Those that say the refs have no influence on game

[copenhagen]

are crazy. Look at Sat night. Lately a lot of the great glue coverage by the dbs have called penalties. And reviews like the Lenz 'fumble' have been overruled. A honest clean called game by the refs does make a difference.

[Cydkar]

This post passes the IQ test. It does make a big difference.

[Doc]

are crazy. Look at Sat night. Lately a lot of the great glue coverage by the dbs have called penalties. And reviews like the Lenz 'fumble' have been overruled. A honest clean called game by the refs does make a difference.

After our game was over you could've flipped to the USC-Stanford game and watch Pac-12 officials keep their golden boy's team undefeated for more verification.

[sfcyclonefan]

You mean the game where they called 11 penalties on Stanford and 3 on USC?

Usually teams that have way more penalties called against them are not getting much help from the officials.

[temperflare]

I re-watched the TTech game today. Honestly, there were at least 3 holding penalties by our O-Line that were blatant that were not called. This, on each of the first few drives. There was a pass interference call against us that they missed, but just prior to that there was a def pass interference call they missed.

Not a badly officiated game, but we got away with some that during the last 5-6 games we were not getting away with. I hope we have this officiating crew again in the next few games.

[only4cy]

Right, that's why the score was 41-7. How did the Hawks do?

[IowaSTATCyclone]

Well-reffed games have zero influence on the final score.
Adequately reffed games maybe influence the score very slightly, in that both teams end up getting equally "robbed" or equal "make-up calls."
Poorly reffed games cost one team or the other maybe 3 points, on average.
Terribly reffed games (and they are rare in major conference games) maybe cost a team six.

I can't say that I've ever seen a game won by more than 10 that I feel like "shoulda gone the other way." Most of them have been under 3 points.

The Baylor game had really bad reffing, for example, but it wouldn't have made enough of a difference to win. Lousy reffing wouldn't have made a significant difference in the TT game. But you are right, the reffing was good in that game, which was a nice surprise.

[CysRage]

Well-reffed games have zero influence on the final score.
Adequately reffed games maybe influence the score very slightly, in that both teams end up getting equally "robbed" or equal "make-up calls."
Poorly reffed games cost one team or the other maybe 3 points, on average.
Terribly reffed games (and they are rare in major conference games) maybe cost a team six.

I can't say that I've ever seen a game won by more than 10 that I feel like "shoulda gone the other way." Most of them have been under 3 points.

The Baylor game had really bad reffing, for example, but it wouldn't have made enough of a difference to win. Lousy reffing wouldn't have made a significant difference in the TT game. But you are right, the reffing was good in that game, which was a nice surprise.

I agree with you to an extent but the referees can also take away momentum. For example, when RGIII tried to do a fake pass tuck and run but fumbled the ball during the tuck, it should have been ruled a fumble and ISU's ball ISU up 7. Instead, they overturned the call and Baylor scored a touchdown on the next play. If it had been called as is on the field, ISU could have very well went down the field and scored another touchdown putting us up 21-7 instead of 14-14.

[IowaSTATCyclone]

I agree with you to an extent but the referees can also take away momentum. For example, when RGIII tried to do a fake pass tuck and run but fumbled the ball during the tuck, it should have been ruled a fumble and ISU's ball ISU up 7. Instead, they overturned the call and Baylor scored a touchdown on the next play. If it had been called as is on the field, ISU could have very well went down the field and scored another touchdown putting us up 21-7 instead of 14-14.

Yes, absolutely. The Baylor game is the best example of a ref influenced game. We should have had a touchdown and an onside kick, and Baylor should have had a touchdown taken off.

I'll be super generous and give ourselves a touchdown for the onside kick.

So, subtracting 7 from their score, and adding 14 to ours nets us...

A 42-40 loss.

You are right about momentum, though. Maybe if we hadn't had bad reffing, we would have taken better advantage of the opportunities, demoralized Baylor, etc. etc., and beaten them.

But at a certain point, you can only manipulate the maybes so far before you have to turn it back on yourself: don't let go of the ball, ever, even if your knee is down. Don't put yourself in a position where you have to spring an onside kick on the opponent to get back in the game. Don't play an opponent so close that you can't overcome a handful of atrocious officiating calls.

Every year, there are a few games that every unbiased observer will designate as a travesty. Some MAC school (Toledo?) got jobbed this year. Oklahoma got ripped off a few years ago.

Those stand out.

Bad reffing, yes, does make a difference. So does rain. So does home field advantage.

You can't do anything about it but be glad that you don't play in a 2nd tier conference, where the reffing is even more imperfect.

[ribsnwhiskey]

Well-reffed games have zero influence on the final score.
Adequately reffed games maybe influence the score very slightly, in that both teams end up getting equally "robbed" or equal "make-up calls."
Poorly reffed games cost one team or the other maybe 3 points, on average.
Terribly reffed games (and they are rare in major conference games) maybe cost a team six.

I can't say that I've ever seen a game won by more than 10 that I feel like "shoulda gone the other way." Most of them have been under 3 points.

The Baylor game had really bad reffing, for example, but it wouldn't have made enough of a difference to win. Lousy reffing wouldn't have made a significant difference in the TT game. But you are right, the reffing was good in that game, which was a nice surprise.

Is this from the manual?

[IowaSTATCyclone]

Is this from the manual?

No. NCAA memo from the annual game officials meeting: Agenda Item #7: On the secret perpetuation of the conspiracy to fabricate blowouts against Iowa State University wherever possible.

[CYKOFAN]

temperflare- I re-watched the TT game too and saw some missed calls on TT too when it came to holding and interference. But it's impossible to get all the calls right, all you can hope for is that the poor judgement calls even out, and I thought in the TT game they mostly did. It's the blatant bad calls and purely blown calls that we've experienced in several of the other games that are tough to take, especially when they extend drives, change possession, take away points, etc. We've had waaaay more than our share of those until the TT game.

[Clonefan94]

Yes, absolutely. The Baylor game is the best example of a ref influenced game. We should have had a touchdown and an onside kick, and Baylor should have had a touchdown taken off.

I'll be super generous and give ourselves a touchdown for the onside kick.

So, subtracting 7 from their score, and adding 14 to ours nets us...

A 42-40 loss.

You are right about momentum, though. Maybe if we hadn't had bad reffing, we would have taken better advantage of the opportunities, demoralized Baylor, etc. etc., and beaten them.

But at a certain point, you can only manipulate the maybes so far before you have to turn it back on yourself: don't let go of the ball, ever, even if your knee is down. Don't put yourself in a position where you have to spring an onside kick on the opponent to get back in the game. Don't play an opponent so close that you can't overcome a handful of atrocious officiating calls.

Every year, there are a few games that every unbiased observer will designate as a travesty. Some MAC school (Toledo?) got jobbed this year. Oklahoma got ripped off a few years ago.

Those stand out.

Bad reffing, yes, does make a difference. So does rain. So does home field advantage.

You can't do anything about it but be glad that you don't play in a 2nd tier conference, where the reffing is even more imperfect.

I don't like to lame the refs for a loss, but that RGIII fumble that was over turned took the wind out of our sails. And that was early in the game. I think later in the game, I always feel like you had more opportunities to put yourself in a position to win, but that happened early and the team wasn't the same after that.

I really don't think the occasional penalty or non call here and there will ever cost a team, but the replay thing can absolutely kill momentum. Especially when a battered RGIII goes from having some pain and turning the ball over, to throwing a TD Pass and forgetting his shoulder hurt.

[Yellow Snow]

Yes, absolutely. The Baylor game is the best example of a ref influenced game. We should have had a touchdown and an onside kick, and Baylor should have had a touchdown taken off.

I'll be super generous and give ourselves a touchdown for the onside kick.

So, subtracting 7 from their score, and adding 14 to ours nets us...

A 42-40 loss.

You are right about momentum, though. Maybe if we hadn't had bad reffing, we would have taken better advantage of the opportunities, demoralized Baylor, etc. etc., and beaten them.

But at a certain point, you can only manipulate the maybes so far before you have to turn it back on yourself: don't let go of the ball, ever, even if your knee is down. Don't put yourself in a position where you have to spring an onside kick on the opponent to get back in the game. Don't play an opponent so close that you can't overcome a handful of atrocious officiating calls.

Every year, there are a few games that every unbiased observer will designate as a travesty. Some MAC school (Toledo?) got jobbed this year. Oklahoma got ripped off a few years ago.

Those stand out.

Bad reffing, yes, does make a difference. So does rain. So does home field advantage.

You can't do anything about it but be glad that you don't play in a 2nd tier conference, where the reffing is even more imperfect.

I think that the ref have the ability to HUGELY change the course of the game. It may or may not change the outcome, but there is no doubt in my mind that bad calls effect the course of the game. Once a bad call is made, from that point on the game has been altered.

Let's say that they call the RGIII fumble a fumble. Even if we don't go down to score and have to punt, it still would have taken seven points off the board for BU. That changes down and distance, play calling, clock management, etc. from that point forward.

It's impossible to definitively say that any one call costs a team the game unless it is on the last drive, or play, or similar situation.

[Cyclonepride]

The timing of calls can be absolutely critical, as noted in the RG III fumble, as momentum is huge in college sports. I see this even more in basketball, where a flurry of calls early can entirely change the way a team has to play on defense.