Ever Seen a Play Reviewed, Called on the Field and then Reversed a couple minutes later? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Ever Seen a Play Reviewed, Called on the Field and then Reversed a couple minutes later?

Hamms30 said:
There should be no "conference affiliated" referees. If there is anything that should be handled centrally by the NCAA, that is it. With all the money the NCAA pulls in it'd be peanuts to pay, train and maintain responsibility for officials.

It wasn't even roughing the passer let alone targeting.
Expand ...
Absolutely agree that officials should not be affiliated to a conference.
 
Windham4th said:
Jackson's helmet made first contact with Leonard's helmet. Technically speaking it was correct to remove him. That said he was pulling up when it happened so it wasn't an obvious call and they should have been allowed to make that judgment call on the field.

Everyone seems to want to make excuses for why we can't win against an ACC team? It's probably because all of the FCS, not just the ACC, is better than we are.

I am seriously worried about the Sacred Heart game at this point.
Expand ...
Disagree. Neither most of us reasonable fans nor Mora blamed this loss or other loses on this review of the review. How many times will there be a review of the review if this sets precedent? Hopefully this type of stupidity is limited to the ACC.
 
This is the rule:
Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet (Rule 9-1-3) -

No penalty, Contact was not with the crown of the helmet.

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player (Rule 9-1-4).

No penalty, QB wasn't defenseless. He was in the pocket attempting a forward pass. The excuse makers will say Mitchell illegally contacted the neck area, but that is ridiculous interpretation. Contact was with the top of the face mask. It was a textbook "heads up" tackle that they now explicitly teach in youth football.

Use of the helmet as a weapon and intentional (targeted) contact to the head or neck area.

No penalty, the helmet wasn't used as a weapon, nor was the contact intentionally targeting the head or neck.
 
Haven't seen a replay yet. If they showed it at the game I missed it and live I my eyes were downfield. Saw something out of the corner of my eye. I thought I heard on the radio on the way home that the explanation was the call was due to something that happened after they hit the ground and they initially only reviewed the initial hit. It sounded lame to me. But as I said I haven't seen it and the video in this thread doesn't go that far.
 
Windham4th said:
Jackson's helmet made first contact with Leonard's helmet. Technically speaking it was correct to remove him. That said he was pulling up when it happened so it wasn't an obvious call and they should have been allowed to make that judgment call on the field.

Everyone seems to want to make excuses for why we can't win against an ACC team? It's probably because all of the FCS, not just the ACC, is better than we are.

I am seriously worried about the Sacred Heart game at this point.
Expand ...
No one is making excuses.

No one.

But the beauty of a Discussion Board is you can discuss things like this….. Even your response prompted some posters to post the rule itself and some of us (myself included) learned some things along the way.
 
.-.
Duke got hit with a controversial targetting call against Clemson....ACC refs really are hard on anything approaching helmet/helmet contact...

 
Though in that game, the defending player was more in an unnatural launching position. One angle makes it look bad while the other shows he misses the QB’s head. In yestersday’s game, Mitchell seemed to be going in a more natural tackling position per the footage I saw. I doubt ACC refs would’ve called targeting had it been on a UConn player.
 
I think that the refs sure might have...they have been free with targetting calls...they have been notorious about over protecting the players. They made that clear last year.

The UConn defender made contact with his helmet to the head and neck area...looking at the play, I could see the call...the rules call for calling when in question. The defender went from low to high in his tackle.

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. ...

  • A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
 
.-.
Sadly as an independent with zero weight in the scheme of things this is one area where we are being hurt by lack of affiliation (I still believe we are better off as we are than if we were to try to return to the AAC).

Standard practice is the visiting school's refs work non-conference games. The ACC officials know they'll face no repercussions if they are slanted towards the ACC school on calls. This does not even need to be a conscious decision, just the lens they are viewing things from. There will never be a case where in a game we are visiting an ACC school that the refs will be as cognizant of borderline calls and to be absolutely sure the call should go against the visiting team before calling it against as they would if they were working for the conference that employs them.
 
Jackson went in with his head up and hit the Duke QB with his facemask. This is how you are supposed to hit to prevent neck injuries. Jackson did not drive the QB to the ground but pushed him. The whole thing was a complete BS call. No targeting and no personal foul.
 
Da_Aisijimo_Gou said:
Obviously, the better team and outcome was not much in doubt. However, unclear initial targeting call even before the post-review change up. Even Puke ex-work colleagues agreed; 2 even questioned the roughing the passer call, then a later defensive interference/holding/whatever call on UConn’s #5.

Inconveniently, not the first incident of conference-affiliated referee teams screwing UConn. Example: shystery MAC refs last season enabling Ball State pulling a win out of what was headed to a Cardinals’ loss. IIRC, also an ACC-crew calls and 1st down ball placements in this year’s NC State game. Others ???

Without conference-affiliated refs, independent UConn’s not in a strong position signing game contracts and has been shystered at times. Today’s change up, absolutely ¥£€#% aggregious.

Next week, Mountain West refs? AAC refs for Rice and USF? ACC shysters again for bcu, etc.

Anyway, 1st sentence, &@%#£ Dook. Arrrrgh! 77-74
Expand ...
You can add two questionable pass interference calls against UConn in the NC State game. In last night's OSU-ND game, the exact defensive play by OSU was not called pass interference as the ones that were called against UConn in that first game. Even though last nights game was a blow out, these early devastating calls by biased officials, chance the temperment of the players on the field and effects the outcome of the game.
 
billybud said:
I think that the refs sure might have...they have been free with targetting calls...they have been notorious about over protecting the players. They made that clear last year.

The UConn defender made contact with his helmet to the head and neck area...looking at the play, I could see the call...the rules call for calling when in question. The defender went from low to high in his tackle.

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. ...

  • A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground
Expand ...
there was neither a crouch nor an upward thrust. Yes, he was going forward. Take that away and we're watching a bunch of mannequins.
 
.-.
buddy said:
You can add two questionable pass interference calls against UConn in the NC State game. In last night's OSU-ND game, the exact defensive play by OSU was not called pass interference as the ones that were called against UConn in that first game. Even though last nights game was a blow out, these early devastating calls by biased officials, chance the temperment of the players on the field and affects the outcome of the game.
Expand ...
Another bad call last night, albeit after the game hit out of hand - the late hit personal foul on Durante Jones early 3rd quarter , when the QB hadn’t even stepped out of bounds yet.
 
billybud said:
Duke got hit with a controversial targetting call against Clemson....ACC refs really are hard on anything approaching helmet/helmet contact...

Expand ...

He went head first like a spear while Jackson went in straight up and tried to knock the pass down
 
Windham4th said:
Jackson's helmet made first contact with Leonard's helmet. Technically speaking it was correct to remove him. That said he was pulling up when it happened so it wasn't an obvious call and they should have been allowed to make that judgment call on the field.
Expand ...
Oh bullshit, if that's the case then they need to be ejecting 10 players every game.
 
I watched the play over and over, and as much as I hate the reversal of the call, it was correct. Jackson's helmet hit the QB in the facemask, Doesn't make a difference if he was "pulling up". That rule needs to be enforced. Mora asked his players to be "maniacal", a term he has used in many of his previous positions. Be careful what you ask for!
 
topogigio said:
I watched the play over and over, and as much as I hate the reversal of the call, it was correct. Jackson's helmet hit the QB in the facemask, Doesn't make a difference if he was "pulling up". That rule needs to be enforced. Mora asked his players to be "maniacal", a term he has used in many of his previous positions. Be careful what you ask for!
Expand ...
I think he hit his shoulder
 
businesslawyer said:
Apparently being interviewed briefly between the halves, Mora basically flat out accused the ACC of cheating.

Replay decisions in games with ACC officials are made in ACC HQ in Charlotte. Apparently they decided no targeting, told the refs on the field, and then on their own called the refs back and told them they changed their mind. Absolutely unprecedented.

That’s not why we lost, but it was inexcusable. Not to get the wrong call, but to deliver the call to the on field officials and then decide you changed your mind.
Expand ...
The refs are puppets, someone or some group in Vegas definitely needed Duke to cover.
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
Apparently being interviewed briefly between the halves, Mora basically flat out accused the ACC of cheating.

Replay decisions in games with ACC officials are made in ACC HQ in Charlotte. Apparently they decided no targeting, told the refs on the field, and then on their own called the refs back and told them they changed their mind. Absolutely unprecedented.

That’s not why we lost, but it was inexcusable. Not to get the wrong call, but to deliver the call to the on field officials and then decide you changed your mind.
Expand ...
The move to take Mitchell out of the game wasn’t the only eye opener I saw. Dukes defense jumping offsides with no call by the line judge at the top of the screen was another one. Another one was in third quarter with around 6 min left in the quarter, the Duke player carrying the ball stepped OB around the 47 yard line and the sideline judge let him go towards another 1st down. Blantant
 
businesslawyer said:
Someone needs to explain to me why human beings feel comfortable accusing people of criminal acts with no evidence to do so whatsoever. Because they are "freethinkers?" Is that just a synonym for not thinking that evidence matters?
Expand ...
People need a conspiracy to keep things going. I think things are usually driven by more subtle or not so subtle biases.
 
The Viking said:
Hey kids, you gotta tackle with your head up. It’s for safety issues. Oh but if the quarterback is the same height as you, tackle a different way.
Expand ...
Rule is an absolute travesty to the game. Unless there is top of head direct and primary contact, it’s utter foolishness.
 
giddyup said:
The rule is an absolute joke and the auto-ejection needs to be put in the trash bin.
Expand ...
That is what I was saying in the game chat. If the officials think it's roughing the passer, which this wasn't, call that, but their is no way they should have the latitude to eject a player unless it's an obvious unsportsman like conduct which this clearly was not.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,160
Messages
4,555,235
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom