Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Kgun7, post: 4749829, member: 811"] We can debate the merits of the targeting call all day long. A lot of that is left to referee and officials interpretation. I can live with a referee's opinion, no matter how questionable it is. That judgement is well within their purview. What is NOT subject to interpretation is a 2nd review of a call that was already reviewed and decided. What is the protocol? Who is responsible to initiate a 2nd review? Who is in charge of deciding when a 2nd review is necessary? These are the answers that I need to hear. Because next week vs Utah State, I want to know which reviews are eligible for a 2nd review. The precedent has been set, but the mechanism and the criteria is still unknown. Somebody from the Uconn AD needs to ask the tough questions and find out how a 2nd review was ever granted, and who initiated it. [/QUOTE]