An interesting point made(ref opinion please)

[Old Tiger]

I saw this on another board and I know it's beating a dead horse but is it interesting point, I think.


On a Tech board of all places. The point brought up, in regards to Lil' Step-Mack, was that the play was called on the field as a lateral recovered by Texas. The flag that was thrown was for intentional grounding and that was waved off as the ball was clearly going backwards. The unsportsmanlike call was made as a result of instant replay. The problem with that is that a penalty cannot be called by replay. Some can be overturned or confirmed by replay, but if no call was made on the field, then replay should not be allowed to issue the penalty. If it were, every play would be reviewed for holding or pass interference, etc.

[Emerson1]

I heard the refs were pretty bad all game. I fell asleep during halftime :doh:

[zebrablue2]

Originally posted by Go Blue
I saw this on another board and I know it's beating a dead horse but is it interesting point, I think.

we need vamike. calling vamike. is a good point Go Blue. man, I am proud of you.. I do not deal with instant replay in high school. so mike can help.

[Stownhorse]

Originally posted by Emerson1
I heard the refs were pretty bad all game. I fell asleep during halftime :doh:

Yea it was sad.

[Phil C]

What could the refs had done?

[DDBooger]

Originally posted by Go Blue
I saw this on another board and I know it's beating a dead horse but is it interesting point, I think. you know i thought the same thing, but i thought that only applied to PRO's.

[Panther One]

You can review whether or not a forward pass was made behind or beyond the line of scrimmage and assess a penalty if it was made beyond, so there are other instances in which penalties can be called upon review. This is not a unique circumstance.

[VAMike]

Where did this idea that fouls cannot be called after IR review come from? That is simply not true. They can be, as was evidenced last night. You cannot go to IR specifically to see if you missed a foul or not but once there, you can use the results to call a foul if it is related to what you were using IR for.

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by VAMike
Where did this idea that fouls cannot be called after IR review come from? That is simply not true. They can be, as was evidenced last night. You cannot go to IR specifically to see if you missed a foul or not but once there, you can use the results to call a foul if it is related to what you were using IR for.
So I assume if they are looking at whether a ball was complete or incomplete, they can't happen to see a linemen holding and call it?

What if they are looking at the same situation, and see a pass interference?

[Panther One]

Originally posted by Emerson1
So I assume if they are looking at whether a ball was complete or incomplete, they can't happen to see a linemen holding and call it?

What if they are looking at the same situation, and see a pass interference?
Judgement calls can't be reviewed or applied upon review.

[Emerson1]

It was still a bad call either way. There was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field.

[VAMike]

Originally posted by Emerson1
It was still a bad call either way. There was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field. Your opinion. I know there are at least 25 refs who disagree witrh you as we discussed it live last night.

[VAMike]

Originally posted by Panther One
Judgement calls can't be reviewed or applied upon review.

Depends what you are calling a judgment call and pretty much everything is a judgment call anyway

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by VAMike
Your opinion. I know there are at least 25 refs who disagree witrh you as we discussed it live last night.


My pont on it is that IMO it was not conclusive either way. I dont think anyone can say 100% YES they can REALLY TELL he did or did not touch the ball

[Emerson1]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
My pont on it is that IMO it was not conclusive either way. I dont think anyone can say 100% YES they can REALLY TELL he did or did not touch the ball
and they should of stayed with the call on the field

[VAMike]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
My pont on it is that IMO it was not conclusive either way. I dont think anyone can say 100% YES they can REALLY TELL he did or did not touch the ball Does not matter if he touched it or not. It is still a foul.,

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by VAMike
Your opinion. I know there are at least 25 refs who disagree witrh you as we discussed it live last night.
I want to be a fly on the wall in these officials message boards! :)

[VAMike]

Originally posted by Adidas410s
I want to be a fly on the wall in these officials message boards! :)

Threre is more disagreement than you might suspect. But we do have some agreement on thngs like how clueless most coaches and media are about the intricacies of things

[zebrablue2]

was the penalty yardage accessed from the correct spot?

[VAMike]

SInce he called it illegal interference he can assess yardage from wherever he wants. If it was just unsportsmanlike conduct for them being on the field then ot would have to be enforced from the dead ball spot. BUt illegal interference is a basic spot foul which means in this play that would have been the prev spot which is where they went from.

[zebrablue2]

Originally posted by VAMike
SInce he called it illegal interference he can assess yardage from wherever he wants. If it was just unsportsmanlike conduct for them being on the field then ot would have to be enforced from the dead ball spot. BUt illegal interference is a basic spot foul which means in this play that would have been the prev spot which is where they went from.


thanks. bet they had their thinking caps working 100 to none on that play. not one seen very often.

[VAMike]

I had it in a game at LaVernia HS about 5 years ago except it was the adult trainer/doc who stepped on the field to "help" us get the ball.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by VAMike
Does not matter if he touched it or not. It is still a foul.,

Then he explained it wrong..and what was the need to review the tape to see if he touched it ?

If it was simply he was out on the field during a play why did it take 12 mins to review and figure it out?

every one could see he was inside the field of play

[Adidas410s]

Originally posted by VAMike
Threre is more disagreement than you might suspect. But we do have some agreement on thngs like how clueless most coaches and media are about the intricacies of things
I sure wish I had a forum to go to when I was officiating baseball. All we had were weekly meetings...which were VERY helpful considering the quality of our senior officials. However...the more information and understanding of rules that one can have then the better off he/she is in the long run IMO.

[VAMike]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
Then he explained it wrong..and what was the need to review the tape to see if he touched it ?

If it was simply he was out on the field during a play why did it take 12 mins to review and figure it out?

every one could see he was inside the field of play

They needed the review to determine if it was touched or not It was close and they deemed it was touched You can choose to disagree but that is the ruling that was made.

Part fo the problem was the crew did not flag the idiots in the field in teh first place which they should have. They also had to review the action of teh QB to determine if it was a forward or backward pass. (ANd I suspect someone upstairs was thumbing through a rulebook which took time also)

[CenTexSports]

I think it should have been called differently. There were at least two other penalties that should have or could have been called.

1) The sideline official had to run three yards on the field to get down the field and he had to dodge several players and coaches while doing so. There could have been sideline interference and at the VERY LEAST there should have been a sideline warning.
2) The Texas player that knocked the ball back into the middle of the field should have been called for illegal batting.

The actual call was debatable but it was what it was.

[eagles_victory]

I hate cocky refs who come to the game with an attitude and are just out there to be seen and not to ref a game there is nothing worse.

[VAMike]

1 - The sideline warning is NOT for when people are on the field. It is for when they are in the white

2 - The ball was dead by rule when teh UT player did what he did. As soon as the kiddo touched the ball it was dead by rule

[VAMike]

Originally posted by eagles_victory
I hate cocky refs who come to the game with an attitude and are just out there to be seen and not to ref a game there is nothing worse.

Me too Thankfully they are few and far between

[eagles_victory]

Originally posted by CenTexSports
I think it should have been called differently. There were at least two other penalties that should have or could have been called.

1) The sideline official had to run three yards on the field to get down the field and he had to dodge several players and coaches while doing so. There could have been sideline interference and at the VERY LEAST there should have been a sideline warning.
2) The Texas player that knocked the ball back into the middle of the field should have been called for illegal batting.

The actual call was debatable but it was what it was. There was no illegal batting on that play.

[kaorder1999]

Originally posted by VAMike
Me too Thankfully they are few and far between

:confused:

[eagles_victory]

Originally posted by VAMike
Me too Thankfully they are few and far between ive seen it far too many times

[CenTexSports]

I don't get your point.

1) There were people in the white and they should have been flagged. The people on the field should have been flagged for sideline interference or (if a player) illegal participation,

2) The illegal batting took place DURING the play before the whistle was blown. A flag should have been thrown at that time. If it was nullified due to the subsequent IR then so be it but there was still an illegal batting of the ball during a LIVE BALL situation.


The Texas player knocked the ball back into the field of play just as it reached the sideline.

[zebrablue2]

Originally posted by eagles_victory
I hate cocky refs who come to the game with an attitude and are just out there to be seen and not to ref a game there is nothing worse.


I am with ya. Like to do my job, and never be seen. People come to see the kids, not the officials.

[eagles_victory]

Originally posted by zebrablue2
I am with ya. Like to do my job, and never be seen. People come to see the kids, not the officials. IMO its way more of a problem in basketball then it is in football

[VAMike]

1 - That is sort of like sending a guy to prison for 10 years for robbery and then giving him a traffic ticket for having expired registration on his getaway car. What's the point? (and those sideline teammembers cannot be charged with illegal participation, they can be charged with unsportsmnalike conduct)

2 - If it is judged the "batting" was accidental then there is no foul anyway.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by VAMike
They needed the review to determine if it was touched or not It was close and they deemed it was touched You can choose to disagree but that is the ruling that was made.



I dont agree or disagree with the call..What I am saying is I dont think there was conclusive 100% proof he touched the ball

[VAMike]

Originally posted by eagles_victory
IMO its way more of a problem in basketball then it is in football

AGreed

[VAMike]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
I dont agree or disagree with the call..What I am saying is I dont think there was conclusive 100% proof he touched the ball

And guys who do this on a weekly basis judged there WAS conclusive evidence to them. Which just proves that IR is not the panacea so many folks think it is

[zebrablue2]

Originally posted by eagles_victory
IMO its way more of a problem in basketball then it is in football

baseball and softball also.

[GreenMonster]

Originally posted by eagles_victory
I hate cocky refs who come to the game with an attitude and are just out there to be seen and not to ref a game there is nothing worse. We had a real classy one this season. We were attempting to get his attention to come and explain what had just happened. He offered an explanation to our opponent, but ignored our pleas. We continued to try to get a meeting, our sideline official was pretending that we didn't exist and would not even say boo. After 2 consecutive plays of us screaming at the guy to tell us what was going on he flags us for a sideline warning from between the hashes. We all looked down to find that we were all in our designated area and we became even more incensed. Finally we were told that to get an explanation we would have to call a time-out and ask the sideline official (who was still not even talking to us) to relay our question in to the white hat during the time-out. So, we do as instructed and call time-out. Our sideline guy runs off before we can ask our question. He comes back and our AD asks him why he ran off so quick. Tells our AD it isn't his job to be a messenger boy. Needless to say that entire crew was placed on our scratch list the very next morning and a copy of our game tape was sent in along with our comments.