replay official

#51
#51
hillsborovol said:
Any replay crew that sees this replay and doesn't think this is a fumble is either 1) grossly incompetent, 2) a biased fan of the Big 12, or 3) has money on the line. In any case, the NCAA should look into this and fire them immediately.
Click to expand...
ABC even brought their own Mike Pereira onto the broadcast while it was being reviewed and he said the ball was clearly dislodged before his knee was down.
 
#52
#52
Volnut said:
ABC even brought their own Mike Pereira onto the broadcast while it was being reviewed and he said the ball was clearly dislodged before his knee was down.
Click to expand...

...and then he mentioned that it looked like the Oklahoma player might have regained possession after he was down.
 
#53
#53
Volnut said:
ABC even brought their own Mike Pereira onto the broadcast while it was being reviewed and he said the ball was clearly dislodged before his knee was down.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is the same Mike Pereia who was the former Vice President of Officiating in the NFL. Mike was quoted later as saying, "For those asking about the play in Oklahoma. I think it was a fumble and a clear recovery. Guess they figured he had control with elbow."

The 2014 NCAA rule book offers the following from Section 4, Article 1a:

"The ball is in player possession when a player has the ball firmly in his grasp by holding or controlling it while contacting the ground inbounds." (emphasis added by me)

This ball was not controlled "firmly"; nor can you "grasp" the back side of the football with your elbow or your side.

All possessions of a football, that I am aware of, involves the hands in some manner. If not, then players should be allowed to recover a fumble by pinning it between their feet.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#54
#54
nash101 said:
How obvious was the fumble? The Oklahoma fans in the stadium conceded that it was a fumble and they refused to show the replay on their jumbotron (every other play was shown over and over)
Click to expand...

That says it all right there. The knee was going down and the ball coming out. The knee got within three or four inches of the ground and then started coming back up, at which time Sutton relieved him of the ball. Just horrible that with slow motion and high def they still can't get it right.:banghead2:
 
#55
#55
A toss up over which was worse-- the obvious fumble or the playclock hitting 0 before the ball was snapped in the UF/UK OT. Both were so clear that the announcers commented.
 
#56
#56
#57
#57
Ok - I happened to have the replay of the Oklahoma game on and Curt Magitt completely and totally blew by his man
and as he is closing on the quarterback - the offensive tackle grabbed his jersey with both hands from behind. I feel this would be nearly impossible to miss.

Then Vareen completely beats his man - and the offensive lineman grabs his shirt from behind with one hand. Also should be impossible to miss. This was on one of Oklahoma's touchdown drives.

Just saw my third example - on the pass we intercepted - all in the first half.

I seldom if ever complain about the refs - but if you look under holding in the encyclopedia of football - there will be a picture of these two blatant worst case examples. Seriously how is it possible to miss these. Isn't someone assigned to watch the backfield ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#58
#58
Failing to SEE a hold and failing to CALL a hold that you see, are two different things!

I don't mind getting beat by a better team, but getting screwed by the refs chaps me! Cheatin bastards!



.
 
#59
#59
bamawriter said:
This looked like a really bad call to me, too. I'm not sure what the replay ref thought he saw, but at the point that the runner's knee might have been down, he'd already lost the ball.
Click to expand...

The only thing he could have went with was that by pinching the ball between his elbow and his side he regain possession at that point. There is no way he didnt lose it before his knee went down originally. Even at that it was incorrect and should have been fixed.
 
#60
#60
hillsborovol said:
Yes, this is the same Mike Pereia who was the former Vice President of Officiating in the NFL. Mike was quoted later as saying, "For those asking about the play in Oklahoma. I think it was a fumble and a clear recovery. Guess they figured he had control with elbow."

The 2014 NCAA rule book offers the following from Section 4, Article 1a:

"The ball is in player possession when a player has the ball firmly in his grasp by holding or controlling it while contacting the ground inbounds." (emphasis added by me)

This ball was not controlled "firmly"; nor can you "grasp" the back side of the football with your elbow or your side.

All possessions of a football, that I am aware of, involves the hands in some manner. If not, then players should be allowed to recover a fumble by pinning it between their feet.
Click to expand...

There you have it.

Should have been fixed.
 
#62
#62
Serene said:
...and then he mentioned that it looked like the Oklahoma player might have regained possession after he was down.
Click to expand...

"...with the prehensile fingers that are on the end of his elbow." You simply can't "grasp" the football with your elbow, and according to the NCAA rule book, you must firmly grasp the ball to gain possession of the football.
 
#63
#63
All I know is when I played; if you had a guy coming off the edge like striker you ran right at him and when you lined up and saw him on the edge as the qb you looked at the running back and said we are gonna run right over him with you and the fullback.you changed the play and off you went. And you kept doing it until he got tired and started staying at home. We could have done that easily.
 
#64
#64
the SEC officials were no better at making the calls on the field i saw time and time again all the holding and none of them called and they need to put the box on the field and let the on field officials make that call dont need someone in a booth. i think they should have official from a different conference other than the two teams playing official from the ACC or the pac 12 it has to change and also they need to be under 50 years old that doesnt wear glasses
 
#68
#68
Serene said:
I honestly don't think that this call was as cut and dry as you guys are making it out to be. I think it could have gone either way and when calls are like that, I always expect them to support the call on the field. That's why I wasn't surprised with the outcome.

I don't have the video, so I can only comment on what I remember seeing live. The Oklahoma player obviously lost possession of the ball before his knee touched the ground. I don't believe anybody is disputing that. However, after his knee touched the ground, he wedged the ball between his arm and his torso. It obviously wasn't a very safe position for the ball to be in, but the ball wasn't "loose" (you can observe this by noticing how Cam has to rip the ball out of his grip instead of just picking it up). At this point, the Oklahoma player's knee is obviously down and you can argue that he has possession of the ball because it is not loose. If those two things are true, it doesn't matter if he lost possession of the ball while he was falling.

Again, I think it was a tough call to make. It's a judgment call on whether a player has possession of a ball for a small amount of time. I believe that if it was ruled a fumble and Tennessee recovery on the field, that also would have been held up in review.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting interpretation that I have to admit had NOT occurred to me. ("That had not occurred to us, dude.") But you know what? I'll bet you're right. I'll bet that's JUST the sort of faulty logic the Big XII (got it right that time, HAH!) replay crew used to rationalize away that fumble.

That does not mean that the argument holds water, however. There is a concept in football that is referred to as possession. You must possess the ball. That does NOT mean that just because the ball is touching your body that you are possessing it. How many times have you seen a WR running out of bounds with the ball and it's called an incompletion, because (while he may be holding the ball) he does NOT have POSSESSION of it?

The Oklahoma player ceased to be in possession of the ball before his knee hit the ground. It was a fumble.

And it wasn't even close.
 
#69
#69
The ball came out immediately on contact. It continued to move and was precariously positioned between the upper arm and the body before being stripped. Neither knee contacted the ground, even after the ball was in the defender's hands, from what I saw.

Orange-tinted glasses aside, it looked like an easy call for the review booth to overturn, and they failed.
 
#70
#70
hillsborovol said:
Yes, this is the same Mike Pereia who was the former Vice President of Officiating in the NFL. Mike was quoted later as saying, "For those asking about the play in Oklahoma. I think it was a fumble and a clear recovery. Guess they figured he had control with elbow."

The 2014 NCAA rule book offers the following from Section 4, Article 1a:

"The ball is in player possession when a player has the ball firmly in his grasp by holding or controlling it while contacting the ground inbounds." (emphasis added by me)

This ball was not controlled "firmly"; nor can you "grasp" the back side of the football with your elbow or your side.

All possessions of a football, that I am aware of, involves the hands in some manner. If not, then players should be allowed to recover a fumble by pinning it between their feet.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree that it should have been a fumble. I think that's the call that should have been made on the field. I agree that he didn't "grasp" the ball. But I looked up the rules earlier when I was considering the call and I read the article differently. I was looking at the NCAA Football 2013-2014 Rules and Interpretations. It's the most recent rules I could find. The article read as follows:

"A player 'gains possession' when he secures the ball firmly by holding or controlling it while contacting the ground inbounds. The ball is then in player possession."

While it's very similar, it doesn't mention "grasping" at all. It only talks about "securing", which is in my opinion much more vague. It doesn't imply that hands have to be used at all. Now, like I said, I'm not saying that the Oklahoma player ever secured the ball. I'm just saying that depending on the NCAA's definition of securing (I'm not sure what that is exactly--not loose?), the replay officials might have at least some defense to not overturn the call on the field. I'd really like some clarification myself--as written, the rules seem kinda vague in this circumstance.
 
#71
#71
Serene said:
I tend to agree that it should have been a fumble. I think that's the call that should have been made on the field. I agree that he didn't "grasp" the ball. But I looked up the rules earlier when I was considering the call and I read the article differently. I was looking at the NCAA Football 2013-2014 Rules and Interpretations. It's the most recent rules I could find. The article read as follows:

"A player 'gains possession' when he secures the ball firmly by holding or controlling it while contacting the ground inbounds. The ball is then in player possession."

While it's very similar, it doesn't mention "grasping" at all. It only talks about "securing", which is in my opinion much more vague. It doesn't imply that hands have to be used at all. Now, like I said, I'm not saying that the Oklahoma player ever secured the ball. I'm just saying that depending on the NCAA's definition of securing (I'm not sure what that is exactly--not loose?), the replay officials might have at least some defense to not overturn the call on the field. I'd really like some clarification myself--as written, the rules seem kinda vague in this circumstance.
Click to expand...
The official said "after further review the runners knee was down Tennessee is charged with a time out first down Oklahoma" no explanation no Nothing. To me that's saying there never was a fumble at all. BULL!!!T.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top