Man, I still can't get over the piss poor officiating

[Irish Envy]

PREFACE: If you are going to bring up the same tired "we should have stopped them" routine, please take it elsewhere. While we should have stopped them in key situations, the players decided those outcomes. This discussion is solely on the impact of the poor calls, of which ran both ways.

The fact of the matter is the officiating crew put what was a great USC win into a cloud of uncertainty... and rightfully so. They did a horrid job officiating the last several minutes of that ballgame, actually the whole fourth quarter.

There are two bad calls in the fourth quarter including the personal foul call on Derek Landri and then also the quarterback scramble by Brady Quinn when his knee was down before the ball crossed the plane of the goal line.

But the last 7 seconds irked me the most. When Leinart scrambled for the endzone and was stopped, the referee had to call one of three things. Unfortunately he didn't know which one to call. He could have either ruled that Leinart fumbled the ball out of bounds, or his forward progress was stopped on the one foot line or he ran out of bounds on the one foot line.

If the ref ruled he fumbled (which I think is the case) then the ball should be spotted where the ball went out of bounds, which was at about the 2 1/2 yard line. This would stop the clock and give USC on more play from the 2 1/2 yard line.

If he decided to rule that his forward progress was stopped, then that would negate the fumble and USC would run out of time because Leinart was stopped on about the one foot line, which is where they marked the ball after the fumble. If he ruled he ran out of bounds at the one footline (as he signaled in his motion to stop the clock) then he was out of position in the first place since he didn't even notice Leinart didn't have the ball in his possession.

Additionally to the blown spot, USC committed two penalties. The first penalty was a 15 yard personal foul infraction on the USC coaching staff for calling a timeout which they didn't have. I'm okay with them not calling this penalty as they ruled that he fumbled, which would negate the need for the timeout, however, because of the blown spot, it ended up calling the integrity of the officials into question.

Second, Reggie Bush's help by placing his hands onto Matt Leinart to push him into the endzone is also a penalty. This one is a five yard penalty and would put the Trojans on about the 5 1/2 yard line with 7 seconds left.

Regadless of the situation, the Trojans should have been playing from either the 2 1/3, 5 1/3, or 15 and 1/3 yard line and not the 1 foot line as handed to them by the officials. This definitely would have caused for alternative strategy, which I don't see them going for it at any of those yardages because they had no timeouts and would not be able to get the field goal unit on the field had they been stopped again like they were on the Leinart scramble.

Yes, we should have stopped them on 4th and 9. And yes, we should have stopped Bush earlier in the game. However, those outcomes were decided by the players within the rules of the game of football. The outcomes that ultimately decided the game in those last 7 seconds were not... they were greatly influenced by the calls (and lackthereof) by the officials.

While officials do make mistakes, this game had National Championship implications and to rush a call was an injustice to each Notre Dame and USC player, coach and fan.

 

[nayers]

couldn't agree more

 

[weisfaninmass]

does a penalty on offense in final minute knock 10 secs of clock by rule so game over???????? or is that only pro?

 

[Irish Envy]

Q. After the punt ball went out of bounds, would you describe what you saw and heard and what kind of explanation was offered?

COACH WEIS: Well, first, I think they got it close to right. I think it was pretty close to being right. The first problem comes with the fact that there's no replay, and that's not a backhanded slap at Pete (Carroll). It's just that when there is no replay, of which I'm a proponent of, you really have a tough time getting a call like that right.

I know the clock ran out and not for one second did I really believe that the clock was really going to run out. So I figured there was still time left on the clock. What bothered me, the referee came over to me and said he fumbled it forward, and then he came over to me and said no, he fumbled it backwards. I said, "Who changed the call?" Well, the same guy changed the call. So the same guy that said he fumbled it forward, he told me the same guy then changed his mind and said he fumbled it backwards.

I said, "Well, how far backwards?" That's the next issue. I mean, I can't really tell. I watched the tape 100 times and I can't really tell. He's so close to the sideline, I don't know if the fumble went back two more yards on the three instead of the one, I don't really know that. So if I say that, it's sour grapes. I just wish that if you had replay, then they might have had the call exactly right. They might have. But we all know that, because we didn't have replay, so without replay, you don't know for sure. But I'm not going to take away from what happened in the game. Still, it was a gutsy decision at the end of the game to do what they did and they got it in there.

And the next thing everyone wants to ask me about is about Bush pushing him in the end zone. Is that illegal? Yes, it's illegal. Would I do the same thing? Absolutely. So I don't want to be a hypocrite and say, well, they were cheating, because is it illegal? Yes, it's illegal, okay, but I'd do the same thing.

I was a little bit more disappointed by the fact that they had a coach out of the box down on the five yard line calling time out when they had no timeouts left. If you want a gripe, that's a gripe. They are out of the coach's box and they are calling timeouts with no timeouts left. Now that's a penalty and that alone puts them out of touchdown scoring range and to field goal range.

But once again, I could cite a whole bunch of things. I basically think that they got it pretty close to right. I'm just not sure where the spot really was, but there was time left on the clock and they would have had at worst they would have had time to spike the ball and kick the field goal. That's at worst. So if that were the case at least you'd be playing for overtime with a chance to win.

But I'm not going to take away from what happened in the game. They won the game, they made a play and you could say Reggie pushed him, which he did, but that's a heads up by Reggie and hopefully any running back I had would be pushing right along with them.

Q. To follow up on what you said there, you said there wasn't one time where you thought the clock was off. I thought I saw you at one point holding your arms up?

COACH WEIS: I'm holding my arms up because what do you want me to do? I'm going to go fight for my guys and I'm always going to fight for my guys. That's my job. I'm supposed to be fighting for my guys. If your players don't see you fighting for them, then what are they going to think of you? That's why I walked all the way across the field. What am I going to do, get a personal foul and give it to him on the half inch line? What difference does it make at that point? I had three time outs left and I didn't want to call a time out and give them a chance to get organized. As it is, they took a very big risk. When you think about with a team that's undefeated, that's the difference between winning the National Championship and losing it, that play right there. That's a little bit of a stretch, and it ended up working out for them. Good for them.

But I'm going over there and saying I said to the official, "Well, let me ask you a question. I mean, who are you going to review whether or not there's any type time left on the clock? There's no replay here. It says there's no time left on the clock so there's no time left."

They said, "No, Coach, there's seven seconds." So you were looking at the clock and saw it was seven seconds. So they probably picked a number; seven is a lucky number, so that's what they ended up picking.

Q. Would it be more like nine seconds?

COACH WEIS: Like I said, I don't know what it was. There was time left on the clock. All I said to them was: "Who are you going to go check to see whether there's time left on the clock? So I thought that was a logical question when there's no replay.

 

[Guest]

The big problem I have is the timeout call by one of the assistant coaches, I found out today listening to Mike and the Mad Dog that is indeed a 15 yard penalty, and considering USC has an unproven kicker, thats not necessarily a chip shot. In fact he missed the extra point after that TD, that would've been the same distance as the FG.

The assistant coach called for time right in front of two referee's, even making the timeout signal. Why even have these rules if there not going to enforce them.

Like Regis said, Charlie Weis will never lose to Pete Carroll again.......

 

[weisfaninmass]

The big problem I have is the timeout call by one of the assistant coaches, I found out today listening to Mike and the Mad Dog that is indeed a 15 yard penalty, and considering USC has an unproven kicker, thats not necessarily a chip shot. In fact he missed the extra point after that TD, that would've been the same distance as the FG.

The assistant coach called for time right in front of two referee's, even making the timeout signal. Why even have these rules if there not going to enforce them.

Like Regis said, Charlie Weis will never lose to Pete Carroll again.......

and the coach was way out of the 'coaching box' -- penalty.

 

[BigIrish]

who knows. maybe they'd have scored from the two. or maybe So Cal would have won in OT. but to end a game like that - where the refs were clearly disoriented and failing to make the proper calls -that's what hurts. i don't care what the gameday crowd - holtz included - say about the fact that aiding a player's forward progress happens all the time without being called. it's true - but so does holding. and it's tolerated because it occurs at low-key where there's not a direct impact on the outcome of the game. but in this sort of situation, where all eyes are watching and the outcome of a game with national title implications is at stake, you make the call because that's the rule and it's the right thing to do.

it's not the fact that ND got beat by So Cal that bothers me. i'd rather see So Cal win their third in a row versus U-M or any of the florida schools, for that matter. Not to mention the fact that it's clear that So Cal's supremacy is waning, and that it's position atop the polls is crumbling, whether the fall comes this year or next remains to be seen.

what bothers me most is that weis was the better coach - it was obvious to any objective observer - and the score failed to reflect that.

 

[Irish1]

good question, i know it's a ten second run off if the clock was running at the time but the team also has to be out of time outs as well. which usc was.......

 

[LuckoftheIrish86]

that call on Landri couldn't have been him. It must have been on another player and the refs just called Landri's number. I've watched the replay a few times and there is abolsutely 100% nothing worth a personal foul call.

 

[Irish Envy]

Okay... I was sour when I wrote this a couple hours ago but I'm now really irked. I just went through the box score listed on both ESPN and on UND.com.

According to the box score, Leinarts scramble was not ruled a fumble on the field, which means they ruled that his forward progress was stopped. If this is the case, the fumble is immaterial and he was stopped in bounds, thus the clock would not have stopped and Notre Dame won the contest.

 

[jiggafini19]

There really isn't much that can be done.

They were Pac 10 officials and there was no replay.

Notre Dame needs to get MAC or Conference USA refs or assemble an "independent" crew of their own. Replay rules should be across the board eventually, but they're experimenting now.

Guys, those last seconds were pure chaos. As I've said, I went from complete joy and elation to total deflation and shock. The officials were only part of the issue. I'm not sure anyone really knew what was happening.

But it is THEIR jobs to keep order.

 

[irish9331]

does a penalty on offense in final minute knock 10 secs of clock by rule so game over???????? or is that only pro?

Only pro

 

[leppycole]

http://search.espn.go.com/keyword/search?searchString=notre+dame&page=images&filter=images

check these out.

 

[Vince Young]

We should've stoppe-- (gets gang-tackled by an angry mob dressed in green and gold.)

Okay, I'll bite... the personal foul looked phantom, but we got away with a personal foul that went uncalled earlier in the game too. Plus the ref might've called the wrong number. A few weeks ago, they called a penalty on a ND player-number that isn't even on the roster.

The fumble call was right, and putting 7 seconds back on looked right too, but that seems to be the consensus from all corners.

On the spot... to be honest, on the replay I saw, it looked like that ball went SCREAMING backwards, but Leinart was pretty darn close to the sidelines. In real-time, when I saw the refs conferencing, my instant reaction was "They're discussing if Leinart got out of bounds!" So, it's entirely possible that the spot at the 1 was correct... or the 2 or the 3. The only way to really KNOW would be with a camera directly overhead. Without that... we're all speculatin'.

On the timeout... I've also heard it suggested that the assistant coach wasn't calling timeout, but rather was trying to signal to the ref that the clock should be stopped because of the fumble going out of bounds. It would help if we knew what he was yelling to the ref. If he was playing games with the refs and calling a timeout he didn't have, heck yeah, flag 'em. If he was arguing that the clock should stop for the fumble going out, no flag.

Outside of the coaches box? WAY outside, clearly. But when's the last time you saw that penalty get called?

The Shove... again, when's the last time you saw that penalty get called? Plus, my understanding of that rule is to keep teams from doing stuff like handing the ball to, say, tiny Joey Getherall and then having, say, gargantuan Chris Zorich grab Joey and throw him over the line of scrimmage. And as Charlie himself said, he hopes his guys would do that shove too. So do I. And I think football has too many stupid piddling rules like that anyway.

You want bad reffing? Look at ND-Pitt last year. THAT was piss-poor reffing, all the way through the game. Just awful.

 

[irishwavend]

Wow...You guys need to get over the semantics...Maybe the spot was a little bad, but the officials weren't awful and it was an F'ing fumble no matter how you look at it. If USC had caused that on us, what would we say? That the ball was fumbled. The Bush push...Big deal...never gets called...What the game came down to was the fact that time just ran out without us getting another chance for a drive...Everybody knew this was gonna be a game of who got ball last. Quit being so sour and get over it...it was a good hard fought game...Don't get me wrong I hate USC more than any other team on the planet, but sometimes the ball doesn't bounce your way.

 

[jiggafini19]

The bottom line is this: If it doesn't get called, get it out of the rule book. OR: if it is in the rule book, start calling it.

THIS is the problem with officiating in every sport at every level. These guys don't know the friggin rules and someone ends up getting hosed in games like this.

The ball should not have been spotted on the one. AT LEAST the 1 1/2 yard line, maybe the 2.

Got BYU?

All of this will mean nothing if they collapse Saturday. Kiss the BCS goodbye with another loss. They have to focus on this weekend!!!

Pac 10 refs. Huge mistake.

 

[Irish Envy]

The fumble call was right, and putting 7 seconds back on looked right too, but that seems to be the consensus from all corners.

But it wasn't ruled a fumble on the field.. Look at the official box score. The rule on the field was that his forward progress was stopped.

USC UND
FIRST DOWNS................... 20 28
RUSHES-YARDS (NET)............ 31-175 52-153
PASSING YDS (NET)............. 301 264
Passes Att-Comp-Int........... 33-17-2 35-19-1
TOTAL OFFENSE PLAYS-YARDS..... 64-476 87-417
Fumble Returns-Yards.......... 0-0 0-0
Punt Returns-Yards............ 3-13 4-87
Kickoff Returns-Yards......... 5-88 4-39
Interception Returns-Yards.... 1-14 2-13
Punts (Number-Avg)............ 6-45.8 5-39.8
Fumbles-Lost.................. 0-0 2-1
Penalties-Yards............... 9-98 6-62
Possession Time............... 21:20 38:40
Third-Down Conversions........ 5 of 13 10 of 19
Fourth-Down Conversions....... 2 of 2 1 of 1
Red-Zone Scores-Chances....... 3-4 3-4
Sacks By: Number-Yards........ 3-20 2-16

What then? He clearly wasn't out of bounds before the ball became separated from his body but the call the ref made was that his forward progress was stopped before he fumbled.

If that is the case, he certainly wasn't out of bounds, nor did the spot matter because he was in bounds and the clock ran out. I don't believe the USC crap about the coach signaling timeout didn't mean timeout... that symbol is univerally known as one thing... we want to call a timeout.

If that's the case, we need to go back and stop the UNC/Michigan title game when Webber didn't mean to call a timeout, he just wanted the ref to stop the clock because he was about to run out of time or turn the ball over.

 

[BigIrish]

The bottom line is this: If it doesn't get called, get it out of the rule book. OR: if it is in the rule book, start calling it.

THIS is the problem with officiating in every sport at every level. These guys don't know the friggin rules and someone ends up getting hosed in games like this.

The ball should not have been spotted on the one. AT LEAST the 1 1/2 yard line, maybe the 2.

Got BYU?

All of this will mean nothing if they collapse Saturday. Kiss the BCS goodbye with another loss. They have to focus on this weekend!!!

Pac 10 refs. Huge mistake.

I agree 100%. If you're not going to make the call, get it out of the rulebook, because it ruins the game when it ends in controversy.

where do you draw the line? how many calls do you avoid making just because they're seldom called? and who grants a referee the discretion to decide what violations should be flagged and what violations should be overlooked?

condoning the lack of a flag for a known violation simply on the grounds that it's seldom called is complete bull$hit. you simply don't overlook rules violations when the game is being played in that sort of spotlight with national title implications when the result of your failure to make the call has a direct outcome on the game.

 

[jiggafini19]

It was so screwed up.

The clock ran down to zero, the students and players rushed the field, he fumbled out of bounds, then got pushed into the end zone.

It's the stuff great finishes are made of.

Makes you want to run up the score so there is no doubt. With some of the comebacks we've seen in recent years, no lead is safe. Pound them and put it away is my theory.

How about the Tuck Rule? Worst screw job ever. There are rules that never get enforced and THAT one came out of the attic? Weis was on the better end of that stick.

 

[ccrit79]

The bottom line is this: Notre Dame's coaches and players outplayed, and outplayed USC! You didn't see any of our players slowing down before the goal line. (Reggie Bush) You didn't see our coaches whining on the sidelines, such as Pete Carroll and his son. What you did see was a team that played their asses off. And a coach that showed the utmost respect by going over to USC's locker room and congratulating them on a great game. That is something that Peter would never do. These are just a few of the things that make me proud to be an Irish fan.

 

[ccrit79]

I also forgot to mention a defense that stepped up and played a hell of a game, even though so many people predicted Leinart to shred them to pieces.

 

[Vince Young]

The bottom line is this: If it doesn't get called, get it out of the rule book.

Fully agreed. Like I said in my first post, I think football has too many stupid piddling rules like that anyway.

 

[Vince Young]

But it wasn't ruled a fumble on the field.. Look at the official box score. The rule on the field was that his forward progress was stopped.

That's clearly a mistake, and it should've been recorded in the box score as a fumble. But just watch the play... Leinart's progress hadn't been stopped for long enough to blow the play dead yet when the ball came out. The correct ruling was a fumble out of bounds, which stops the clock. And that's how they played it. To me, the box score not showing that fumble is a technicality. The refs got it right on the field; the guy upstairs in the box made the mistake there.

I don't believe the USC crap about the coach signaling timeout didn't mean timeout... that symbol is univerally known as one thing... we want to call a timeout.

Hey, I'm not sure I believe it either. I'm just presenting an alternate theory of the crime, so to speak. And if you're trying to signal to the ref that the clock is supposed to stop, what should you do instead, wave your arms back and forth over your head? In the heat of the moment, making a T with my hands is easier and would probably be my first instinct. Not smart, sure, since it could be mis-interpreted and result in a 15-yard-penalty, but people don't always do the smart thing. Just don't make me an assistant coach.

The Chris Webber thing is different, because there it was CLEAR he was specifically trying to call a timeout, and he never tried to deny it.

 

[TomFoolery]

Irish just need to win out- cannot worry about spilled milk- beat everyone else, and the chips will fall into place....(Perhaps this is a case where the "instant replay" should have been utilized.)

 

[KMac151993]

I don't even know if instant replay would have been conclusive enough to spot the ball at anything but the one, without a blimp view of the play its not "certain" were the ball went out, now granted they said he fumbled it backwards anything from the 1 yard line out was fair game. I don't know if he was trying to call timeout or just tell the official to take an officials time out and talk that one over, you had 3 officials all call different things on that play-one ruled touchdown another ruled down and another ruled fumble, I think the coach wanted them to stop the clock to discuss the play. On the other hand it is illegal and a penalty for a coach to be all the way down there like that and should have drawn a flag.

 

[weisfaninmass]

The only thing reviewable and subject to change would have been the spot and the time on the clock.....i would find it hard to believe they would spot it at the one inch line but all else is a guess.

the phantom timeout and reggie PUSH would not have been reviewable.

 

[Rip Rap]

The only thing reviewable and subject to change would have been the spot and the time on the clock.....i would find it hard to believe they would spot it at the one inch line but all else is a guess.

the phantom timeout and reggie PUSH would not have been reviewable.

As Svoboda noted, there were also dubious penalities on one of the punt returns and Derek Landri that may have had greater consequences on the outcome of the game.

I certainly doubt Carrol opposed reviewing calls because he 'just doesn't like it.' He knew that in the hands of somebody like Weis, reviews are a weapon.

 

[BGIF]

The Chris Webber thing is different, because there it was CLEAR he was specifically trying to call a timeout, and he never tried to deny it.

The Chris Webber thing is different but it's also irrelevant as it was when first raised. This is NCAA football not NCAA basketball. The rules are different.

The coach trying to call an additional time out is NOT a penalty in NCAA Football. His presence that far down the sideline was.

Let's at least limit our whine about the refereeing to those rules that are a part of NCAA football.

The "official" stats don't change the outcome of the plays. Mistakes in pass completions, rushing yardage, penalty tallys, etc occur. The score is final.

The "spot" was questionable but not indisputable. USC got the optimum spot.
The coach was in an illegal area and was not penalized.
There was time for one snap regardless of the number of seconds.
Bush pushed. No doubt about it but it wasn't called.

 

[weisfaninmass]

As Svoboda noted, there were also dubious penalities on one of the punt returns and Derek Landri that may have had greater consequences on the outcome of the game.

I certainly doubt Carrol opposed reviewing calls because he 'just doesn't like it.' He knew that in the hands of somebody like Weis, reviews are a weapon.

The thing that i just dont understand about officiating is the INHERANT CONFLICT that exists with "conference officiating". For example, PAC TEN refs get paid by whom? The PAC TEN, right. The PAC TEN makes a hell of alot more money if SOUTHERN CAL wins and goes to the Rose Bowl. More money means everyone associated w PAC TEN wins......even the refs. You can't tell me that there are not 'winks' from the PAC TEN office in big non-conference games like this one to the officials.

Additionally, you know that PETEY knows each official by name and their wife and kids name. This doesn't factor in a game like this? It has to.

HENCE - no replay.

As far as ND, we don't have "ND officials".

 

[BigIrish]

eh....i buy into the concept of poor officiating - they were bad for this game, on both sides of the ball. remember shark's catch out of bounds to keep a drive alive?

but i don't buy into the officiating conspiracy theories. these guys might be paid by the pac 10, but they're officiating a game on national tv where the fans and media have the benefit of instant replay even if the teams and coaches don't. a ref blows too many calls, and he'll get crucified in the court of public opinion, as will the pac 10.

you've got to believe that the majority of officials will set aside personal relationships during game time and call a game as best they know how. their reputations are based on their integrity on the field, and most of them take pride in that.