FInal Rant THE MCB PLAY

[GUNTERSVOL]

Let me see if I can break the rule down some to eliminate confusion. (Underlined statements are the text of the rule)

ARTICLE 2. a. A live ball becomes a dead ball

as provided in the rules - Possibility #1 - The "rules" say you are "down" if any part of your body (except for feet and hands) comes into contact with the ground, if you run out of bounds, score, etc. A live ball becomes a dead ball when a legal forward pass hits the ground.

or when an official sounds their whistle (even though inadvertently) - Possibility #2 - This is the commonly understood "end of a play" signal. We have all been taught and those of us that coach have coached to "PLAY TO THE WHISTLE"!

or otherwise signals the ball dead (A.R. 4-2-1-II and A.R. 4-2-4-I). - Possibility #3 - This is the answer to your question. An official can judge forward progress stopped and mark it at that spot. The whistle comes late...after the judgement occurs. "when a ball carrier is so held that his forward progress is stopped. When in question, the ball is dead (A.R. 4-2-1-II)." The doofus judged that his progress had been stopped so he made that call. My main gripe again is that he had time to realize his screw-up between the time he made his decision and the time he got to the white hat.

The whistle does not have to be present to rule the play dead. It never has. This call was bungled all the way around. I think they knew he screwed up so they made it worse by saying it was going to review, when that is not allowed in a play that forward progress was ruled to have stopped. Comparing this one to the Ole Miss play, I have a bigger issue with that one. At no time did I ever see an official "act" to stop a play. They waited until we were in the endzone to "fix" it. If they had ruled forward progress on the field, they wouldn't have trailed the play all the way to the endzone. They would have blown it dead at some point before it got that far.

What really sucks is if he would have just ruled that his knee was down and not his forward progress stopped, that could have been reviewed and overturned.

Yes the rule 4-3 Ball Declared Dead does explicitly define that the ref can make the progress call and that the end result is that the ball becomes dead , but it also says they SHALL sound their whistle or declare it dead because it immediately follows 4-2 which previously defined the timing,of when a Live Ball Becomes Dead...... when an official sounds their whistle (even though inadvertently) or otherwise signals the ball dead. Furthermore rule 5-3 Just a few inches away says ...Forward Progress ARTICLE 3. a. The most forward point of the ball when declared dead. NOT at some ambiguous point in time in some official's head.

All three of these key rules are in direct conflict with your position that the whistle or some verifiable signal does not have to be present to change a live ball to a dead ball on a progress call and that progress is possible and reviewable until it does. Spot the ball at it's most forward point attained at the time it is legally declared dead. Like I said, I heard a whistle, what is the problem. Now if replay had a prior whistle or signal they can provide I am good with it. A live ball can only become a dead ball once each play and progress and the legal defensive resistance of it is possible until it is.

edited to add on 1/15

In my never ending search for relative data I want to add the following... to address the concept that an officials initial judgement call that progress was stopped is end all and cannot be adjusted by replay I want to include the most similar call to progress on a running play and that is a ball being judged out of bounds by an official and him establishing an initial spot with that belief and it not being absolute. Also Rule 4.

Out of Bounds at Forward Point ARTICLE 4. a. If a live ball is declared out of bounds and the ball does not cross a boundary line, it is out of bounds at the ball’s most forward point when it was declared dead.

Obviously not necessarily where the guy first put his foot down on the line. You can't put the bullet back in the gun but you do allow all the legal yardage gained till it is blown dead.

Notice the similarity in circumstance. This guy ran to establish a spot where the thought progress was stopped just like the guy who thought it crossed a line, it obviously was not since the ball broke the plane, and just like this instance the correct adjusted spot should be the progress spot when the ball is legally declared dead not the original assumption. The play is over and additional yardage when applicable cannot be recovered but declaration of dead ball spot overrules the initial judgement. That would be with a whistle or some significant as yet undefined group of signals. I am guessing that 99.99 percent of all plays ever have been declared dead with the whistle.

Where was the ball when the ball was legally declared dead?

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Time to end this study I guess, and I have gone back through it all since I started it, and just wanted to close with the very definition of FORWARD PROGRESS which I did not see included by anyone in the thread. I think we have run to ground that the play was reviewable by rule no matter how many talking heads wanted to hide behind an assumption.

RULE 2-9-2

Forward Progress ARTICLE 2. Forward progress is a term indicating the end of advancement by the ball carrier or airborne pass receiver of either team and applies to the position of the ball when it becomes dead by rule (Rules 4-1-3-a, b and p; Rules 4-2-1 and 4; and Rule 5-1-3-a Exception) (A.R. 5-1-3-I-VI and A.R. 8-2-1-I-IX) (Exception: Rule 8-5-1-a, A.R. 8-5-1-I).

I will close by reposting only the one most critical rule in determining the forward progress spot when the play was dead by rule on this judgement play. Whereas the rule Ball Declared Dead covers just plays stopped by official judgement, this rule defines when a play is dead for all plays like a runner is down or out of bounds too. In this instance the OR portion is in play.

Live Ball Becomes Dead ARTICLE 2. a. A live ball becomes a dead ball as provided in the rules or when an official sounds their whistle (even though inadvertently) or otherwise signals the ball dead (A.R. 4-2-1-II and A.R. 4-2-4-I).

Sequence these rules and see what YOU see. In my opinion they just backed up the line judges desire to spot the ball where he thought it could be ruled as progress and if he was right the ball still would have been there when his or any other officials first whistle or acceptable by rule declaration or signal ended the play. OOPS.

I will leave this thread with a broader knowledge of the rule book but with the same position I had when I kicked it off. With a greater issue with replay than the on field official. Thanks to all who have contributed.

Warning, I am now taking a look at the replay rules to see if it was actually handled within the rules as written or not, whether I liked the outcome or not. Do not want to mix that discussion with the specifics of this play itself.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

OK, I lied..... As I pivoted to my study the replay process itself, I encountered this play situation ruling in the official 21 Instant Replay Casebook that is more relative to this specific play. Link below.

21 Instant Replay Casebook link

19. Forward progress with respect to a first down Third and 10 on the B-20. A22 runs to the B-9, where he is pushed back to the Team B 15-yard line and is never downed. Officials rule forward progress was stopped at the Team B 11-yard line. RULING: Reviewable play, regarding whether A22 had made the line to gain. Reverse to A 1-Goal onB-9, reset clock if within two minutes of the first half or five minutes of the second half and start on Referee’s signal (Rule 12-3-3-e).

This does not address if the ball was originally spotted to just the officials spot or where indicated by the whistle, so it should be an applicable ruling to our situtaton. Replay would have seen that the official ruled him down (progress stopped) close to the one, but that he was never downed till after the ball broke the plane of the endzone.

Also on progress play reviews
o Replay can only move the ball closer to the line to gain, not farther away.
Not a clue why.

This seems to be the sliver stake in the heart of any defense of how replay handled it.

 

[Clayton]

I know this is going to solidify my status as a grumpy stubborn old guy but I need to put this out there for all to see why I am so wound up, not about the call, but how it was administered by replay. I think there is verifiable video evidence to support a different ruling and the following depicts why.

Multiple talking heads have parroted the position that the call being FORWARD PROGRESS is NOT reviewable. Well, that is a half truth, like LOTS of calls that are not reviewable the result of the call is reviewable, when he blew the whistle it was done. Funny that there is this section in the 21 NCAA Instant Replay Casebook for forward progress. Much more there to if you care to review it all.


21 NCAA Instant Replay Casebook
22 PART II: INSTANT REPLAY MECHANICS AND GUIDELINES

.Forward Progress

Forward progress is a term indicating the end of advancement by the ball carrier or airborne pass receiver and applies to the position of the ball when it becomes dead by rule (Rule 2-9-2).

The replay official must know the ruling on the field and where officials ruled progress.

Replay can create or negate a safety, touchdown or first down.

---
Let's also review the key rule involved with the runner out of the the 21 NCAA Rulebook also available online for free.

I believe Rule 4.3 and 4.2 are the most pointed to the call that CAN be reviewed. 4.3 defines the actual CALL of forward progress and 4.2 clarifies when the ball goes from live ball to dead ball status for all related calls.

RULE 4 / ball in play, dead ball, out of bounds

Ball Declared Dead
ARTICLE 3. A live ball becomes dead and an official shall sound their whistle or declare it dead:
a. When it goes out of bounds other than a kick that scores a field goal after touching the uprights or crossbar; when a ball carrier is out of bounds; or when a ball carrier is so held that their forward progress is stopped. When in question, the ball is dead .`

----
YEP, not arguing that the call was within the rules for him to make, nor that he made it. Don't think it was accurate, but it was executed. But let's go back up to 4.2 to define how the book says plays with verifiable actions ending a play like down by contact or stepping out of bounds creates a dead ball and how a judgment call differs. NOTICE the "OR" in this rule.

Live Ball Becomes Dead

ARTICLE 2. a. A live ball becomes a dead ball as provided in the rules or when an official sounds their whistle (even though inadvertently) or otherwise signals the ball dead.

---
The otherwise signals is a subplot, but in the same book go to appendix F and holding up one arm is not defined as a signal to stop the play or clock like the one we see all the time, with two arms up and waving back and forth especially on a change of possession play like this one. In our other infamous play vs UM if you remember the linesman raised his hand 20 yards behind the play and ran all the way to the ball and he did not kill the play. We see plays all the time where both linemen run in with their arms up. But the whistle when applied seems to be the key action to end the play. Replay has a spot to verify on down by contact, or a line crossed for out of bounds to end the play, only an official's declaration for judgement calls.

We have also been told over and over that the whistle did not matter. I need to see that supported in the book to buy that. This rule seems to make the whistle the most important element for DECLARING a play dead. For example this call is often made with a runner being pushed backwards and the whistle is blown but the ball is spotted at the most forward spot until the whistle was blown.

So the key question is if this play was correctly handled by Replay what should they have ruled? Let me close with some more excerpts from the Replay Casebook that should have driven the end game situation. That is what can be replayed. Same should be true here. In fact it also states that during the review-

o Replay can only move the ball closer to the line to gain, not farther away.

PART II: INSTANT REPLAY MECHANICS AND GUIDELINES

Competitive Effect
• The replay official should not overthink competitive effect. The game should be stopped in obvious review situations.
• Scoring and change of possession plays must be cleared by replay before play is resumed.
• Reviewing whether a player made the line to gain is significant on third and fourth down. The guideline can be less at the end of each half and in red zone situations
• Everything is magnified in overtime. A review that may result in a five-yard difference is enough to warrant a stoppage

---
I know that the game is over, but I want an honest and accurate account of how this situation was handled and if that was to the letter of the book. I don't think the ball was dead till the whistle, and the one I heard was after ball crossed the plane. But for sure I want them to end the charade that forward progress spot is not reviewable. He should have run in and spotted the ball where it was when he legally ended the play with his whistle. A ball is live till it is not.

As always if you have more rules or input relative to this situation, I would appreciate you sharing it.

I hate losing to a fault, but hate it more when I think replay did not apply the rules just to cover for a marginal at best call on the field. As I posted in another thread I think the announcement after a review would have been "after review the player was not down by contact and he extended the ball and broke the plane before the whistle and therefore it is a touchdown."

They can clear it all up by showing why the ball was dead BY RULE before the whistle we heard blew or provide the video evidence they used of an earlier whistle.

Anyway, this is my story and I am sticking to it. He did in fact rule PROGRESS and he did in fact blow it dead, but his whistle was late enough we still scored while the ball was still live, regardless of his intent.

EDITED TO ADD RULES SUBSEQUENTLY POSTED IN RESPONSE TO DIALOG IN THIS THREAD ONLY

RULE 12 / INSTANT REPLAY
ARTICLE 3. Reviewable plays involving potential dead balls and loose balls include:
e. Ball carrier’s forward progress, spot of fumble, or spot of out-of-bounds backward pass, with respect to a first down or the goal line.

ANOTHER ADDED 1/10


PART III: PLAY SITUATIONS/RUNNING PLAYS
Running Plays

18. Runner down with respect to a first down

Third and 10 on the A-20. A22 is downed, with his knee landing at the A-29. Officials spot the ball at the A-29, although A22 had extended the ball to the Team A 31-yard line prior to his knee hitting the ground. RULING: Reviewable play, regarding whether A22 had made the line to gain. Reverse to A 1-10 on A-31, reset clock if within two minutes of the first half or five minutes of the second half and start on the Referee’s signal (Rule 12-3-3-e). 19. Forward progress with respect to a first down Third and 10 on the B-20. A22 runs to the B-9, where he is pushed back to the Team B 15-yard line and is never downed. Officials rule forward progress was stopped at the Team B 11-yard line. RULING: Reviewable play, regarding whether A22 had made the line to gain. Reverse to A 1-Goal on B-9, reset clock if within two minutes of the first half or five minutes of the second half and start on Referee’s signal (Rule 12-3-3-e).

If in doubt concerning the line to gain language.....

Line to Gain ARTICLE 2. a. The line to gain for a series shall be established 10 yards in advance of the most forward point of the ball; but if this line is in the opponent’s end zone, the goal line becomes the line to gain.

Its really a mute point. #88 committed a foul before the ball crossed the line. Forward progress was over the second #88 began pulling him into the end zone.
Section 3. Blocking, Use of Hand and Arm
Interfering for or Helping the Ball Carrier or Passer—ARTICLE 2
Approved Ruling 9-3-2
I. In trying to gain yardage, ball carrier A44 is slowed by defensive players attempting to make the tackle. Back A22 (a) puts his hands on the buttocks of A44 and pushes him forward; (b) pushes the pile of teammates who begin to surround A44; (c) grabs the arm of A44 and tries to pull him forward for more yardage. RULING: (a) and (b) Legal. It is not a foul to push the ball carrier or the pile. (c) Foul for assisting the runner. Five-yard penalty with three-and-one enforcement. (Rule 9-3-2-b)

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Its really a mute point. #88 committed a foul before the ball crossed the line. Forward progress was over the second #88 began pulling him into the end zone.
Section 3. Blocking, Use of Hand and Arm
Interfering for or Helping the Ball Carrier or Passer—ARTICLE 2
Approved Ruling 9-3-2
I. In trying to gain yardage, ball carrier A44 is slowed by defensive players attempting to make the tackle. Back A22 (a) puts his hands on the buttocks of A44 and pushes him forward; (b) pushes the pile of teammates who begin to surround A44; (c) grabs the arm of A44 and tries to pull him forward for more yardage. RULING: (a) and (b) Legal. It is not a foul to push the ball carrier or the pile. (c) Foul for assisting the runner. Five-yard penalty with three-and-one enforcement. (Rule 9-3-2-b)

It does not justify them not getting the progress call right and it is not moot in that the most logical outcome of a correctly called TD with the correctly call assistance foul would have been a FG attempt after the 5 yard penalty. We were deprived of the opportunity for the players to settle it on the field. Never know. I can feel for their fan base too, they had already hosed us on the non call on the defensive holding or interference call in regulation that was equally as egregious in front of the entire world. Might have never made it to OT and these two calls.

The biggest difference it was a marginal call AT BEST on the field and a horrendous replay execution unless they have a replay with an earlier whistle than the one I have witnessed. Bet if they did it would have been out there by now.

 

[Clayton]

It does not justify them not getting the progress call right and it is not moot in that the most logical outcome of a correctly called TD with the correctly call assistance foul would have been a FG attempt after the 5 yard penalty. We were deprived of the opportunity for the players to settle it on the field. Never know. I can feel for their fan base too, they had already hosed us on the non call on the defensive holding or interference call in regulation that was equally as egregious in front of the entire world. Might have never made it to OT and these two calls.

The biggest difference it was a marginal call AT BEST on the field and a horrendous replay execution unless they have a replay with an earlier whistle than the one I have witnessed. Bet if they did it would have been out there by now.

You can see by the picture...forward progress over...thats why he's trying to pull him into the end zone.

 

[GordonC]

I do not believe this will be the final rant, FTR.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

You can see by the picture...forward progress over...thats why he's trying to pull him into the end zone.

Imagine that I watched this still shot for 5 minutes and he did not score. However, in less than one second clock time the ball breaks the plane, how did that happen? Go frame by frame and his arm or helmet get closer each frame., that is not stopped, Oh yeah, look how far off the ground all his body parts are off the ground in this shot. But STILL the critical question is where was the ball when the first whistle blew or the official first crossed his arms on a legal signal to declare it dead?

 

[Clayton]

Imagine that I watched this still shot for 5 minutes and he did not score. However, in less than one second clock time the ball breaks the plane, how did that happen? Go frame by frame and his arm or helmet get closer each frame., that is not stopped, Oh yeah, look how far off the ground all his body parts are off the ground in this shot. But STILL the critical question is where was the ball when the first whistle blew or the official first crossed his arms on a legal signal to declare it dead?

The ball was behind the goal line when his team mate started trying to pull him into the end zone. When he grabbed the runner the ball was not across the line. Either way it was a no touch down wether it be by stopping forward progress or a penalty.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

The ball was behind the goal line when his team mate started trying to pull him into the end zone. When he grabbed the runner the ball was not across the line. Either way it was a no touch down wether it be by stopping forward progress or a penalty.

No, when he broke the plane without out any down by contact and before the whistle/official signal it was a TD by rule and the ball would be dead before any body part hit. Then if a penalty was called the other team would have the option of accepting the penalty and we would be penalized 5 yards and have our fourth down over again. But it was not called and just like the missed holding or PI on our last possesion in regulation it was not reviewable. Evidently they do not call penalties where uniforms are stretched. Both world class non calls do add to the whole incompetence argument for the on field judgement errors to go along with the Replay administration failures.

 

[TNnative]

How many final rants does this game get?

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

He comes running in waving his arms just as Wright reaches across the goal line. The call looks even worse on this low angle. You can't really tell when he starts waving his arms because he runs into the camera shot.

YO Gavol, what was the source for your replay?

It is more incredible today than when I saw it the day you posted it. I run it, pause it, and while paused move it frame by frame. If the timing is correct he is still mainly upright entering the 6th second and the ball breaks the plane before the completion of the 7th second. You cannot move it without his head or shoulders getting closer to the goal. I don't know if replay had this or not, but it is telling, especially the sounding of the whistle even though it does not show his initial departure from the sideline to verify if he did or did not have an earlier signal. There were better views on TV showing beyond a shadow of a doubt no body part hit the ground, but putting these together shows me plenty.

I am not sure if the signal to stop the clock was applicable or not since the clock was not running in overtime. But it would meet the rule to declare the ball dead I think.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

How many final rants does this game get?

I will respond to each challenge that the call should not have been overturned by replay. I don't agree with the JUDGEMENT the official made that progress was stopped long enough but recognize he made it and the judgement itself is not reviewable, but his spot at the one is not correct if the ball broke the plane before the first whistle or completed signal declared the ball dead. When somebody shows a body part down or an earlier whistle I will go away.

 

[TNnative]

I will respond to each challenge that the call should not have been overturned by replay. I don't agree with the JUDGEMENT the official made that progress was stopped long enough but recognize he made it and the judgement itself is not reviewable, but his spot at the one is not correct if the ball broke the plane before the first whistle or completed signal declared the ball dead. When somebody shows a body part down or an earlier whistle I will go away.

I understand Gunter. But the final rants on this one game are multiplying. I think we agree on one thing; We got screwed. You know it, I know it, and I don't think we need a poll to figure out how many of the rest here know it. Moving forward? I fear the MCB. We got screwed over twice in the same decade at that one. Hell, I have met fans from both North Carolina and Purdue that say we got screwed.

As for me? I am ready to smoke a cigarette, take a shower, and meet with a rape counselor for football fans. Reliving it is kinda traumatic mentally speaking. And hope to Hell we never have to go through this crap again. Look at the bright side though. Maybe these refs will get theirs one of these days. And they will deserve it. Worthless twits.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I understand Gunter. But the final rants on this one game are multiplying. I think we agree on one thing; We got screwed. You know it, I know it, and I don't think we need a poll to figure out how many of the rest here know it. Moving forward? I fear the MCB. We got screwed over twice in the same decade at that one. Hell, I have met fans from both North Carolina and Purdue that say we got screwed.

As for me? I am ready to smoke a cigarette, take a shower, and meet with a rape counselor for football fans. Reliving it is kinda traumatic mentally speaking. And hope to Hell we never have to go through this crap again. Look at the bright side though. Maybe these refs will get theirs one of these days. And they will deserve it. Worthless twits.

I am ready to go challenge the undefendable in this situation IF MY MEMORY IS CORRECT regarding the execution of the replay review. I unfortunately deleted my game recording with all the real time occurrences to go back and review. Did we ever get the official initial announcement that THE PREVIOUS PLAY IS UNDER REVIEW? I don't remember it but not trusting my memory. If we did it would have required the official AFTER FURTHER REVIEW YADA YADA, and all I remember is the conversation between the ref and Coach. But I was hacked off at the time especially with the talking heads spouting the MYTH that progress calls are not reviewable.

Rule 12 specifically defines that if the game is stopped for review it must be done either at the decision of the replay guru after the cursory every play gets reviewed phase, or due to a coach's challenge. My memory once again is that there was a significant amount of time between our last play and them setting the ball at the 25 for the other guys.

So was there a stoppage and did they or did they not complete one of the two defined processes?

My conspiracy theory-based assumption is they did not want to since it was easier to just give coach an off camera duck job and not having to back up some official announcement.

UT could require a clarification on the process if my memory is correct. I don't think there is the same wiggle room they have on the calls themselves. Not a long rule to review. I will have to sulk and walk away if my memory is just jaded.

 

[TNnative]

I am ready to go challenge the undefendable in this situation IF MY MEMORY IS CORRECT regarding the execution of the replay review. I unfortunately deleted my game recording with all the real time occurrences to go back and review. Did we ever get the official initial announcement that THE PREVIOUS PLAY IS UNDER REVIEW? I don't remember it but not trusting my memory. If we did it would have required the official AFTER FURTHER REVIEW YADA YADA, and all I remember is the conversation between the ref and Coach. But I was hacked off at the time especially with the talking heads spouting the MYTH that progress calls are not reviewable.

Rule 12 specifically defines that if the game is stopped for review it must be done either at the decision of the replay guru after the cursory every play gets reviewed phase, or due to a coach's challenge. My memory once again is that there was a significant amount of time between our last play and them setting the ball at the 25 for the other guys.

So was there a stoppage and did they or did they not complete one of the two defined processes?

My conspiracy theory-based assumption is they did not want to since it was easier to just give coach an off camera duck job and not having to back up some official announcement.

UT could require a clarification on the process if my memory is correct. I don't think there is the same wiggle room they have on the calls themselves. Not a long rule to review. I will have to sulk and walk away if my memory is just jaded.

I just checked my DVR. I had it saved, but deleted it after the second viewing. But i don't think they really looked that hard at replay. They pretty much insisted what the talking heads were saying. That forward progress was stopped and it was blown dead. It was a circus.

We just need to avoid the MCB, until they can vet the officiating crews better. IMo, that crew should not be welcome at even the HS level.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I just checked my DVR. I had it saved, but deleted it after the second viewing. But i don't think they really looked that hard at replay. They pretty much insisted what the talking heads were saying. That forward progress was stopped and it was blown dead. It was a circus.

We just need to avoid the MCB, until they can vet the officiating crews better. IMo, that crew should not be welcome at even the HS level.

Disagree, if there was a stoppage of play while they kicked around the game situation and did not within the norms place the ball down start the 40 second clock then they should have followed the rules and declared it under review in one of the two clearly defined paths. This play clearly qualified for a review within in the most basic guidelines in Rule 12. SO........ Can't remember if we still had a timeout for a coaches challenge or even if they are allowed in OT. This one clearly on the Replay guy.
XXXX
SECTION 5.
Initiating the Replay Process
Game Stop
ARTICLE 1. There are two methods to stop a game to review a ruling on the field.
a. The replay official and their crew shall review every play of a game. The replay official may stop a game at any time before the ball is next legally put in play (Exception: Rule 12-3-6-d) whenever they believe that:
1. There is reasonable evidence to believe an error was made in the initial on-field ruling.
2. The play is reviewable. PART I: RULE 12 - INSTANT REPLAY 11
3. The outcome of a review would have a direct, competitive impact on the game.

SECTION 6. Reviewing an On-Field Ruling

Procedures
ARTICLE 1. a. When a game is to be stopped either by the replay official or by a head coach’s challenge, the designated officials on the field will be notified by a paging system or other appropriate means.

ANYBODY THINK REPLAY AND THE REF WERE NOT DISCUSSING THE PLAY RATHER THAN ADVANCING THE BALL FOR OT TO PROCEED? HOW DID THEY WORK IN THE CONFERENCE WITH COACH? THIS GAME WAS STOPPED.

SECTION 6. Reviewing an On-Field Ruling

Procedures
ARTICLE 1. a. When a game is to be stopped either by the replay official or by a head coach’s challenge, the designated officials on the field will be notified by a paging system or other appropriate means.

b. If the review is initiated by the replay official, the referee shall announce: “The ruling on the previous play is ... (brief description of ruling). The play is under further review.”
If the game has been stopped due to a head coach’s challenge, the referee shall announce: “The (name of institution) head coach has challenged the ruling of (state the ruling). The play is under further review.”

----------

Restrictions
ARTICLE 2. a. There is no restriction on the number of times the replay official may stop a game for reviews.
b. The expectation is that the replay official will not exceed two minutes to complete a review. If the review has end of game impact or has multiple aspects as a part of the review, it should be completed efficiently but will have no stated time limit.

NOT A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM HERE. DID THEY OR DID THEY NOT FOLLLOW ONE OF THE TWO DEFINED PROCESSES ONCE THIS GAME WAS STOPPED? IF NOT THEY NEED TO OFFICIALLY ADDRESS THE BREACH AND MODIFY THE RULES TO PROVIDE A LOOPHOLE.

A BAD JUDGEMENT CALL THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED BY REPLAY AND WAS NOT. HIS SPOT AT THE ONE WAS NOT CORRECT BY RULE. CAN'T BELEIVE THEY DID NOT HAVE A REPLAY THAT SHOWED THAT. THE ONE THAT Gavol POSTED ON HERE CLEARLY DID SHOW THE BALL BROKE THE PLANE BEFORE THE FIRST WHISTLE. PRETTY INDISPUTABLE. HAD HE BLOWN THE WHISTLE WHEN THE BALL WAS AT THE ONE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNCORRECTABLE ERROR. NOT THE CASE. RULE 4-1-2 DEFINES THIS FOR A BALL DECLARED DEAD RATHER THAN DOWN BY CONTACT OR OUT OF BOUNDS ON A RUNNING PLAY. THEY SUCCESSFULLY AVOIDED HAVING TO DEFEND AN OFFICIAL RULING BY NOT MAKING ONE. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.

WE AT LEAST DESERVE AN APOLOGY LETTER AND THE RULES GUYS NEED TO MEET FOR EVERGENCY RULES MODIFICAIONS LIKE AFTER THE FL TD CALL AND OUR LAST MCB GAME. HAVE TO DUMMY PROOF THE RULES EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE. WON'T CHANGE THE RECORD BOOK BUT RIGHT IS RIGHT. THAT WOULD BECOME AN OFFICIAL * TO GO ALONG WITH THE ONE VOLS FANS ARE ALREADY APPLYING.

 

[TNnative]

Disagree, if there was a stoppage of play while they kicked around the game situation and did not within the norms place the ball down start the 40 second clock then they should have followed the rules and declared it under review in one of the two clearly defined paths. This play clearly qualified for a review within in the most basic guidelines in Rule 12. SO........ Can't remember if we still had a timeout for a coaches challenge or even if they are allowed in OT. This one clearly on the Replay guy.
XXXX
SECTION 5.
Initiating the Replay Process
Game Stop
ARTICLE 1. There are two methods to stop a game to review a ruling on the field.
a. The replay official and their crew shall review every play of a game. The replay official may stop a game at any time before the ball is next legally put in play (Exception: Rule 12-3-6-d) whenever they believe that:
1. There is reasonable evidence to believe an error was made in the initial on-field ruling.
2. The play is reviewable. PART I: RULE 12 - INSTANT REPLAY 11
3. The outcome of a review would have a direct, competitive impact on the game.

SECTION 6. Reviewing an On-Field Ruling

Procedures
ARTICLE 1. a. When a game is to be stopped either by the replay official or by a head coach’s challenge, the designated officials on the field will be notified by a paging system or other appropriate means.

ANYBODY THINK REPLAY AND THE REF WERE NOT DISCUSSING THE PLAY RATHER THAN ADVANCING THE BALL FOR OT TO PROCEED? HOW DID THEY WORK IN THE CONFERENCE WITH COACH? THIS GAME WAS STOPPED.

SECTION 6. Reviewing an On-Field Ruling

Procedures
ARTICLE 1. a. When a game is to be stopped either by the replay official or by a head coach’s challenge, the designated officials on the field will be notified by a paging system or other appropriate means.

b. If the review is initiated by the replay official, the referee shall announce: “The ruling on the previous play is ... (brief description of ruling). The play is under further review.”
If the game has been stopped due to a head coach’s challenge, the referee shall announce: “The (name of institution) head coach has challenged the ruling of (state the ruling). The play is under further review.”

----------

Restrictions
ARTICLE 2. a. There is no restriction on the number of times the replay official may stop a game for reviews.
b. The expectation is that the replay official will not exceed two minutes to complete a review. If the review has end of game impact or has multiple aspects as a part of the review, it should be completed efficiently but will have no stated time limit.

NOT A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM HERE. DID THEY OR DID THEY NOT FOLLLOW ONE OF THE TWO DEFINED PROCESSES ONCE THIS GAME WAS STOPPED? IF NOT THEY NEED TO OFFICIALLY ADDRESS THE BREACH AND MODIFY THE RULES TO PROVIDE A LOOPHOLE.

A BAD JUDGEMENT CALL THAT COULD HAVE BEEN CORRECTED BY REPLAY AND WAS NOT. HIS SPOT AT THE ONE WAS NOT CORRECT BY RULE. CAN'T BELEIVE THEY DID NOT HAVE A REPLAY THAT SHOWED THAT. THE ONE THAT Gavol POSTED ON HERE CLEARLY DID SHOW THE BALL BROKE THE PLANE BEFORE THE FIRST WHISTLE. PRETTY INDISPUTABLE. HAD HE BLOWN THE WHISTLE WHEN THE BALL WAS AT THE ONE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN UNCORRECTABLE ERROR. NOT THE CASE. RULE 4-1-2 DEFINES THIS FOR A BALL DECLARED DEAD RATHER THAN DOWN BY CONTACT OR OUT OF BOUNDS ON A RUNNING PLAY. THEY SUCCESSFULLY AVOIDED HAVING TO DEFEND AN OFFICIAL RULING BY NOT MAKING ONE. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.

WE AT LEAST DESERVE AN APOLOGY LETTER AND THE RULES GUYS NEED TO MEET FOR EVERGENCY RULES MODIFICAIONS LIKE AFTER THE FL TD CALL AND OUR LAST MCB GAME. HAVE TO DUMMY PROOF THE RULES EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE. WON'T CHANGE THE RECORD BOOK BUT RIGHT IS RIGHT. THAT WOULD BECOME AN OFFICIAL * TO GO ALONG WITH THE ONE VOLS FANS ARE ALREADY APPLYING.

Whatever. You lost me on the apology letter part. That is for dumbasses.
Enjoy livin in the past, even if it is the recent past. I'm movin forward. Have fun.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Whatever. You lost me on the apology letter part. That is for dumbasses.
Enjoy livin in the past, even if it is the recent past. I'm movin forward. Have fun.

I simply do not want them to slide by not following THEIR rulebook twice.... Once on the correctable call and once on the lack of following the proper process to review it.

He was within the rules to make a bad judgement but not to spot the ball wrong, and they did not properly follow the rules during the review process. I hate coverups more than I hate admissions of error, even if the record book does not change. They cost both teams the opportunity to finish the game within the rules IF IN FACT THE FIRST WHISTLE OR COMPLETION OF THE STOP THE CLOCK SIGNAL WERE THE ONES IN THE REFERENCED CLIP. If there was an earlier whistle the play would have ended properly but the review process would not be. They need to be held accountable to the replay rules regardless.

For the record, I am not sure his use of the stop the clock signal was technically valid since the there was no game clock in overtime. Might be covered in the book or some referee's manual somewhere similar to a point after. It's use as the alternative to the whistle to declare the ball dead might be defined, but never understood how it could be completed quicker than a whistle. There are time critical situations where stopping the clock is important and it would surely make the ball dead when the clock was stopped whistle or not. Typically the whistle is blown and then the kill the clock signal is given when a runner is downed but gains a first down for an example. Same for when a guy steps out of bounds. Both of those are down by rule, and this judgement call where a ball is declared dead is a bit different. In the first two forward progress is where the ball was when those actions occurred. In this instance progress is where the ball is when the play is whistled or signaled dead. That is WHEN in rule 4.1.2 rules the day for either method to declare the play dead. And that is what replay should have been looking for period. If they did not have the one's we have seen that would be one thing, but ignoring what they do have because there might be an earlier whistle, they did not get to see is not a valid concept.

 

[photovol]

The refs of the Music City Bowl should be castrated……. If they do indeed have testicles!
Robbed! I won’t forget this one, because this team overachieved and still got screwed in the end

 

[SonOfGodVolforlife]

The refs of the Music City Bowl should be castrated……. If they do indeed have testicles!
Robbed! I won’t forget this one, because this team overachieved and still got screwed in the end

I’m still pissed the refs didn’t get some kind of disciplinary, Or correction after that game. Until refs are held to a standard they hold games in their hands instead of the players.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

I’m still pissed the refs didn’t get some kind of disciplinary, Or correction after that game. Until refs are held to a standard they hold games in their hands instead of the players.

That was the reason I invested the time I did laying out the rules to show they did not call it correctly. The judgement call is what it is, but Replay should have awarded us the TD even with the really bad call. I was hoping that if this board raised heck that some talking head would pick up the mantel and challenge the NCAA to declare based on the replays available that there was justification for the end result. Guess not.

 

[rjd970]

We got jobbed. We should be used to it by now. No cares until we throw mustard bottles then it’s about the mustard bottle. We’re cursed and hated, it is what it is.

 

[volinSmyrna]

That was the reason I invested the time I did laying out the rules to show they did not call it correctly. The judgement call is what it is, but Replay should have awarded us the TD even with the really bad call. I was hoping that if this board raised heck that some talking head would pick up the mantel and challenge the NCAA to declare based on the replays available that there was justification for the end result. Guess not.

Replay cannot "add" progress after the play has been deemed to have stopped. The official declared his progress stopped before he reached the ball across the line. It's not a reviewable play to determine if he added to his progress. I wish they would make the whistle the uniform and standard end-all for every play, but that is not the case. He ruled progress stopped and between that time and the whistle, the ball was reached across the line. It sucks. That official shouldn't even ref a pee-wee league game ever again.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Replay cannot "add" progress after the play has been deemed to have stopped. The official declared his progress stopped before he reached the ball across the line. It's not a reviewable play to determine if he added to his progress. I wish they would make the whistle the uniform and standard end-all for every play, but that is not the case. He ruled progress stopped and between that time and the whistle, the ball was reached across the line. It sucks. That official shouldn't even ref a pee-wee league game ever again.

They did not have to add anything. As I have posted multiple times both 2-9-2 and 5-1-3 both specifically say that progress calls are based on the forward most position the ball reaches up to the time the ball legally becomes dead. Rule 4-1-3 states that progress like many situations SHALL be declared dead with a whistle or a SIGNAL. 4-1-2 further states that the ball becomes dead WHEN those two are employed, not before. The ball was actually dead when the ball broke the plane before he finally blew the whistle I heard. That is in the book too. If they have an early SIGNAL before the ball broke the plane then all they need to do is show it. Can you show me a rule that says an official gets to run in and retroactively point to a spot? He was within the rules to make a progress call, but none of them get to ignore these rules about progress and when the ball becomes dead.

I am not sure the signal made was by the book either. The signal he used is not to declare the ball dead, but to stop the clock. Lots of runs, even those progress declared calls do not stop the clock. As I said up this thread somewhere, there could be a ruling or ref instruction manual that says he could use this signal, but there was not a clock to stop in overtime, but the whistle is always good. On a two point TRY for example, also with no clock, in an identical scrimmage situation the correct signal would not be a stop the clock #3, but the #10 signal we more commonly see for incomplete pass. All in the book. Wish they would use it.

This is the challenge I want somebody to put out to the NCAA for confirmation. With the replays available showing no down by contact and showing the ball broke the plane before the whistle, do they stand behind the call. Pretty indisputable I think. This is no longer a philosophical argument about an official's mindset, but the video available and the rulebook. What was the forward most spot the ball attained when the whistle sounded.. Plain and simple.