You are defending the process, but what about the call? Do you think the right call was made?
Statement from Big 12 Conference
- Thread starter CyFan61
- Start date
You are defending the process, but what about the call? Do you think the right call was made?
There are usually 3 or 4 replay booth officials...so yeah, I'd be pretty comfortable letting them make the call by a voting majority (unless they graduated from a competing university).
I do not believe that the right call was made on the field, but given the contraints of the replay process requiring indisputable evidence, and based on the poor, low resolution still pictures I have seen, I could not justify overturning the call on the field. I'd love to have a DVR of the ESPN coverage to extract some high res stills.
If I'm not mistaken, the line judge made the call. The same line judge who hosed us the entire game and was responsible for numerous poor ball spots. Who is this guy and where is he from? Is he the same bonehead that called the DPI on us?
FYI - from the source...
Basically, everything is up to Bowlsby regarding CPR getting a fine and Davis getting penalized. Timing is outlined below in 12.4, which will resolve most things in a matter of days, but the commissioner can waive timing requirements so it could be longer. My guess is that we'll know if there are any fines or suspensions on Monday mid-day. My guess is that CPR got a "private reprimand" and that will be that. I think he had it prior to going on the radio shows, as I have a feeling the Big 12 used it as a bargaining chip to have him not continue to go off about it so clearly. I'm frankly more interested in what will happen to Davis. IMO that should have been an expulsion and he should be out the first half against OU, at the minimum.
12.3 Violations. Violations of this rule requiring actions by the Commissioner are:
12.3.1 Verbal or Physical Abuse. Prior to, during and after a contest, coaches,
student-athletes, and members of the athletics department staff and spirit
squads are prohibited from committing verbal or physical abusive acts toward
game officials or an opponent’s team members, coaching staff, institutional
personnel or fans.
12.3.2 Comments about Officiating. Coaches, student-athletes, and members of
the athletics department staff are prohibited from making any public comment
regarding the game officials or the officiating at any contest. The public
airing of officiating matters, whether directly or indirectly, during or after a
game, verbally or by use of video, on or off the record, is prohibited.
12.4 Processing of Possible Violations. When a member institution has reason to believe
that a violation of Section 12.3 has occurred, it shall be reported immediately to the
Commissioner. Written communication between the Conference and the involved
institution shall include copies to the president or chancellor and faculty athletics
representative.
12.4.1 Report of Commissioner. After the Commissioner becomes aware of a
possible violation of these rules, he/she or a designated Conference staff
member will gather all information available for review of the matter. If the
Commissioner concludes that a violation occurred, a report will be provided
to the athletics director(s) of the institution(s) involved which will set forth
the Commissioner’s findings and penalty, if any, to be imposed.
12.4.2 Response by Institution. After the receipt of the Commissioner’s report,
the athletics director(s) of the involved institution(s) shall within 24 hours
of receipt of the report submit a response to the Commissioner indicating
the institution’s position on the matter.
12.4.3 Final Decision by the Commissioner. Within 24 hours of the receipt of
the institution’s response, the Commissioner will send his final report to the
athletics director(s) of the involved institution(s). The university will have
24 hours after receipt of the Commissioner’s final decision to indicate in
writing to the Commissioner whether or not it will appeal his/her decision
under the provisions of Section 12.5 below.
12.4.4 Delegation of Authority and Timing Waiver. The Commissioner or Director
of Athletics may designate another member of their staff to act on their
behalf and the Commissioner shall have the authority to waive the timing
requirements set forth above.
12.4.5 Penalties. The penalties that may be imposed by the Commissioner for
violation of these standards may include, but are not limited to, private and
public reprimand, institutional fines, and suspension from practice and/or
competition.
Basically, everything is up to Bowlsby regarding CPR getting a fine and Davis getting penalized. Timing is outlined below in 12.4, which will resolve most things in a matter of days, but the commissioner can waive timing requirements so it could be longer. My guess is that we'll know if there are any fines or suspensions on Monday mid-day. My guess is that CPR got a "private reprimand" and that will be that. I think he had it prior to going on the radio shows, as I have a feeling the Big 12 used it as a bargaining chip to have him not continue to go off about it so clearly. I'm frankly more interested in what will happen to Davis. IMO that should have been an expulsion and he should be out the first half against OU, at the minimum.
12.3 Violations. Violations of this rule requiring actions by the Commissioner are:
12.3.1 Verbal or Physical Abuse. Prior to, during and after a contest, coaches,
student-athletes, and members of the athletics department staff and spirit
squads are prohibited from committing verbal or physical abusive acts toward
game officials or an opponent’s team members, coaching staff, institutional
personnel or fans.
12.3.2 Comments about Officiating. Coaches, student-athletes, and members of
the athletics department staff are prohibited from making any public comment
regarding the game officials or the officiating at any contest. The public
airing of officiating matters, whether directly or indirectly, during or after a
game, verbally or by use of video, on or off the record, is prohibited.
12.4 Processing of Possible Violations. When a member institution has reason to believe
that a violation of Section 12.3 has occurred, it shall be reported immediately to the
Commissioner. Written communication between the Conference and the involved
institution shall include copies to the president or chancellor and faculty athletics
representative.
12.4.1 Report of Commissioner. After the Commissioner becomes aware of a
possible violation of these rules, he/she or a designated Conference staff
member will gather all information available for review of the matter. If the
Commissioner concludes that a violation occurred, a report will be provided
to the athletics director(s) of the institution(s) involved which will set forth
the Commissioner’s findings and penalty, if any, to be imposed.
12.4.2 Response by Institution. After the receipt of the Commissioner’s report,
the athletics director(s) of the involved institution(s) shall within 24 hours
of receipt of the report submit a response to the Commissioner indicating
the institution’s position on the matter.
12.4.3 Final Decision by the Commissioner. Within 24 hours of the receipt of
the institution’s response, the Commissioner will send his final report to the
athletics director(s) of the involved institution(s). The university will have
24 hours after receipt of the Commissioner’s final decision to indicate in
writing to the Commissioner whether or not it will appeal his/her decision
under the provisions of Section 12.5 below.
12.4.4 Delegation of Authority and Timing Waiver. The Commissioner or Director
of Athletics may designate another member of their staff to act on their
behalf and the Commissioner shall have the authority to waive the timing
requirements set forth above.
12.4.5 Penalties. The penalties that may be imposed by the Commissioner for
violation of these standards may include, but are not limited to, private and
public reprimand, institutional fines, and suspension from practice and/or
competition.
I agree...its MUCH closer than I originally thought. At least from the angle of the videos posted in this thread. But if I watch the video from the goal line camera, its doesn't look near as close.
Around the :38 second mark
[video=youtube;i8hEZ1Bhcbw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8hEZ1Bhcbw[/video]
All in all, I guess I can somewhat see why they made the call and I feel a little better as its not as obvious as I originally thought last night in the heat of the moment. Could have gone either way.
Last edited:
Well, after the KU BS and all the egg on their faces the Big 12 is not going to admit that once again ISU was screwed by a conference officiating crew. It might start to look like a conspiracy....
What ever they say doesn't mean anything to me unless they give ISU the win. Don't see that happening.
After rewatching it again it is absolutely clear he was not down because George was hold him up when stripping the ball. After George gets the ball he falls right on his back. Now you could argue that his forward progress was stopped, but then the official should have blown the whistle.
The thing that really makes me made is ISU was a lot better than Texas last night except for a few plays. The hail Mary at the end on the half really changed the game and for the life of me, I do not know what the defense was doing out there.
Is it the same line judge ref that Deloss Dodds was conveniently standing next too during the no fumble call.
I think it's right around the 5:11 mark.
2013 Texas vs Iowa State LHN highlights [Oct. 4, 2013] - YouTube
The goal-line shot played all day on ESPN leaves no doubt. Not down, not close to the goal-line.
Ask yourself this simple question, if the RB had dug in and somehow spun his way into the endzone, do you think they would have called TD?
That's what I thought.
Ask yourself this simple question, if the RB had dug in and somehow spun his way into the endzone, do you think they would have called TD?
That's what I thought.
[video=youtube;1IjYPtTsd0Y]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IjYPtTsd0Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/video]
Watching that YouTube video it's not so clear to me. Now it's the call on the field not so much the replay review that I have an issue with. The mistake I would say is no whistle. Since there is no whistle they must not have thought he was down, since they didn't think he was down, then why did they decide that he was down after iowa State was running free down the field? The answer is of course is because it was Texas. If they would have blown a whistle and stopped the play and called it dead, I don't think there would be as big an uproar over this. It would have been called a very close play.
They couldn't blow the whistle because he's still moving his feet and flips over as he is churning. While doing so, he exposes the ball and George takes it. It's the force of losing the struggle over the ball that makes Gray fall down, so clearly George has a live ball. It's just a travesty, no way around it.
i think we agree, no whistle then not down, so the call on the field was made up when the officials saw what happened, that's what I have a problem with. As far as the replay I still think its close at least based on the above YouTube video.
