NCAA Football 2015

[alfred russel]

ACC SUSPENDS MIAMI-DUKE OFFICIATING CREW

Of the two-game suspension of the on-field officiating crew as well as the replay official and communicator, the league said in a statement: "The replay official erred in not overturning the ruling on the field that the Miami player had released the ball prior to his knee being down. If called, this would have ended the game." The league cited three other uncalled penalties.

Uh, Dorsey, you might want to rethink your position vis-a-vis mine! 

Exactly what did I say that makes you think this in any way contradicts what I wrote?

You wrote:

"That replay official was as awful as the one in the UM-MSU game.  One of the Miami players tackled a Duke player, #1's knees hit the ground before he threw the ball away, there were two blocks in the back (one somewhat questionable, the other blatant), and a helmet-to-helmet hit on one of the blocks.  Other than that, it looked like a good play.  I mean, fuck Duke, but that replay official was grossly incompetent and should never work another game."

I pointed out that the only component of that which was reviewable was the player's knee being down (which I parenthetically and with a ? at the end to indicate I was clearly not personally arguing that point said people were disputing). The ACC did not indict the replay official for any of the other things you mentioned in the post.

Then, you bizarrely went on to post this, without any evidence:

"The play was reviewed, and the egregious block in the back was called on the field (and over-ruled on review)."

I pointed out that while it was not clear what happened during to the penalty call because it was not explained on the field and the officials ran off the field immediately after the game concluded, it could not have been over ruled on review, because that is outside of the scope of the replay official.

And in fact the ACC clarified that in fact the penalty was not overturned on review, but overturned based on consultations among the officials without using replay. Which is what I posted I guessed is what happened.

So no, I do not think I should rethink my position, because I never said it was a clean play, never said a penalty shouldn't/couldn't have been called during the play, and never said that the runner wasn't down at some point. Part of what I did allude to, was while I am glad Miami won, I don't care all that much, because needing a miracle to beat Duke is not some great memory I will relish. Duke sucks, Miami sucks, the whole ACC Coastal sucks. Miami has already lost to FSU and been humiliated by Clemson. Baring somehow winning the ACC, nothing good will come from this season (save a better coach), and really going to the ACC championship game to play Clemson or possibly FSU again isn't all that appealing. If tomorrow the NCAA announces that it is overturning the result of the game because of shitty officiating on that play and giving the game to Duke, I really won't care, but will welcome the concept of reexamining past games and overturning outcomes when shitty officiating determined them. I have a few suggestions of games they could start with.

[alfred russel]

Oh, and the Kelly thing was the most over-reacted-to event of the weekend.  He was right to shove his coach away from the official.  Only the head coach gets to argue calls.

Brian Kelly is a good coach, and I'm glad he is at Notre Dame, but he put his hands on another man with some aggression behind it. That isn't cool.

[MadBurgerMaker]

A alum friend of mine who is pretty connected told me this was coming.  This wasn't Beamer's choice.

Sucks for Beamer, but it really seems like it's about that time. 

[Admiral Yi]

My google fu utterly failed, but if yo guys haven't seen the UMass/Ball State kick return you absolutely have to see this.

It was the Duke/Miami game.  They must have been running the Mass/Ball score on the ticker.  D'oh.

[grumbler]

Then, you bizarrely went on to post this, without any evidence:

"The play was reviewed, and the egregious block in the back was called on the field (and over-ruled on review)."

I pointed out that while it was not clear what happened during to the penalty call because it was not explained on the field and the officials ran off the field immediately after the game concluded, it could not have been over ruled on review, because that is outside of the scope of the replay official. 

Why is the flag for a block in the back not subject to review?  Most penalties are not reviewable, but this was clearly was reviewable because it was reviewed, and the flag picked up.  I don't know what is "bizarre" about it.

And in fact the ACC clarified that in fact the penalty was not overturned on review, but overturned based on consultations among the officials without using replay. Which is what I posted I guessed is what happened.

Edit: I see the later statement, which says that the on-field officials fucked that up, and the referee didn't make it clear that no review of that penalty was conducted.  The ACC also didn't make that clear in their earlier statement, which specifically mentioned the block in the back but didn't note that it was on-field incompetence, not booth incompetence, that caused the refs to blow that call.

In any case, the ACC seems to reject your contention that my position was the equivalent of wanting "to call a penalty for every play a forensic inspection of a replay shows helmets touch during a block, or possibly someone blocked in the back, we will never again have a play without a penalty."  Rather, they agreed with my assessment of the refereeing and suspended the refs for two games.

[alfred russel]

Then, you bizarrely went on to post this, without any evidence:

"The play was reviewed, and the egregious block in the back was called on the field (and over-ruled on review)."

I pointed out that while it was not clear what happened during to the penalty call because it was not explained on the field and the officials ran off the field immediately after the game concluded, it could not have been over ruled on review, because that is outside of the scope of the replay official. 

Why is the flag for a block in the back not subject to review?  Most penalties are not reviewable, but this was clearly was reviewable because it was reviewed, and the flag picked up.  I don't know what is "bizarre" about it.

And in fact the ACC clarified that in fact the penalty was not overturned on review, but overturned based on consultations among the officials without using replay. Which is what I posted I guessed is what happened.

Edit: I see the later statement, which says that the on-field officials fucked that up, and the referee didn't make it clear that no review of that penalty was conducted.  The ACC also didn't make that clear in their earlier statement, which specifically mentioned the block in the back but didn't note that it was on-field incompetence, not booth incompetence, that caused the refs to blow that call.

Yep, you were wrong. The penalties were not reviewable.

In any case, the ACC seems to reject your contention that my position was the equivalent of wanting "to call a penalty for every play a forensic inspection of a replay shows helmets touch during a block, or possibly someone blocked in the back, we will never again have a play without a penalty."  Rather, they agreed with my assessment of the refereeing and suspended the refs for two games.

Uh, the ACC did not and does not reject my contention that penalties such as blocking in the back can not be called by the replay official, and to make them subject to review would result in absurd numbers of penalties. That was the point I was discussing. ACC officials didn't specifically respond to any contention I made because they probably aren't reading this thread.

FWIW, I've always felt the officials were shitty--and based on the overall performance in the game should be suspended for much longer than 2 games.

[Berkut]

ACC SUSPENDS MIAMI-DUKE OFFICIATING CREW

Of the two-game suspension of the on-field officiating crew as well as the replay official and communicator, the league said in a statement: "The replay official erred in not overturning the ruling on the field that the Miami player had released the ball prior to his knee being down. If called, this would have ended the game." The league cited three other uncalled penalties.

Uh, Dorsey, you might want to rethink your position vis-a-vis mine!   

Wow. That is pretty harsh.

I actually know the new AAC director of officiating - I've worked several games with him in the past, and he came up through my D3 organization. Awesome guy.

[alfred russel]

My favorite part of this is that a Duke dumbass started a thread on their board about how he hopes Miami will do the classy/sportsmanlike thing and request the NCAA to vacate the last play and declare Duke the winner. 

Lets just say the chances of that are rather low. When the ACC announced the suspensions of the officials, the Miami twitter feed responded with a smiling emoticon shrugging his shoulders.

[alfred russel]

Wow. That is pretty harsh.

It really strikes me as politics.

The ACC seems to be saying there were three errors on the play:

#1: The ballcarrier was down, and the replay official didn't call it. This seems to be the only thing on the replay official. There are lots of still shots with the Miami player with his knee on the ground and the ball touching his hand, but he was in the process of tossing/fumbling the ball backward. Not the most egregious thing I've seen.

#2: Block in the back penalties. So in a 46 second play they missed some blocks in the back. Not the first time a crew has missed block in the back penalties.

#3: poor communication. Clearly, but not the first time for that either.

I've definitely seen worse replay mistakes than #1, and suspending a crew for 2 games for missing blocks in the back and poorly communicating the rationale for a play seems harsher than normal. My guess: Duke is screaming bloody murder that the game should be overturned, and this is a way for the conference office to at least toss Duke a bone while not overturning the game.

[Berkut]

Well, I don't buy that Duke is asking for the game to be "overturned". There is no such thing in college football, no matter how egregious the screwup.

I am actually rather curious, since I know Denny Hennigan, the new AAC head of officiating. I know he was hired to bring a much higher level of professionalism and accountability to AAC officiating. I have to assume this is his call (although I cannot be certain of that of course).

But I know Denny - he is incredibly, almost ridiculously, straight and by the book. He is a really, really nice guy while at the same time holding himself (and presumably others) to an incredibly high set of standards.

[alfred russel]

Well, I don't buy that Duke is asking for the game to be "overturned". There is no such thing in college football, no matter how egregious the screwup.

Results of games have been changed--I read an article a long time ago on the history of this. It has only happened a few times, and it has been a long time. But it has happened.

[dps]

I don't really disagree, I just don't agree that there is a "conflict of interest".

The officials do not have an interest in the outcome of the game, regardless of what conference they work for - but if it makes people feel better to have a third conference provide the officials, that is fine as well.

The idea, however, that officials have some idea in their head that since they work for the AAC, they really should try to see if they can make the AAC team win, is kind of tin-foil.

Okay, "conflict of interest" goes to far, but remember that this is AR, and if we ignored those statements of his that went to far, we would be ignoring him. 

I think that there probably is an unconscious bias in favor of the guys you work with multiple times in your career, and against guys you've never seen before and won't see again.

The practice simply creates a perception that there might be bias or a conflict of interest.  Simply from a PR standpoint, there's no reason to do that.

[grumbler]

Well, I don't buy that Duke is asking for the game to be "overturned". There is no such thing in college football, no matter how egregious the screwup.

I am actually rather curious, since I know Denny Hennigan, the new AAC head of officiating. I know he was hired to bring a much higher level of professionalism and accountability to AAC officiating. I have to assume this is his call (although I cannot be certain of that of course).

But I know Denny - he is incredibly, almost ridiculously, straight and by the book. He is a really, really nice guy while at the same time holding himself (and presumably others) to an incredibly high set of standards.

They need to clone him and put the clone in charge of Big Ten officiating.  They desperately need someone there with high standards.

[sbr]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EwSP_yPa0w


Rebuttal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQnYfkDO5Ks

[Admiral Yi]

 

Nice line about Vanderbilt.