Post by Jet on Nov 2, 2015 11:21:55 GMT -6
THIS IS LONG, BUT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT ALL OF THIS ...
Interesting on the issue it raises on the future of replay, and what can be and should be done ex post factoregarding the outcomes of games.
Here's one thing I don't have an answer to. You hear the phrase "the ball was coming out" regarding to reviews on fumbles, and it was certainly a fundamental I was taught during my time as a HS official. If the ball is moving, it's a fumble. Well, on the replay, the guy's knee was down, but was the ball coming out? Was that the reason the play stood in the reviewer's eyes? I'd say the ball was clearly sitting on his hand, and had not left the gripped position, so he's down in my mind. I don't what the reviewer's judgment was.
But here's the other part: the officials overruled a penalty via review, which is specifically against the rules. Regardless of what the reviewer thought about the play itself, the game, in theory, ended when a non-reviewable penalty was called.
I'm sure I've shared this before, but in 1986ish, I was a covering a HS game between Carver and Selma at Cramton Bowl. It had playoff implications. It went to OT. In HS overtimes, and I think it is still the rule today, once the defense gains possession of the ball it is dead. The defense could not advance a fumble nor an interception, and unless somehow the offense lost 90 yards, a safety was impossible. But the officials screwed up. On the first possession of the OT, Carver scooped up a fumble and ran it 95 yards for a TD. The officials called touchdown and ball game, and left the field. The Selma coach was so angry about another missed call that he wasn't even thinking about the fact that by rule the game wasn't over. After interview some players and coaches, I made my way up into the stands to exit to drive back to the paper and write my story.
Spence McCracken and three other coaches accosted me. "That ain't right! That ain't right!" Spence was three inches from my face, which was normal for any conversation with him. "You gotta call Bubba! You gotta call Bubba!" That means, calling Bubba Scott, the head of the AHSAA.
I woke up Mr. Scott at 11 p.m. or so with my call. I described to him what happened. His answer: tell 'em they'll be at my office tomorrow afternoon, and we're gonna get them back on the field. Ball was dead when the Carver defender possessed the ball. Game's tied. Carver's ball first and 10 ... by rule." So Selma had to load up the buses on Saturday afternoon ... Carver ran 2 plays and won the game, but an outcome had been overruled due to the misapplication of a rule on a game-ending play.
The Duke-Miami ending is somewhat similar. The reviewer's judgment of the knee is just that -- a judgment. The review of the penalty was not. It's a misapplication of a rule on the game's final play.
I've never been a fan of replay ... it's inconsistent ... different games have different camera angles ... it takes too long ... and if we're gonna do it, we don't review enough things. I've always said just unplug it and let the officials make mistakes like coaches and players make mistakes.
Now, we're talking about centralized review at another location.
Should the NCAA or ACC take another look at this, or is it as Miami tweeted:
Interesting on the issue it raises on the future of replay, and what can be and should be done ex post factoregarding the outcomes of games.
Here's one thing I don't have an answer to. You hear the phrase "the ball was coming out" regarding to reviews on fumbles, and it was certainly a fundamental I was taught during my time as a HS official. If the ball is moving, it's a fumble. Well, on the replay, the guy's knee was down, but was the ball coming out? Was that the reason the play stood in the reviewer's eyes? I'd say the ball was clearly sitting on his hand, and had not left the gripped position, so he's down in my mind. I don't what the reviewer's judgment was.
But here's the other part: the officials overruled a penalty via review, which is specifically against the rules. Regardless of what the reviewer thought about the play itself, the game, in theory, ended when a non-reviewable penalty was called.
I'm sure I've shared this before, but in 1986ish, I was a covering a HS game between Carver and Selma at Cramton Bowl. It had playoff implications. It went to OT. In HS overtimes, and I think it is still the rule today, once the defense gains possession of the ball it is dead. The defense could not advance a fumble nor an interception, and unless somehow the offense lost 90 yards, a safety was impossible. But the officials screwed up. On the first possession of the OT, Carver scooped up a fumble and ran it 95 yards for a TD. The officials called touchdown and ball game, and left the field. The Selma coach was so angry about another missed call that he wasn't even thinking about the fact that by rule the game wasn't over. After interview some players and coaches, I made my way up into the stands to exit to drive back to the paper and write my story.
Spence McCracken and three other coaches accosted me. "That ain't right! That ain't right!" Spence was three inches from my face, which was normal for any conversation with him. "You gotta call Bubba! You gotta call Bubba!" That means, calling Bubba Scott, the head of the AHSAA.
I woke up Mr. Scott at 11 p.m. or so with my call. I described to him what happened. His answer: tell 'em they'll be at my office tomorrow afternoon, and we're gonna get them back on the field. Ball was dead when the Carver defender possessed the ball. Game's tied. Carver's ball first and 10 ... by rule." So Selma had to load up the buses on Saturday afternoon ... Carver ran 2 plays and won the game, but an outcome had been overruled due to the misapplication of a rule on a game-ending play.
The Duke-Miami ending is somewhat similar. The reviewer's judgment of the knee is just that -- a judgment. The review of the penalty was not. It's a misapplication of a rule on the game's final play.
I've never been a fan of replay ... it's inconsistent ... different games have different camera angles ... it takes too long ... and if we're gonna do it, we don't review enough things. I've always said just unplug it and let the officials make mistakes like coaches and players make mistakes.
Now, we're talking about centralized review at another location.
Should the NCAA or ACC take another look at this, or is it as Miami tweeted:
