OT_ Pac-10 responds to replay rukus

[joseephuss]

While they did get jobbed on that call, it wasn't the refs who had an absolutely dreadful defense.

When you put yourself in a position to have a game decided by the officials, you'll get screwed occasionally. Basketball is the finest example of this.

If OU could have made a single defensive stand, we wouldn't even be talking about this.

It would be talked about, but not with as much emotion and ziel. It is something that needs to be fixed. I am not a fan of either team, but when I see that kind of thing happen, I know it can happen in any game. Steps need to be made to make sure it doesn't. In the least, steps need to be taken to discount impropiety. A game like that should have utilized out of conference officials on the field and in the replay booths. Minimum standards for number of cameras and angles need to be utilized for every game.

 

[EMMITTnROY]

While they did get jobbed on that call, it wasn't the refs who had an absolutely dreadful defense.

When you put yourself in a position to have a game decided by the officials, you'll get screwed occasionally. Basketball is the finest example of this.

If OU could have made a single defensive stand, we wouldn't even be talking about this.

you have to be kidding me..

first of all, everything you said is irrelevant.. it wouldnt have mattered if OU had given up 10000 yards of offense that day.. if they had the lead and blatantly and clearly lost because of the officials and instant replay staff, they were absolutely robbed.. they had done their job in winning a football game.. OU won that game, end of story.. the refs took it away from them..

all that said, you say "if OU could have made a single defensive stand, we wouldn't even be talking about this".. do you realize that OU's defense caused FOUR turnovers? this was against a Top 20 (Top 10 now) opponent, on the road, in a hostile environment.. and they won the game and were robbed of a victory..

EDIT: I have always hated the old "you shouldnt have put yourself in a position to even be close to losing a game" argument when it comes to things like this.. that is ridiculous.. with that line of thinking, does every single game that is decided by a touchdown or less somehow mean that it is less of a victory for the winning team? I mean, any team who has EVER won a game by a touchdown or less put themselves in a position to lose the game, right? stupid, stupid way of thinking..

you have no clue man..

 

[royhitshard]

While they did get jobbed on that call, it wasn't the refs who had an absolutely dreadful defense.

When you put yourself in a position to have a game decided by the officials, you'll get screwed occasionally. Basketball is the finest example of this.

If OU could have made a single defensive stand, we wouldn't even be talking about this.

If the refs get the obvious call right, OU doesn't have to make a defensive stand. All they need to do is take a knee.

I will be the first (or 15th) to admit the OU defense sucks, but that is not the issue here. The blown coverage on the last touchdown shouldn't have happened anyway. And I am also tired of hearing about the missed field goal. Yes, it was makeable, but once again, it shouldn't have been necessary.

 

[EastDallasCowboy]

Like I said, when you put yourself in a position to have games decided by the officials, you'll get burned occasionally. It happens in every sport.

The call was bad, and I don't think collusion is out of the question.

But if OU stops them before the onsides kick, it's moot. Similarly, if OU stops them after the onsides kick, it's moot. If OU stops either drive, the game is over. OU had chances, and they failed.

Ultimately though, none of this really matters because OU isn't that great a football team and they had no shot at the national title anyway. Michigan, TCU, Louisville, LSU, and Auburn are all better than OU and that's just off the top of my head.

And for the record, I have no real rooting interests in college football. I gamble on it, and that's the only reason I watch it. So don't try and label me a Duck, Longhorn, Frog, or whatever.

 

[Dallas]

After heaping portion of home cooking, time to ditch replay
Sep. 19, 2006
By Gregg Doyel
CBS SportsLine.com National Columnist

Instant replay has to go. Why? Because either way, officials are going to continue to screw up perfectly good football games. But only with instant replay -- which weakens the excuse of "human error" -- are we forced to consider other, darker possibilities.

Last week four NCAA teams were let down by an instant replay system that, frankly, isn't all that difficult.


Oklahoma was screwed, twice, by replay officials in its 34-33 loss at Oregon.

LSU was screwed by replay officials in its 7-3 loss at Auburn.

BYU was screwed by replay officials in its 30-23 loss at Boston College.

And Maryland, which wasn't going to win this game, was still screwed by replay officials in its 45-24 loss at West Virginia.
We're about to test your reading comprehension. Look at those last four sentences again. Now then -- what key word appeared in all four sentences? Other than screwed and replay officials, I mean.

Here you go:

At.


Officials ruled that this hit on Early Doucet was not pass interference. Controversy ensued. (Getty Images)
As in, the visiting team got screwed. Every time. If you were so inclined, you could call that statistical anomaly a coincidence. I don't, but then, maybe I'm more cynical than you. Or smarter than you. Probably not, but I know I'm smarter than the replay officials at those four college games.

In all four cases, presumably intelligent men studied a television screen and saw something that didn't happen. Or misinterpreted what did happen. Or missed the call on purpose. Those are your three choices. Pick one.

On a weekend of bad officiating, the Oklahoma-Oregon game had the worst of the worst, as well as the most of the worst. In that game, officials had two chances to get a replay right, missed both calls, and Oregon capitalized with a last-minute touchdown.

First came the desperate Oregon onsides kick that clearly -- c-l-e-a-r-l-y -- was interfered with by an Oregon player before it had gone the necessary 10 yards. The ball was recovered by Oklahoma, by the way, but field officials missed that and possession isn't reviewable because, well, just because. The replay guy could only review whether the kick had gone 10 yards, and he determined that it had. Aw, hell, why not. Seven yards, 10 yards, what's the difference?


Then came pass interference against Oklahoma. There was legitimate interference on the play, but it came after the pass had been tipped at the line of scrimmage. Which means the interference was allowable -- but only if officials saw the tip. They missed it on the field. In the replay booth, staring at the same replay you and I saw, they missed it again.

Advertisement


The replay official, Gordon Riese, reportedly lives in Portland. I'm not going to say the replay official from Oregon intentionally missed two calls to benefit Oregon. That would make him a cheater. I am saying the replay official from Oregon missed two calls despite incontrovertible evidence. What does that make him? An idiot, I suppose.

Everyone from the Pac-10 to the president of Oklahoma agrees. The Pac-10 suspended Riese and the on-field officiating crew for one game. The Oklahoma president wants the results of the game vacated.

Me? I want someone to explain the LSU-Auburn game.

There, officials encountered another pass interference muddled by a deflection, and LSU was denied a first-and-goal late in the fourth quarter when the replay official overturned the call on the field. The replay guy said Auburn's pass interference happened after the tip and therefore was allowable.

Replays clearly showed the tip coming after the interference. Did the SEC fly in that guy from Oregon for this call?


At Boston College, BYU lost its overtime possession -- and the game -- when the ACC official in the replay booth overturned the Mountain West official's call on the field. On the field, a near-interception by Boston College's Jamie Silva was ruled incomplete because the ball hit the ground first. In the booth, without anything resembling conclusive proof, the ACC official overturned the call, giving the win to the home (ACC) team.

At West Virginia, replay officials upheld the call on the field when WVU cornerback Antonio Lewis was given an interception. Replays showed Lewis and the player from Maryland had the ball in unison when both players hit the ground, leaving Maryland coach Ralph Friedgen to wonder afterward why the 50-50 call hadn't gone to the offense.
Maybe that's only a baseball rule. Maybe they should ask the guy from Oregon.

Definitely this stuff shouldn't be happening. And when the mistakes continually benefit the home team -- or the home team's conference, which assigns the officials -- you have to wonder why.

Do officials get caught up in the moment, in the excitement, and lose their composure and their competence? Do subconscious biases in favor of their league's schools affect what they're seeing with their own eyes?

Those are ugly questions we shouldn't be asking. But they are questions that, after this past weekend, we have to ask.

I have two solutions:

1. Get rid of all those replay-booth codgers who were raised on radio. Bring in a TV-watching expert. Yes, I'm saying my 11-year-old son could do a better job than the idiot from Oregon.

2. Get rid of replay entirely -- on the field, off the field, in my living room, everywhere. Why? Because I'd rather think the officials are blowing a game than know it.

 

[Dallas]

Riese's piece in history: Cal-Stanford 'band' game
Sep. 19, 2006
By Dennis Dodd
CBS SportsLine.com Senior Writer


The Pac-10 replay official who was suspended Monday for his role in the Oklahoma-Oregon worked the infamous Cal-Stanford "band" game in 1982.




The conference confirmed Tuesday that Gordon Riese, now 64, was the line judge that day and made a crucial ruling in that game. Riese told referee Charles Moffett that Cal's Kevin Moen had legally scored after the last of five laterals that concluded with a run through the Stanford band.

"I say, 'Were all the laterals legal?' 'Yes,' Moffett, now deceased, was quoted in a 1997 San Francisco Chronicle story. "Then the line judge, Gordon Riese, says to me, 'Charlie, the guy scored on that.' And I said, 'What?' I had no idea the guy had scored."

In that game, Stanford kicked a field goal to go ahead 20-19 with eight seconds remaining. The Cardinal kicked off with four seconds left. Then-Cal coach Joe Kapp instructed his players to keep lateraling the ball like rugby players to keep the game alive.

Stanford loyalists have bitterly disputed the 25-20 loss for years claiming a Cal player's knee was down during the series of laterals that resulted in the game-winning touchdown. On the last lateral some contend that Cal's Mariet Ford actually threw an illegal forward pass to teammate Kevin Moen.

Riese was quoted five years ago as saying he couldn't rule on a forward lateral because he was run over by the Stanford band.

Flags were thrown during the return because of the Stanford band's presence on the field. Moffett later said that had Moen not scored, the crew had the option of awarding Cal a touchdown because of the band's interference.

Riese is a 28-year veteran of Pac-10 officiating and resides in Portland, Ore. He retired from on-field duties in the mid-1990s. He and replay official Roger Judd, along with the officiating crew on Saturday, were suspended for a game.

"He had been one of our top referees for a long time," Pac-10 spokesman Jim Muldoon said.

Riese could not be reached for comment. - bummer

 

[Concord]

Those were two absolutely Horrible calls.

I wanted Oregon to win but come on.

 

[joseephuss]

Like I said, when you put yourself in a position to have games decided by the officials, you'll get burned occasionally. It happens in every sport.

The call was bad, and I don't think collusion is out of the question.

But if OU stops them before the onsides kick, it's moot. Similarly, if OU stops them after the onsides kick, it's moot. If OU stops either drive, the game is over. OU had chances, and they failed.

Ultimately though, none of this really matters because OU isn't that great a football team and they had no shot at the national title anyway. Michigan, TCU, Louisville, LSU, and Auburn are all better than OU and that's just off the top of my head.

And for the record, I have no real rooting interests in college football. I gamble on it, and that's the only reason I watch it. So don't try and label me a Duck, Longhorn, Frog, or whatever.

I agree that teams shouldn't have to rely on refs to win or lose games. The same holds true for Oregon. What if OU really had touched the ball first, but the refs ruled that Oregon touched it first? That would have taken the Ducks last chance to win it.

Games between two pretty equal teams are typically going to be close and the officiating is going to effect the outcome. It is a minor shame that they make a bad call during the speed of a game, but somewhat acceptable because live action is difficult to monitor. It is not acceptable to blow the call on a instant replay slow motion reveiw. There may be inconclusive evidence, but to just get it wrong is wrong.

As I was watching the game, it sure looked like OU had touched the ball, so I can see why that was the call on the field. I also could see that OU had the ball after the kick, so I could not understand how the line judge could spot the ball so quickly for Oregon. Seems to me that he should have kept an eye on the spot where he thought it was covered and then go into the pile to make sure it indeed was recovered. Watching the review, it was extremely clear that Oregon touched the ball prior to going 10 yards.

And now to hear the excuse that the official felt pressured to hurry up and did not have access to all the camera angles seems ridiculous. What other angles were they showing? Just incompetence is what it looks like. Keith Olberman brought up a good point on the Dan Patrick Show. These guys aren't paid too much, so if you pay for something cheap you get something cheap. Kind of like public educations. Oops, sorry, I need to take that to the political board.

 

[EMMITTnROY]

Like I said, when you put yourself in a position to have games decided by the officials, you'll get burned occasionally. It happens in every sport.

The call was bad, and I don't think collusion is out of the question.

But if OU stops them before the onsides kick, it's moot. Similarly, if OU stops them after the onsides kick, it's moot. If OU stops either drive, the game is over. OU had chances, and they failed.

Ultimately though, none of this really matters because OU isn't that great a football team and they had no shot at the national title anyway. Michigan, TCU, Louisville, LSU, and Auburn are all better than OU and that's just off the top of my head.

And for the record, I have no real rooting interests in college football. I gamble on it, and that's the only reason I watch it. So don't try and label me a Duck, Longhorn, Frog, or whatever.

wrong. see my post earlier. also, you seem to be forgetting that on the drive AFTER the horrible onside kick ruling, there was an EQUALLY horrible pass interference call that was reviewed and given to Oregon that set up their touchdown.. OU beat Oregon.. but they cant be expected to beat Oregon AND the officials.. you talk like if OU never stops Oregon at all, they dont have a complaint.. that is ridiculous.. so now a team needs to beat another team by a couple of touchdowns for it to be a "real" win? do you realize how dumb that thinking is?

furthermore, to say it doesnt matter because OU sucks is a stupid statement.. OU was ranked #15 and beat a Top 20 team on the road in a hostile environment.. they win and they are in the Top 10.. Texas is their last roadblock, and if they beat them there is a good chance they play for the national championship.. saying that OU sucks is your opinion.. but Im pretty sure that they have a Heisman candidate in that backfield.. any Top 10 team from a major conference has a shot a the national championship- there is no dominant team this year.. OU is as good as any of them..

 

[royhitshard]

I agree that teams shouldn't have to rely on refs to win or lose games. The same holds true for Oregon. What if OU really had touched the ball first, but the refs ruled that Oregon touched it first? That would have taken the Ducks last chance to win it.

Games between two pretty equal teams are typically going to be close and the officiating is going to effect the outcome. It is a minor shame that they make a bad call during the speed of a game, but somewhat acceptable because live action is difficult to monitor. It is not acceptable to blow the call on a instant replay slow motion reveiw. There may be inconclusive evidence, but to just get it wrong is wrong.

As I was watching the game, it sure looked like OU had touched the ball, so I can see why that was the call on the field. I also could see that OU had the ball after the kick, so I could not understand how the line judge could spot the ball so quickly for Oregon. Seems to me that he should have kept an eye on the spot where he thought it was covered and then go into the pile to make sure it indeed was recovered. Watching the review, it was extremely clear that Oregon touched the ball prior to going 10 yards.

And now to hear the excuse that the official felt pressured to hurry up and did not have access to all the camera angles seems ridiculous. What other angles were they showing? Just incompetence is what it looks like. Keith Olberman brought up a good point on the Dan Patrick Show. These guys aren't paid too much, so if you pay for something cheap you get something cheap. Kind of like public educations. Oops, sorry, I need to take that to the political board.

Well said.

 

[The30YardSlant]

That was absolutly atrocious. I was the worst jobbing by the refs since....well....

 

[EMMITTnROY]

That was absolutly atrocious. I was the worst jobbing by the refs since....well....

haha.. exactly.. I think that OU's fans' reactions are completely understandable.. not the threats and all that, those are just isolated events as every team has its share of nutty fans.. but the uproar it is causing is completely understandable.. this is TWICE in their last five games that they were completely robbed of a game because of instant replay goofs that should have been clear as day.. but this Oregon one is absolutely the worst I have ever seen.. I really do think there was an agenda or a payoff.. just too much evidence to think otherwise.. and come on, the instant replay official is freaking from Oregon..

 

[ddh33]

It's not at all the same thing, and I don't mean to compare the two things at all, but the logic seems to be the same...

Saying that OU should have won the game anyway - that they didn't because their defense wasn't as good as it should have been or whatever else - is the same logic used in saying that a woman who was raped was asking for it by wearing a skirt too short and not fighting hard enough...

Like I said, I don't mean to compare the two things. After all, this is still just a football. At the same time, wrong is wrong, and that was absolutely wrong. There's no reason to ever justify wrong.

 

[NickZepp]

The Tech game OU didn't have a chance after that play. Basically the game was decided on that play. OU still shoulda beat Oregon despite the bad calls

 

[ddh33]

The Tech game OU didn't have a chance after that play. Basically the game was decided on that play. OU still shoulda beat Oregon despite the bad calls

Maybe, but they were done after those things went against them. It's hard for me to hold that against them. Have you ever seen a horse break from the gate too early at the track? As soon as you see that happen, it's over. It's the same kind of thing...

Had the OU kids not actually gained possession of the on-side kick, they would have had a better chance. Knowing that they got the short end of the stick, and then seeing it reaffirmed by the pass intereference call, they lost it emotionally.


I still maintain that the issue here isn't just about OU. It's about getting it right. As fans we all expect for refs to miss a few calls. We know that replay doesn't fix every single thing. These are things that we live with, and I don't think a lot of intelligent fans use that to excuse a loss. In this case, a bad call was made. Fine. But the people involved had ample opportunities to fix the mistake. They never did. It's either crooked or it's incompetent. But more than anything, it's too common. I don't want to watch referees decide games. I want to see players do that...When the playing field isn't level, it ruins the game completely.

 

[jay cee]

While they did get jobbed on that call, it wasn't the refs who had an absolutely dreadful defense.

When you put yourself in a position to have a game decided by the officials, you'll get screwed occasionally. Basketball is the finest example of this.

If OU could have made a single defensive stand, we wouldn't even be talking about this.

I've never liked this argument, because it seems to say if you play the perfect game, then the refs can't screw you.

Well no one can play the perfect game.

Oklahoma's defense stopped Oregon's offense enough to force the officials to have to resort to "cheating" to give them the ball back one more time when they did not recover.

It's not like they were playing some Division 2 program. Oregon was out there trying to win just like Oklahoma. They had some pretty good offensive weapons.

Yet it took those bad calls for them to get the win and OK still almost pulled it out with a last second fg attempt.

So rather than blame one team for not being good enough to beat a very good opponent that happened to benefit from two terrible calls.

IMO the blame should be placed on the people responsible for making those calls.

 

[joseephuss]

I've never liked this argument, because it seems to say if you play the perfect game, then the refs can't screw you.

Well no one can play the perfect game.

Oklahoma's defense stopped Oregon's offense enough to force the officials to have to resort to "cheating" to give them the ball back one more time when they did not recover.

It's not like they were playing some Division 2 program. Oregon was out there trying to win just like Oklahoma. They had some pretty good offensive weapons.

Yet it took those bad calls for them to get the win and OK still almost pulled it out with a last second fg attempt.

So rather than blame one team for not being good enough to beat a very good opponent that happened to benefit from two terrible calls.

IMO the blame should be placed on the people responsible for making those calls.

Exactly. If Oregon fails to score the TD, it is still a bad call. Bad calls need to be fixed.

 

[jimmy40]

One game suspension huh? well gee, thanks,,, these officials are all moonlighters right?

What needs to happen is that these criminals be thoroughly investigated because a BCS Bowl game is worth MILLIONS to the participating college as well as the Conference they represent. This thing reeks of corruption.

Almost as corrupt as OU being in the MNC title game after being thrashed by KState.

 

[joseephuss]

Almost as corrupt as OU being in the MNC title game after being thrashed by KState.

Or Nebraska making it to the MNC after being thrashed by Colorado and without winning their own conference or at the least their own division within the conference.

 

[Danny White]

http://img.***BLOCKED***/albums/v192/goodpain/allenpatrick.jpg