush. Third game, beating down Miami, they lose their starting QB, Brian Brohm for 3-6 weeks. Now, thankfully they have a great system and some great depth that they don't have too much dropoff (Cantwell seemed to be just as effective against the Canes). And that defense is pretty solid. They'll probably stay undefeated (though won't look as impressive as they would normally) until the big game with West Virginia. After that, who knows what'll happen.

[Cuckoo]

Much more than I expected actually.

Originally Posted by NewsOK.com

WALNUT CREEK, Calif. -- The Pacific-10 Conference has suspended for one game the officiating crew and the instant replay officials that worked Saturday's Oklahoma at Oregon football game.
The Pac 10 also apologized to the University of Oklahoma for the officiating on a key play in the game.

A review by conference officials of video of the game revealed that both the instant replay officials and the game officials assigned by the Conference made errors in the final 1:12 of the game, Pac-10 Commissioner Tom Hansen said today.

Oregon won the game 34-33, scoring two touchdowns in the final 1:12.

An onside kick by Oregon after its first touchdown was touched by an Oregon player before it had traveled the required 10 yards, and the ball accordingly should have been awarded to Oklahoma at the spot of touching.

Further, while the ball was determined to have been recovered by Oregon by the game officials, video shows an Oklahoma player actually recovered the ball. That aspect of the play is not reviewable by instant replay by rule.

The play was reviewed by the instant replay officials, who concurred with the field officials that Oklahoma had touched the ball with Oregon recovering and the play stood as called on the field.

A subsequent Oregon pass play on which pass interference was called on Oklahoma also was reviewed to see if the forward pass had been touched by a defensive player, thus nullifying the pass interference call. The replay officials ruled that there was not indisputable video evidence that the touching had occurred.

"The fact that the errors on the onside kick altered the outcome of the game is most unfortunate and unsettling," Hansen said. "We had a solid veteran crew assigned, and the instant replay official had a fine career as a referee in the Pac-10. We believe in the ability and integrity of each individual involved. It should be noted that not all of the seven officials were directly involved in the play in question, but the entire crew bears responsibility for every play. Game officials and replay officials have positions of great responsibility and must be accountable for their actions.

"Errors clearly were made and not corrected, and for that we apologize to the University of Oklahoma, cCoach Bob Stoops and his players. They played an outstanding college football game, as did Oregon, and it is regrettable that the outcome of the contest was affected by the officiating.

"Because of the ramifications, we are taking action against both the members of the officiating crew and the instant replay official and his assistant. Each individual will be suspended for one game, and their work in future games closely monitored.

"Officiating on the field is much more difficult than it appears from the stands, and certainly when watching repeated replays. Plays occur at a high rate of speed. Decisions on the field must be made instantaneously. The training and experience of officials at this level enable them to work at a high degree of accuracy. Unfortunately, at the critical moment of this game errors were made," Hansen stated.

"Further, the instant replay official is limited to the views of any play which is made available and must make a timely decision, although on the kickoff play ample views were available," he concluded.

[MylesKnight]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

In the OU/Oregon game, if the officials make the obvious correct call, the game is over with. This type of thing happens very rarely, like the 72 Olympic basketball game between the USA and USSR, or the 5th down in the Missouri/Colorado game.

Game. Set. Match.

Vegas Vic is the Winner!

I will never be a Oklahoma Sooner fan by any stretch of the imagination, but they were definitely jobbed here.

If I-A College Football is going to keep this BCS/Bowl format to determine it's National Champion, then each and every Regular Season Game is going to continue to be gigantically important, in a way that is not comparible to any other collegiate sport. Shouldn't the officiating then be held to a higher standard.. What if OU wins out and doesn't play in the BCS Title Game because of this game? I don't think this will happen (OU winning out), but who knows..

[k0ruptr]

Im a Duck fan, and I don't feel bad at all.

[Logan]

I've only seen the video that (I believe) Vegas Vic posted, that showed the OU player come out of the side of the pile with the ball, as no one noticed. So my question is...how did they originally award the ball to Oregon, when they got everyone out of the pile and no one had the ball? Did they just forget?

[k0ruptr]

yea, I have no idea how they awarded oregon the ball after that onside kick, completely uttlerly disgusting call and video review. I've never been on this side of a complete ripoff call before, its always been teams I been rooting for getting ripped off by refs, officials , whoever. So thats why I'm so damn happy. it feels good to be given a game , pretty damn good infact.

[HerRealName]

All the games from the weekend have run into each other (might have something to do with all the hard cider I was drinking) but didn't Oklahoma benefit from a bad call on a fumble return for a TD in the first half? I don't see it mentioned anywhere, so now I'm second guessing myself. Wasn't that a 10 - 14 point swing?

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The ACC coaches have to be scratching their heads over the AP poll.

Boston College (3-0) is undefeated, including a win over Clemson (2-1), but Clemson leapfrogs them in the polls.

So, then you look at Clemson. Clemson is 2-1 with a win over Florida State (2-1), who won ugly over now unranked Miami and Troy, but they are behind Florida State in the polls.

Too bad the ACC didn't get its initial wish of Syracuse over VT, as I think a Big East with VT, WVU, and Louisville would be clearly better than the current ACC lineup. ACC only has three of its twelve teams undefeated at this point with BE castoffs VT and BC, along with Wake Forest.

Another interesting fact is that after just three weeks, there are only four non-BCS conference teams that are still undefated: Houston (CUSA), TCU (MWC), Boise State (WAC), and Navy (IND).

BC consistently gets treated like the redheaded step child of the ACC, it's nothing new./ Last year they were the third place team in the ACC, and got sent to the SEVENTH place bowl game, because the other games preferred local ACC teams. They actually amended the ACC bowl selection proceedure to prevent it from happening again.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by HerRealName

All the games from the weekend have run into each other (might have something to do with all the hard cider I was drinking) but didn't Oklahoma benefit from a bad call on a fumble return for a TD in the first half? I don't see it mentioned anywhere, so now I'm second guessing myself. Wasn't that a 10 - 14 point swing?

You must be thinking of the wrong game, there was no fumble return for a TD in the game.

I've only seen the video that (I believe) Vegas Vic posted, that showed the OU player come out of the side of the pile with the ball, as no one noticed. So my question is...how did they originally award the ball to Oregon, when they got everyone out of the pile and no one had the ball? Did they just forget?

Here's the problem...before Patrick dove onto the ball and got up, you can see in the regular broadcast camera, the referee already running in signaling to stop the clock. At that point, the referee thought that the ball had been recovered. I guess he saw an Oregon player clutching to his gut, or something...who really knows. Anyway, the whistle blew and they had declared that someone had the ball underneath and assumed Patrick (the OU guy) stole it from underneath. I'm not really sure what the rules are if nobody has possession when the whistle blows...it could be that the recieving team gets possession, but anyway the Oregon player was ruled to have at one point had possession when the whistle blew and that was that. Unfortunately, the play allegedly isn't reviewable because of the whistle, and even if it was, the most conclusive camera views are those of local stations that were shot from the endzone and not part of the ABC replay camera pool.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

yea, I have no idea how they awarded oregon the ball after that onside kick, completely uttlerly disgusting call and video review. I've never been on this side of a complete ripoff call before, its always been teams I been rooting for getting ripped off by refs, officials , whoever. So thats why I'm so damn happy. it feels good to be given a game , pretty damn good infact.

I would. I hate it and I mean HATE it when my team wins because of a horrible call. I'd rather lose 75-0 than win 14-13 on a blown call. I still hate the fifth down play, even if it did help CU win a share of the national title.

The season is always going to be tainted by that fact. And in that game, there were a lot of things that were not CU's fault. For example, after the third down run gets stuffed, you can clearly see the CU QB look at the yardsticks before spiking the ball. CU had ample time to run a real 4th down play and the lines crew helped prevent that from happening.

But it was still a horrible call and it still impacts the national title CU won.

I think the two toughest things about being a sports fan for me are when the team I cheer for gets the benefit of a bad call to impact a game and when there are players I DESPISE on my favorite teams. (Despite my joy at the Broncos winning those Super Bowls, seeing Romo smiling made me sick to my stomach)

[digamma]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

BC consistently gets treated like the redheaded step child of the ACC, it's nothing new./ Last year they were the third place team in the ACC, and got sent to the SEVENTH place bowl game, because the other games preferred local ACC teams. They actually amended the ACC bowl selection proceedure to prevent it from happening again.

BC has been in the league for less than two full years, so using the word "consistently" may be overkill at this point. And, of course, the conference doesn't have anything to do with national rankings. The Tobacco Road crowd still rules the ACC, but it's a bit premature for BC to pull the red-headed stepchild card. The line for that one is long, and BC will be at the end of it.

BC did get screwed in the bowl selection process last year, but they weren't the only ones and it wasn't as bad as it seems. The best bowl the Eagles could have gotten was the Peach Bowl, but that wasn't very likely, so that left them with a reasonable best case game as the fourth selection (I can't remember if that is the Charlotte game or the Orlando game). They finished with a 5-3 record, which tied them for the third best record in the league with FSU and Georgia Tech. Problem was FSU went and won the ACC title game. That obligated the Gator Bowl to take Virginia Tech because no one else was within a game of them. The Peach Bowl could have taken Miami, BC or GT because they are all within a game of one another. They went for the Miami-LSU match-up. Understandable. After that, it was a free for all because bowls 4-7 didn't have the "within one game" rule. So, Charlotte was hopping to get NC State. Orlando was happy to get Clemson. Virginia made a promise it couldn't keep to Nashville and that sent BC and GT out west.

[JW]

Here is youtube video of two controversial plays from the LSU-Auburn game. In one LSU's Brandon LaFell is mugged in the endzone at the end of the first half and no flag is thrown. And the other is Doucet getting tackled as he goes for the ball late in the second half. He is clearly hit before the ball is tipped. Two terrible calls.

That takes nothing away from Auburn. They are just as good as LSU if not better, and LSU still would have had to score even if one or both of these penalties had been called, and there is certainly no guarantee they would have scored.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=S-46FByOK...related&search

On second thought, I deleted some comments I made about LSU fans. I just don't want to get into that nonsense.

[dawgfan]

I'm OK with the on-field crew getting a 1-game suspension, but the replay official should be out for the year, if not fired outright.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I'm OK with the on-field crew getting a 1-game suspension, but the replay official should be out for the year, if not fired outright.

Coach Stoops Agrees:
“At least they have reacted to it and tried. Truly there can be no amends to it and it can’t be corrected. I think (the media) are fair to discern whether the actions taken against (the officials) or the individuals who had an opportunity to get it right are acceptable or enough ... compared to how our season has changed.

“If you're going to write any of this, you need to say it all. I’ve made a million mistakes; I’ll make a million more. In each game and in that game included ... there are things I could have done differently or changed. Unlike officials, players and coaches don’t have that opportunity. They had an opportunity to get it right and they chose not to.

"So I find it still absolutely inexcusable and unacceptable. In particular (the) people who had an opportunity to review it all and look at it and get it right. They chose not to. You discern whether a one-game suspension is appropriate for those individuals. I’m not talking about people in the heat of the moment out there in the middle of the chaos. I’m talking about people who, like every viewer at home, had an opportunity to see it. It’s not for me to decide what is appropriate, but I think it's fair to say that a one-game suspension compared to the way our season now is altered, I don’t know if that fits the situation.

“Like I said, I’ve made a million mistakes. In a game I’d love to have a chance to replay it and do it over. They get that opportunity, we don’t. To me again it’s just unacceptable and inexcusable.”

On if the players understand that the season is not lost:
“Our players understand we’ve got a lot in front of us. The season is young. We’ve got a ton to get better at, improve at. I have to deal with this because I am the head coach, but we’re on to Middle Tennessee. We had a great practice. Our players are upbeat. They understand the potential that is on the football team and we’re going to keep working to get better.”

On President David L. Boren’s letter:
“We have a great administration. President Boren is the absolute best president a head coach can have. And you know what, and a great president for this university. You look at what he has done for this university, it’s remarkable. He’s a great leader for us right through Joe Castiglione. I’ve got faith in what they believe is right and trust their opinions.”

On the team’s motivation:
“It’s behind us. We’re motivated. We’ve got another game coming up and we’re going to keep getting better. That’s all the motivation we need.”

On accountability:
“I get a 19-year-old kid who’s out there in front of the whole country and out there in front of 60,000 people who makes a mistake and gives up a play at the end. He’s got to talk to (media) and he’s a man and walks in the tunnel and talks to everybody and explains (himself). All parties involved should have to explain their actions to some degree you would think. There are a lot of dynamics to it.

“We all make mistakes in the heat of the moment. Every coach in the country and every kid would love to replay it and say, ‘Let me do that over.” (The officials) have that opportunity, so how can it be excusable and acceptable? It’s just not. The people who were in those positions, I don’t know if that’s enough compared to what they’ve done to our season when they had an opportunity to get it right. And it isn’t like there’s 10 minutes to go. We’re taking a knee, game’s over. I’m not saying we didn’t have our fault in it that we could be better. But that’s the end of the game and there is no refuting that.”

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://www.newsday.com/sports/colleg...orts-headlines

Long story short, the SEC says the officials got the call at the end of the LSU/Auburn game right ... and for the very reason I told my wife at the time I thought it was.

Redding said pass interference can be called if the ball is tipped after the contact occurs, as it appeared to on the play.

However, he said, "it was more than a tip, it was a deflection of the ball so it made the ball uncatchable. A key part of the pass interference rule is whether or not the pass is uncatchable."

[JW]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

http://www.newsday.com/sports/colleg...orts-headlines

Long story short, the SEC says the officials got the call at the end of the LSU/Auburn game right ... and for the very reason I told my wife at the time I thought it was.

Redding said pass interference can be called if the ball is tipped after the contact occurs, as it appeared to on the play.

However, he said, "it was more than a tip, it was a deflection of the ball so it made the ball uncatchable. A key part of the pass interference rule is whether or not the pass is uncatchable."

Actually that is incorrect, no matter what the SEC says. The LSU receiver was not allowed to make a fair play on the ball because he was being held as he made his move on the ball, before the ball was tipped. Here is another angle of the play. Note Doucet has not made his jump yet. His foot is still on the ground. The ball is still on the way in. It has not been tipped yet. It will be tipped right in front of him by one defender as he is being held and pushed away from the ball by the other defender. He was prevented from making a move toward the ball by the Auburn defender holding his arm and then his leg. Just about the only people saying this was a good call are those in the SEC office.



Link if the image doesn't show up.

http://www.wilddogdigital.com/Auburn2006/images/006-b.jpg

If the SEC interpretation is correct, then on any given pass play, one defender can level the receiver and then a second defender can tip the ball away, making it uncatchable. You will not see the rule interpreted this way again in the SEC this year.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JW

Just about the only people saying this was a good call are those in the SEC office.

Nope. Like I said, I called it the same way they (ultimately) did when I saw the play.

If the SEC interpretation is correct, then on any given pass play, one defender can level the receiver and then a second defender can tip the ball away, making it uncatchable.

That's actually correct, as far as the way the rule appears to be written.

[JonInMiddleGA]

http://sports.myway.com/news/09182006/v7461.html

Instant Replay Official Gets Death Threat, Considers Resigning

Sep 18, 11:14 PM (ET)
By WILLIAM McCALL

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) -The instant replay official whose failure to overturn a bad call led to a narrow victory for Oregon over Oklahoma said he feels like he is under siege after receiving menacing phone calls and a death threat.

Gordon Riese said he would make a decision soon about whether to finish the season, or even whether to return next year.

"I'm struggling with it," Riese said in an interview at his home. "I feel so bad I missed that call, it's driving me crazy."

A former college baseball pitcher in the 1960s who was inducted into the Portland State Hall of Fame in 1997, Riese said he never played football but always enjoyed the game during 28 years as a Pacific-10 Conference official.

"I loved it, I absolutely loved it," Riese said.

But that was before he became an instant replay official.

"I've felt much, much more pressure as an instant replay official than I ever did on the field," Riese said.

He said the equipment is not as sophisticated as NFL replay equipment, and does not allow the official to freeze the frame. But Riese lays the blame on himself after replays showed that an onside kick was touched by an Oregon player before it traveled the required 10 yards. The Ducks went on to score the go-ahead touchdown.

"I can't sleep, I can't eat, my blood pressure is skyrocketing," Riese said, looking haggard and worn as he sat on the front porch of his house.

His wife is a registered nurse, and has been checking his blood pressure every four hours, he said.

Riese said he has stopped answering the phone, and police are investigating the threatening calls while keeping an eye on his neighborhood.

"They not only threatened me, they threatened my wife and kids," Riese said.

Riese has endured plenty of physical pain in his career. He said a torn rotator cuff ended his pitching days, all the ligaments in his right knee were torn when he was hit by an Oregon defensive back at Autzen Stadium in a 1984 game against Washington State, and he separated a collarbone when he was run over by opposing linemen trying to block each other in the 2005 Fiesta Bowl.

The knee and the collarbone still bother him, occasionally, he said. But not as much as his ruling from the booth last Saturday.

"I don't know how to deal with it," he said. "I guess it's just one of those things."

[JW]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Nope. Like I said, I called it the same way they (ultimately) did when I saw the play.



That's actually correct, as far as the way the rule appears to be written.

So LSU can come out in its next SEC game and start grabbing receivers and THEN tipping the ball and there will be no flags thrown. Right? You and I both know that we won't see that call waved off in that situation again in the foreseeable future in an SEC game.

[Cuckoo]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

"They not only threatened me, they threatened my wife and kids," Riese said.

That's really too bad. I'm fine with OU fans being upset about it, but I've heard some people discussing it that are just borderline psychotic.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by Cuckoo

That's really too bad. I'm fine with OU fans being upset about it, but I've heard some people discussing it that are just borderline psychotic.

Yeah, that's just not right. I sincerely hope that the imbecile who made the threat is caught and punished to the full extent of the law.

[duckman]

Originally Posted by Cuckoo

That's really too bad. I'm fine with OU fans being upset about it, but I've heard some people discussing it that are just borderline psychotic.

You really should stop talking about me like that, Cuckoo. Bad things happen to those who do.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JW

So LSU can come out in its next SEC game and start grabbing receivers and THEN tipping the ball and there will be no flags thrown. Right? You and I both know that we won't see that call waved off in that situation again in the foreseeable future in an SEC game.

Whether we see it again has no bearing on whether they got the call right in the first place.

And to get that scenario you describe, you gotta get to the ball to tip it to make that work. And I don't think there are that many sure thing tips to create a frenzy of these as a defensive tactic.

edit to add: Seeing how you seem to like pictures, here's one that really matters. Enjoy

[JW]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Whether we see it again has no bearing on whether they got the call right in the first place.

And to get that scenario you describe, you gotta get to the ball to tip it to make that work. And I don't think there are that many sure thing tips to create a frenzy of these as a defensive tactic.

Or we can simply apply the rules and their interpretations.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

Use of Hands or Arms by Defense—ARTICLE 4
Approved Ruling 9-3-4
I. During a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone, B1 holds eligible A1, who is beyond or behind the neutral zone. The pass is not catchable by A1. RULING: Team B foul, holding. Penalty—10 yards and first down, basic-spot enforcement.

Since Doucet was being held by the Auburn defender during a legal forward pass, (note, before the tip; see photo and video) LSU should have had a first down regardless of what later happened to the ball. The clear intent here is that if a receiver is held and prevented from making a fair play on a ball, it is a penalty, even if the ball is subsequently deflected and becomes, due to the holding or interference or whatever you want to call it, uncatchable.

In the case of the interference call against LSU -- which was a good call imo -- the SEC thought the Auburn receiver was prevented from making a play on the ball that was intercepted by LSU. It was definitely uncatchable as far as the Auburn receiver was concerned, but only because of the interference that occurred before the LSU player touched the ball. Do you think that if LSU has simply tipped that ball instead of intercepting it, that the officials would have waved off the call? You know better.

And while you're at it, take a look at the video of the play in the endzone at the end of the first half and explain to me why that wasn't interference? No tipped ball, just an Auburn defender holding the LSU receiver with the ball in the air.

[sooner333]

The threats are really unacceptable. In the end it's just a game that we probably care about way too much. Yeah, the guy was a moron in the booth, but that doesn't mean you have to make his life even worse than it was...I'm sure he feels pretty bad anyway right now.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JW

Do you think that if LSU has simply tipped that ball instead of intercepting it, that the officials would have waved off the call? You know better.

So, what, it's some sort of giant conspiracy or something against LSU?

Who are you, Ray Nagin going incognito?

Here's what I "know better".
LSU lost. Deal with it.

[JW]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

So, what, it's some sort of giant conspiracy or something against LSU?

Who are you, Ray Nagin going incognito?

Here's what I "know better".
LSU lost. Deal with it.

You seem unable to deal with the fact that more than one bad call was involved in Auburn's win, thus resorting to the "nyah nyah" juvenile type post.

I said earlier LSU still would have had to score and did not show the ability to do that all game long. I am concerned however that the SEC feels the need to defend poor officiating. They should just admit the call was wrong. That would help their credibility more than defending the indefensible.

As for the Doucet play, I would ask anyone just to look at this sequence of pictures and determine for yourself if there was a penalty. Look particularly as 007-b, where Doucet is being held with one arm pinned down as the ball comes in, before it is tipped away.

http://www.wilddogdigital.com/Auburn2006/index.htm

With that, Jon, I will take my leave and let you make any further nyah nyah comments you want.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JW

Or we can simply apply the rules and their interpretations.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/rules/20...ball_rules.pdf

Use of Hands or Arms by Defense—ARTICLE 4
Approved Ruling 9-3-4
I. During a legal forward pass that crosses the neutral zone, B1 holds eligible A1, who is beyond or behind the neutral zone. The pass is not catchable by A1. RULING: Team B foul, holding. Penalty—10 yards and first down, basic-spot enforcement.

Since Doucet was being held by the Auburn defender during a legal forward pass, (note, before the tip; see photo and video) LSU should have had a first down regardless of what later happened to the ball. The clear intent here is that if a receiver is held and prevented from making a fair play on a ball, it is a penalty, even if the ball is subsequently deflected and becomes, due to the holding or interference or whatever you want to call it, uncatchable.

I think you may have just added to the argument for reversing the call.

This applies to defensive holding (which wasn't called), not to defensive pass interference (which was originally).

And here's what the NCAA says about defensive pass intereference.
http://www1.ncaa.org/eprise/main/pla...nterference%22

If you observe defensive interference but rule the pass was uncatchable, the result is an incomplete pass if it was not caught. There is no foul and do not throw a penalty flag.

That's the key here, whether the ball was uncatchable (for a reason other than the potential pass interference). QB overthrow or underthrow, or in this case, a deflection that rendered the pass uncatchable regardless of any possible pass interference by another player.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JW

With that, Jon, I will take my leave and let you make any further nyah nyah comments you want.

Oh, believe me, I love the result. And given the amount of whining going on, it's hard to resist the urge to nyah nyah it.

They got the call right, although I'll admit it was a bang bang play that needed reviewing & consideration of all the applicable rules. I understand why the flag was thrown initially, but I also understand why the review overturned it.

Apparently the difference in our p.o.v. extends beyond our feelings about the outcome, it's also in reading the applicable rule.

[Poli]

I wonder if there's a picture of Cory Anderson turned around watching Ainge trying to avoid the sack on the 1st and 10 from the Florida 39.

Friggin missed block.

[molson]

Refs miss calls, receivers drop balls, wind catches field goal kicks, guys get the flu the morning before kickoff. None of those things "taint" anything. It's all part of the game. The goal is to win convincingly enough so that you're not subject to that kind of bad luck. I'll never get the anger that people generate for refs.

[Poli]

Nice post.