crooked refs

[Hammersmith]

Fair comment on the real-time call. I disagree but only because bang-bang plays like that are not always easy to see, especially with all the bodies in and around the ball. When they are that close and instant replay is in play, they are taught to err on the side of fumble. The LJ could very well still get a downgrade on the fumble call even though he only did what he was instructed to do. Replay is not there to cover their backs. It's to get it right. I understand why you think that way. Does anyone know if FCS has used instant replay previously. Since the field officials aren't used to using it and the stadiums aren't used to having it I wonder how many gliches there are.

Someone else mentioned the officials huddling and I did see a couple of them get together quickly. Unless someone had absolute knowledge the runner was down, there isn't much a longer conversation could have resulted in. Only 2 officials would be looking at Jensen at this point and 1 of them (referee--white hat) would have definitely not had a view from where he is. That leaves the LJ (LOS official on the near sideline) as the only official with responsibility for the runner. The field judge (deep corner pylon on near side), back judge (deep middle on end line), and umpire (middle near LBs) are watching blockers primarily but may pick up the runner and help. If one of them saw him down, they would go to the LJ and have the conversation you are talking about. If they only "think" he may have been down, they don't have applicable knowledge.

Last two years in the semis and championship, I think. This was the first year for the quarters.

[IndyBison]

I'm seeing a problem with that "overwhelming" word. anybody have some insight if they elaborate more on the definition of overwhelming in the officials handbook (looking at you referees)? if they dont define "overwhelming" for the officials, that leaves it wide open to interpretation for the officiating crew. that's a little too subjective for my liking.

Here is the actual text from the rule book. Rule 12 is all about instant replay and includes section on roles, equipment and what is and is not reviewable.

Rule 12-1-2 Philosophy
The instant replay process operates under the fundamental assumption that the ruling on the field is correct. The replay official may reverse a ruling if and only if the video evidence convinces him beyond all doubt that the ruling was incorrect. Without such indisputable video evidence, the replay official must allow the ruling to stand.

Rule 12-7-1 Criterion for Reversal
To reverse an on-field ruling, the replay official must be convinced beyond all doubt by indisputable video evidence through one or more video replays provided to the monitor.

There is a lot of interpretation and subjectivity throughout the rules so this is no different. Not all rules are black and white.

[SDbison]

Fair comment on the real-time call. I disagree but only because bang-bang plays like that are not always easy to see, especially with all the bodies in and around the ball. When they are that close and instant replay is in play, they are taught to err on the side of fumble. The LJ could very well still get a downgrade on the fumble call even though he only did what he was instructed to do. Replay is not there to cover their backs. It's to get it right. I understand why you think that way. Does anyone know if FCS has used instant replay previously. Since the field officials aren't used to using it and the stadiums aren't used to having it I wonder how many gliches there are.

Someone else mentioned the officials huddling and I did see a couple of them get together quickly. Unless someone had absolute knowledge the runner was down, there isn't much a longer conversation could have resulted in. Only 2 officials would be looking at Jensen at this point and 1 of them (referee--white hat) would have definitely not had a view from where he is. That leaves the LJ (LOS official on the near sideline) as the only official with responsibility for the runner. The field judge (deep corner pylon on near side), back judge (deep middle on end line), and umpire (middle near LBs) are watching blockers primarily but may pick up the runner and help. If one of them saw him down, they would go to the LJ and have the conversation you are talking about. If they only "think" he may have been down, they don't have applicable knowledge.

So what about the dumba$$ who reviewed it and still didn't get it right. I could care less about the officials on the field because they just randomly screwed up against the Bison all day.

[onbison09]

Fair comment on the real-time call. I disagree but only because bang-bang plays like that are not always easy to see, especially with all the bodies in and around the ball. When they are that close and instant replay is in play, they are taught to err on the side of fumble. The LJ could very well still get a downgrade on the fumble call even though he only did what he was instructed to do. Replay is not there to cover their backs. It's to get it right. I understand why you think that way. Does anyone know if FCS has used instant replay previously. Since the field officials aren't used to using it and the stadiums aren't used to having it I wonder how many gliches there are.

Someone else mentioned the officials huddling and I did see a couple of them get together quickly. Unless someone had absolute knowledge the runner was down, there isn't much a longer conversation could have resulted in. Only 2 officials would be looking at Jensen at this point and 1 of them (referee--white hat) would have definitely not had a view from where he is. That leaves the LJ (POS official on the near sideline) as the only official with responsibility for the runner. The field judge (deep corner pylon on near side), back judge (deep middle on end line), and umpire (middle near LBs) are watching blockers primarily but may pick up the runner and help. If one of them saw him down, they would go to the LJ and have the conversation you are talking about. If they only "think" he may have been down, they don't have applicable knowledge.

FIFY

[bisonboone11]

Just thought I'd point out another "questionable" call by the refs. This one is the personal foul penalty on the Bison player (#63) with about 12:30 left in the 4th quarter with the Bison in easy field goal range and moving the ball. Here is the youtube link. Please notice that the Bison player was tackled after the play. Apparently it's against the rules to be tackled by the opposing team after the play is over. Please notice the EWU player on the ground grabbing the leg of #63 and taking him to the ground. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsG4QKv6KOI

[IndyBison]

After review this is clearly the WORST call of the day on the field without question. For those who didn't see it and were upset at Richard for the personal foul, now you know why all of his teammates were chasing the ref about the call. BRUTAL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsG4QKv6KOI

Youtube is blocked at work so I'll take a look at this when I get home. The most common way an official f-s up a call (especially one like this) is not seeing the entire play. We are instructed to not flag something unless we saw the whole thing because what you think you saw and what actually happened are 2 different things. Evaluation drives that behavior too because throwing a flag that should not have been thrown is a bigger downgrade than not throwing a flag that should have been thrown. The fould was a personal foul so it had nothing to do with anything that was said. That would be unsportsmanlike conduct and not a personal foul.

[SDbison]

Just thought I'd point out another "questionable" call by the refs. This one is the personal foul penalty on the Bison player (#63) with about 12:30 left in the 4th quarter with the Bison in easy field goal range and moving the ball. Here is the youtube link. Please notice that the Bison player was tackled after the play. Apparently it's against the rules to be tackled by the opposing team after the play is over. Please notice the EWU player on the ground grabbing the leg of #63 and taking him to the ground. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsG4QKv6KOI

Just disgusting!
At least the Bison had a chance to recover from this 2nd of bad calls so far in this game. Then the 3rd one that finished the Bison off at the end of the game! The replay official was involved twice and obviously doesnt have a clue. Just a shame it comes down to piss poor refs.

[SDbison]

Youtube is blocked at work so I'll take a look at this when I get home. The most common way an official f-s up a call (especially one like this) is not seeing the entire play. We are instructed to not flag something unless we saw the whole thing because what you think you saw and what actually happened are 2 different things. Evaluation drives that behavior too because throwing a flag that should not have been thrown is a bigger downgrade than not throwing a flag that should have been thrown. The fould was a personal foul so it had nothing to do with anything that was said. That would be unsportsmanlike conduct and not a personal foul.

Face it Indy you would protect a ref like your brother no matter how much they sucked. I still don't think the grading and demotion of refs is as tough as it should be. This crew for the game gets an F from me. I am sure they will get B's and B+'s from their peers.

[IndyBison]

So what about the dumba$$ who reviewed it and still didn't get it right. I could care less about the officials on the field because they just randomly screwed up against the Bison all day.

My guess is bad video, lack of video or that "convinced beyond all doubt". His threshold must have been higher than all of us.

I hate to add fuel to the fire but while watching parts of the video last night to find the replays I saw 2 personal fouls by the Bison that were not called as well as an illegal shift. They had plenty of other opportunities to "screw" the Bison if that was their intent.

[CAS4127]

Youtube is blocked at work so I'll take a look at this when I get home. The most common way an official f-s up a call (especially one like this) is not seeing the entire play. We are instructed to not flag something unless we saw the whole thing because what you think you saw and what actually happened are 2 different things. Evaluation drives that behavior too because throwing a flag that should not have been thrown is a bigger downgrade than not throwing a flag that should have been thrown. The fould was a personal foul so it had nothing to do with anything that was said. That would be unsportsmanlike conduct and not a personal foul.

You will see that either no flag should have been thrown, or it should have been thrown against EWU--really bad call that very well costed us the game, among the other well-talked about play.

Will these refs feel like shit knowing they took a win away from our kids, or will they just pass it off as an "o shucks" thing?