NCAA officiating - PAC12 ref suspended

#1
Shades

Shades

Shady member
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
815
Likes
3,101
#1
It's about time. College football officiating has become a laughing stock. Hopefully this will become more prevalent among all P5 conferences.


It's big rock being dropped into a huge lake. It’ll cause a ripple by the wording on the suspension. Other conferences can see a Power 5 is not afraid to shine light or blame on refs, then susp them. Ref Unions will also watch this. It’s a ripple, for now-
Click to expand...

 
  • Like
Reactions: joevol33, Paper_Towel, knucklehead_vol and 3 others
#10
#10
Seems like all of them should have been suspended. Also seems like with review and all the other officials in the booth, someone should have buzzed down that they got the wrong team.

It's amazing to me with this day and age of technology they still have stuff like this happen and they have things that "can't" be overturn just because they say so. If say a ref calls a facemask and the replay shows the facemask wasn't grabbed, there should be an official that can buzz down and say "There was no facemask". Or vice versea. I don't want to hear about all this crap about taking the game away from the on field officials or anything like that, they've proven they need more oversight.

And everything wouldn't need to be a 10 minute review either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolGee4 and JBondVol
#11
#11
bamawriter said:
You're kidding, right?
Click to expand...
I normally don't blame the refs but they tried to penalize #70 on LSU when it was a clear penalty on #70 for Bama. It is not even funny at this point. What is called on other teams vs what isn't called on Bama is a disgrace. And don't give me "Bama is the most penalized..."...not on penalties that"matter"!

I would like to know the # of Bama players that have been called for targeting AND had to leave the game vs the other SEC teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: onevol74 and marcusluvsvols
#12
#12
Boca Vol said:
I normally don't blame the refs but they tried to penalize #70 on LSU when it was a clear penalty on #70 for Bama. It is not even funny at this point. What is called on other teams vs what isn't called on Bama is a disgrace. And don't give me "Bama is the most penalized..."...not on penalties that"matter"!

I would like to know the # of Bama players that have been called for targeting AND had to leave the game vs the other SEC teams.
Click to expand...

So we're going to ignore our star punt returner being injured by a facemask wherein his head was jerked past 90 degrees, and somehow, despite multiple officials having nothing else at which to look, it went uncalled.

Let's also ignore the play wherein Moss stepped out of bounds before catching the ball, and after review the ref gave no explanation beyond the confirmation. The conference released a statement saying that the ruling on the field was that Diggs pushed Moss out, thus making it legal for him to come back in bounds. The problem is that, if that was the ruling on the field, why no interference call? Heck, why no indication by the side judge that Moss was pushed out? And further, why go thru a lengthy review when such a ruling isn't reviewable?

The refs didn't cost Bama the game. But the suggestion that they were helping Bama is not even absurd, it's moronic.
 
#13
#13
bamawriter said:
So we're going to ignore our star punt returner being injured by a facemask wherein his head was jerked past 90 degrees, and somehow, despite multiple officials having nothing else at which to look, it went uncalled.

Let's also ignore the play wherein Moss stepped out of bounds before catching the ball, and after review the ref gave no explanation beyond the confirmation. The conference released a statement saying that the ruling on the field was that Diggs pushed Moss out, thus making it legal for him to come back in bounds. The problem is that, if that was the ruling on the field, why no interference call? Heck, why no indication by the side judge that Moss was pushed out? And further, why go thru a lengthy review when such a ruling isn't reviewable?

The refs didn't cost Bama the game. But the suggestion that they were helping Bama is not even absurd, it's moronic.
Click to expand...
The refs are worse this season than I’ve ever seen. Why??? I really don’t understand how they continue to outdo the previous weeks bad calls with worse calls. Vols have been on the receiving end of this quite a bit.
 
#14
#14
bamawriter said:
So we're going to ignore our star punt returner being injured by a facemask wherein his head was jerked past 90 degrees, and somehow, despite multiple officials having nothing else at which to look, it went uncalled.

Let's also ignore the play wherein Moss stepped out of bounds before catching the ball, and after review the ref gave no explanation beyond the confirmation. The conference released a statement saying that the ruling on the field was that Diggs pushed Moss out, thus making it legal for him to come back in bounds. The problem is that, if that was the ruling on the field, why no interference call? Heck, why no indication by the side judge that Moss was pushed out? And further, why go thru a lengthy review when such a ruling isn't reviewable?

The refs didn't cost Bama the game. But the suggestion that they were helping Bama is not even absurd, it's moronic.
Click to expand...

That's rich, a bammer calling someone else a moron.
 
#15
#15
bamawriter said:
So we're going to ignore our star punt returner being injured by a facemask wherein his head was jerked past 90 degrees, and somehow, despite multiple officials having nothing else at which to look, it went uncalled.

Let's also ignore the play wherein Moss stepped out of bounds before catching the ball, and after review the ref gave no explanation beyond the confirmation. The conference released a statement saying that the ruling on the field was that Diggs pushed Moss out, thus making it legal for him to come back in bounds. The problem is that, if that was the ruling on the field, why no interference call? Heck, why no indication by the side judge that Moss was pushed out? And further, why go thru a lengthy review when such a ruling isn't reviewable?

The refs didn't cost Bama the game. But the suggestion that they were helping Bama is not even absurd, it's moronic.
Click to expand...

There was also a blatant block in the back on that play, which at best should have been offsetting penalties.

But I'll give you the line bammers give me when I bring up the play that took one second on the drive before the half at our game.

Did it matter?

If you got the flag, then what? Are you going to take the flag and take points off the board? You guys scored on the play. LOL. Give me break.

And oh yeah...there is literally one for every call in the Bama/GA SECCG:

e4de300cce93c9677434133bc0b948ad.gif

As far as that catch, there was no interference call, because the defender got the Bama ref treatment. It just so happens in this case it screwed you because the WR made an amazing play and re-established himself inbounds and made a hell of a catch, with BOTH feet in bounds. The only part that wasn't reviewable is if the receiver was pushed out of bounds or not. The irony here is getting the Bama ref treatment actually screwed you guys.

At the end of the day, the receiver caught the ball with both feet in bounds despite being interfered with. It was the correct call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ButchPlz
#16
#16
rjd970 said:
But I'll give you the line bammers give me when I bring up the play that took one second on the drive before the half at our game.
Click to expand...

I'm going to give you this one, because it was very weird. It was very weird to me, because I was at the game, and I looked at the clock before that play and recall it reading 10 seconds. The play was run, and the clock read 6 seconds. However, when I watched my DVR of the game, it read 7 seconds before the play, the clock didn't start until the play was almost over, than read 6. I rewound a few times trying to figure out where the clock got off, and I couldn't figure it out. I think (and I have no way of being able to confirm this) that the ESPN clock somehow got off from the stadium clock. When? No idea. Take that for what it's worth. If you think that it's proof of epic bias in Bama's favor, my recollection isn't going to change your mind.

Did it matter?

If you got the flag, then what? Are you going to take the flag and take points off the board? You guys scored on the play. LOL. Give me break.
Click to expand...

A personal foul is tacked on at the end of the play, so Bama would have kicked off from the 50. And look, I'm a big proponent of the refs holding onto their flags when there is no way the foul will be accepted. If there's a PI in the endzone, but the WR catches it anyway, no reason to throw the flag. But in this instance there is no way the official could have known that Waddle would take it 77 yards.

And oh yeah...there is literally one for every call in the Bama/GA SECCG:

View attachment 237870
Click to expand...

That's not the SECCG. It's the 2018 CFPNCG (look at the logo on the field). So not only are the SEC refs in Bama's pocket, but we own the Big 10 as well...


As far as that catch, there was no interference call, because the defender got the Bama ref treatment. It just so happens in this case it screwed you because the WR made an amazing play and re-established himself inbounds and made a hell of a catch, with BOTH feet in bounds. The only part that wasn't reviewable is if the receiver was pushed out of bounds or not. The irony here is getting the Bama ref treatment actually screwed you guys.
Click to expand...

This makes absolutely no sense.

-Bama got the no-call on the pass interference BUT the ref did in fact call a pushoff on Bama SO THAT the receiver was declared eligible DESPITE Bama not being called for interference SO Bama got the benefit of a no call PI that resulted in LSU making the catch anyway EVEN THOUGH the only real benefit to Bama would have been to rule that Moss stepped out on his own.

-And in the midst of all this, the official never indicated the step out, or the push off, and the head ref never gave any indication of what the call was on the field, and the first we heard of any of it was the SEC head office explaining the insanely long review of a call that isn't reviewable.

There's mental gymnastics, and then there's whatever this^ is.
 
Last edited:
#17
#17
bamawriter said:
I'm going to give you this one, because it was very weird. It was very weird to me, because I was at the game, and I looked at the clock before that play and recall it reading 10 seconds. The play was run, and the clock read 6 seconds. However, when I watched my DVR of the game, it read 7 seconds before the play, the clock didn't start until the play was almost over, than read 6. I rewound a few times trying to figure out where the clock got off, and I couldn't figure it out. I think (and I have no way of being able to confirm this) that the ESPN clock somehow got off from the stadium clock. When? No idea. Take that for what it's worth. If you think that it's proof of epic bias in Bama's favor, my recollection isn't going to change your mind.



A personal foul is tacked on at the end of the play, so Bama would have kicked off from the 50. And look, I'm a big proponent of the refs holding onto their flags when there is no way the foul will be accepted. If there's a PI in the endzone, but the WR catches it anyway, no reason to throw the flag. But in this instance there is no way the official could have known that Waddle would take it 77 yards.



That's not the SECCG. It's the 2018 CFPNCG (look at the logo on the field). So not only are the SEC refs in Bama's pocket, but we own the Big 10 as well...




This makes absolutely no sense.

-Bama got the no-call on the pass interference BUT the ref did in fact call a pushoff on Bama SO THAT the receiver was declared eligible DESPITE Bama not being called for interference SO Bama got the benefit of a no call PI that resulted in LSU making the catch anyway EVEN THOUGH the only real benefit to Bama would have been to rule that Moss stepped out on his own.

-And in the midst of all this, the official never indicated the step out, or the push off, and the head ref never gave any indication of what the call was on the field, and the first we heard of any of it was the SEC head office explaining the insanely long review of a call that isn't reviewable.

There's mental gymnastics, and then there's whatever this^ is.
Click to expand...

Serious question because I don’t know. If the receiver is pushed out of bounds due to incidental contact, that contact wouldn’t be called interference but at the same time the receiver would be able to re-establish himself inbounds and make a play, right?
 
#19
#19
rjd970 said:
Serious question because I don’t know. If the receiver is pushed out of bounds due to incidental contact, that contact wouldn’t be called interference but at the same time the receiver would be able to re-establish himself inbounds and make a play, right?
Click to expand...

Only if the incidental contact was great enough that there was no way the receiver could stay in bounds. But, in such an instance, the official is supposed to throw his hat to indicate the step out, then signal the push off.

What's funny about the whole situation is that the whole thing could have been considered a catch if it had been ruled that Diggs tipped the ball. If a receiver steps out he's not allowed to be the first one to touch the ball. But if it's tipped, he's eligible again. Such a call is reviewable, and I thought that's what they were looking at. I think it's certainly possible that Diggs got a finger on it. But it's insane to me that they spent 5 minutes reviewing what they claim was the call on the field despite no indication of that call and it not even being reviewable.
 
#20
#20
bamawriter said:
I'm going to give you this one, because it was very weird. It was very weird to me, because I was at the game, and I looked at the clock before that play and recall it reading 10 seconds. The play was run, and the clock read 6 seconds. However, when I watched my DVR of the game, it read 7 seconds before the play, the clock didn't start until the play was almost over, than read 6. I rewound a few times trying to figure out where the clock got off, and I couldn't figure it out. I think (and I have no way of being able to confirm this) that the ESPN clock somehow got off from the stadium clock. When? No idea. Take that for what it's worth. If you think that it's proof of epic bias in Bama's favor, my recollection isn't going to change your mind.



A personal foul is tacked on at the end of the play, so Bama would have kicked off from the 50. And look, I'm a big proponent of the refs holding onto their flags when there is no way the foul will be accepted. If there's a PI in the endzone, but the WR catches it anyway, no reason to throw the flag. But in this instance there is no way the official could have known that Waddle would take it 77 yards.



That's not the SECCG. It's the 2018 CFPNCG (look at the logo on the field). So not only are the SEC refs in Bama's pocket, but we own the Big 10 as well...




This makes absolutely no sense.

-Bama got the no-call on the pass interference BUT the ref did in fact call a pushoff on Bama SO THAT the receiver was declared eligible DESPITE Bama not being called for interference SO Bama got the benefit of a no call PI that resulted in LSU making the catch anyway EVEN THOUGH the only real benefit to Bama would have been to rule that Moss stepped out on his own.

-And in the midst of all this, the official never indicated the step out, or the push off, and the head ref never gave any indication of what the call was on the field, and the first we heard of any of it was the SEC head office explaining the insanely long review of a call that isn't reviewable.

There's mental gymnastics, and then there's whatever this^ is.
Click to expand...
I dont think pushing/guiding a WR is a penalty. Now if he got straight up shoved out of bounds, yes. But if he was just crowded out, it's not called.
 
#21
#21
LouderVol said:
I dont think pushing/guiding a WR is a penalty. Now if he got straight up shoved out of bounds, yes. But if he was just crowded out, it's not called.
Click to expand...

Again, if that was the ruling, fine. I then question why it wasn't indicated on the field, why the head ref never said what the call was, and why they took half a year to review a call that isn't reviewable.
 
#22
#22
gDPOmqq.gif
 
#23
#23
bamawriter said:
Again, if that was the ruling, fine. I then question why it wasn't indicated on the field, why the head ref never said what the call was, and why they took half a year to review a call that isn't reviewable.
Click to expand...
They were likely looking to find some way to help Bama but couldnt.
 
#25
#25
Bama will always get the benefit of the calls and protection they need. The total number of penalties stat is does not paint the story. There is a double standard that is clear as day. Any Bama fan has zero room to complain about officiating.

 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and VolGee4
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top