Video of the Pass Interference

[Guest]

Can you link to the rule that you are quoting, that says the offensive player has to TRY to avoid contact, and then goes on to specifically state that what Fuller did was not PI? Because I posted the rule yesterday, and asked you to point out where it said "try", and you never responded.

A poster provided the rules earlier in this thread... Running into a DB does not automatically call for offensive PI per the rules.

edit: for kmoose (and possibly others) - this has been posted twice in this thread, but here it is again.

ARTICLE 8. a. During a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutral
zone, illegal contact by Team A and Team B players is prohibited from the time
the ball is snapped until it is touched by any player or an official (A.R. 7-3-8-II).
b. Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zone
during a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses the
neutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents. It is not
offensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-IV, V, X, XV and XVI):
1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges
and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond the
neutral zone and does not continue the contact more than three yards
beyond the neutral zone.
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bona
fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either
team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When the pass is in flight and two or more eligible players are in the area
where they might receive or intercept the pass and an offensive player in
that area impedes an opponent, and the pass is not catchable.

It does say the offensive player is responsible for avoiding the opponent, however, if the offensive player is being cut off by a DB I don't think this applies. Further, analysts always state that the offensive player has the right to run a route (short of the 5 yard 'engagement' area where a DB can chip or chuck the WR). So in this case, could Fuller have avoided the DB? No, not based on the route he was running. And when the DB jumped his route, beyond 5 yards, this could be interpreted as defensive PI. So the try comes from each player having responsibilities and rules, and the offensive player cannot be held accountable for where the DB interferes with his route.

 

[Guest]

But you can reasonably infer that, if the defender is allowed to contact the receiver up to 5 yards down the field, then so would the offensive player be allowed to contact the defender. As long as the ball is not in the air, that is.

Agree with that. There was no foul either way between CJ and his DB.

 

[kmoose]

A poster provided the rules earlier in this thread... Running into a DB does not automatically call for offensive PI per the rules.

edit: for kmoose (and possibly others) - this has been posted twice in this thread, but here it is again.

ARTICLE 8. a. During a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutral
zone, illegal contact by Team A and Team B players is prohibited from the time
the ball is snapped until it is touched by any player or an official (A.R. 7-3-8-II).
b. Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zone
during a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses the
neutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents. It is not
offensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-IV, V, X, XV and XVI):
1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges
and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond the
neutral zone and does not continue the contact more than three yards
beyond the neutral zone.
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bona
fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either
team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When the pass is in flight and two or more eligible players are in the area
where they might receive or intercept the pass and an offensive player in
that area impedes an opponent, and the pass is not catchable.

It does say the offensive player is responsible for avoiding the opponent, however, if the offensive player is being cut off by a DB I don't think this applies. Further, analysts always state that the offensive player has the right to run a route (short of the 5 yard 'engagement' area where a DB can chip or chuck the WR). So in this case, could Fuller have avoided the DB? No, not based on the route he was running. And when the DB jumped his route, beyond 5 yards, this could be interpreted as defensive PI. So the try comes from each player having responsibilities and rules, and the offensive player cannot be held accountable for where the DB interferes with his route.

I think you are reading this wrong, if you think that it says that what Fuller did was not pass interference. But I have to go to work, after a 13 hour of travelling, just to get to the jobsite, so I don't have time to explain. I'll try to get on in a bit, if there is some down time on the job tonight.

 

[Grahambo]

The rule is ambiguous about this. Sure would be nice if some a-hole at ESPN, FOX SPORTS, or NBC would explain this. I'm looking at you, Mike Pereira!!

Ugh. Not him. I prefer Mike Carey. He does the rules interpretation for CBS. Difference between he and Pereira is that Mike used to actually be a ref.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Ugh. Not him. I prefer Mike Carey. He does the rules interpretation for CBS. Difference between he and Pereira is that Mike used to actually be a ref.

Mike Pereira - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mike Pereira is a former Vice President of Officiating (formerly Senior Director of Officiating) for the National Football League (NFL). He first took over the position in 2001, succeeding Jerry Seeman. He was also a game official in the NFL for two seasons (1996 and 1997) as a side judge on the officiating crew headed by referee Mike Carey.

That said...

However, Danny O'Neil of the Seattle Times wrote that "Pereira has assumed the role of the overzealous defense attorney ... his appearances generally conclude with him concluding that the referees have gotten it right yet again ... Analyst is the title that FOX hangs on Pereira, but advocate is more appropriate"

 

[IrishinSyria]

OFD Films: Iso Cam - Notre Dame-FSU Offensive Pass Interference - One Foot Down


Absolute best break down of the last play I've seen.

 

[kmoose]

It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents. It is not
offensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-IV, V, X, XV and XVI):
1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges
and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond the
neutral zone and does not continue the contact more than three yards
beyond the neutral zone.
2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bona
fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either
team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-IX).
3. When the pass is in flight and two or more eligible players are in the area
where they might receive or intercept the pass and an offensive player in
that area impedes an opponent, and the pass is not catchable.

I'm not sure why you bolded the second sentence here. The "It is not offensive pass interference..." sentence? All that sentence does is set up the conditions where contact would not be considered offensive pass interference. But none of those conditions existed, in Fuller's case.

I'm not sure why the "pass is not catchable" is bolded, either. It was clearly catchable, as it was caught.

It does say the offensive player is responsible for avoiding the opponent, however, if the offensive player is being cut off by a DB I don't think this applies.

I'm not sure why you would think that. The rule lists exceptions to the contact rule, and a DB cutting off his route is not one of the conditions listed.

Further, analysts always state that the offensive player has the right to run a route (short of the 5 yard 'engagement' area where a DB can chip or chuck the WR).

I have never heard an analyst say that a defender has to get out of the way of a receiver, if his route takes him further than 5 yards down the field. In fact, many coaches TEACH their corners to run a guy into the sidelines, to give him less field to catch the ball. Not only that, but the rule specifically states that is the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponent, not the responsibility of the defender to allow the receiver to run his route.

So in this case, could Fuller have avoided the DB? No, not based on the route he was running.

As I have previously stated; I don't think that the initial contact was OPI. But I do think that Fuller caused the flag to be thrown, when he tried to run through the guy. He basically looked like he was trying to "pancake" Darby. This would violate his responsibility to avoid the opponents, spelled out in the rule. At least, I think it leaves an official plenty of room to justify throwing a flag.

And when the DB jumped his route, beyond 5 yards, this could be interpreted as defensive PI.

I don't think it would be Defensive Pass Interference, as Fuller was never the intended receiver. If the officials wanted to, they maybe could have called Defensive Holding on Darby, in that case.

So the try comes from each player having responsibilities and rules, and the offensive player cannot be held accountable for where the DB interferes with his route.

The offensive player absolutely can be held accountable. If not, then why is there even language about it being the offensive player's responsibility to avoid the opponents?

 

[IrishinTN]

 

[connor_in]

Ha ha ha! The joke is on you...that horse is only MOSTLY DEAD

 

[philipm31]

Fuller was being blocked and was attempting to run through the block. BGIF brings up Fuller's head but watch the video again, he slants, gets held up by Darby, looks to Golson who threw the ball to C-Rob and then Fuller looks at C-Rob. So no, again, that's not PI.

BINGO.

He WAS looking back at Golson because Darby cut in front of him instead of covering Robinson, but he was not jamming him as the defender on CJ was. So yes, Fuller was looking for the ball.

And Ramsey was supposed to cover Fuller, but Darby jumped in front of him and blocked Ramsey or ANYONE from covering Robinson. That is a total crap call.

 

[philipm31]

I'm not sure why you bolded the second sentence here. The "It is not offensive pass interference..." sentence? All that sentence does is set up the conditions where contact would not be considered offensive pass interference. But none of those conditions existed, in Fuller's case.

I'm not sure why the "pass is not catchable" is bolded, either. It was clearly catchable, as it was caught.



I'm not sure why you would think that. The rule lists exceptions to the contact rule, and a DB cutting off his route is not one of the conditions listed.



I have never heard an analyst say that a defender has to get out of the way of a receiver, if his route takes him further than 5 yards down the field. In fact, many coaches TEACH their corners to run a guy into the sidelines, to give him less field to catch the ball. Not only that, but the rule specifically states that is the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponent, not the responsibility of the defender to allow the receiver to run his route.




As I have previously stated; I don't think that the initial contact was OPI. But I do think that Fuller caused the flag to be thrown, when he tried to run through the guy. He basically looked like he was trying to "pancake" Darby. This would violate his responsibility to avoid the opponents, spelled out in the rule. At least, I think it leaves an official plenty of room to justify throwing a flag.




I don't think it would be Defensive Pass Interference, as Fuller was never the intended receiver. If the officials wanted to, they maybe could have called Defensive Holding on Darby, in that case.



The offensive player absolutely can be held accountable. If not, then why is there even language about it being the offensive player's responsibility to avoid the opponents?

How do you KNOW that Fuller was not the intended receiver? If FSU covered the play correctly, I guarantee you that Fuller is much more likely to have the ball thrown his way, although Ramsey might have been able to cover the play, as good as he is.

It was not a justifiable call, and certainly not by the guy with the worst view of the play.

At the very least, ND should have had the ball at the 8 or 9 yard line with 1st and goal after the ACC refs "magically" missed the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. ND got jobbed twice on one play, with the game on the line. It was clearly a blown call (2 actually), as well as a blown coverage.

 

[kmoose]

How do you KNOW that Fuller was not the intended receiver? If FSU covered the play correctly, I guarantee you that Fuller is much more likely to have the ball thrown his way, although Ramsey might have been able to cover the play, as good as he is.

It was not a justifiable call, and certainly not by the guy with the worst view of the play.

At the very least, ND should have had the ball at the 8 or 9 yard line with 1st and goal after the ACC refs "magically" missed the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. ND got jobbed twice on one play, with the game on the line. It was clearly a blown call (2 actually), as well as a blown coverage.

The intended receiver was Robinson. I'm not sure how that could even be in question? The pass was thrown right to him. I absolutely agree with you, that the officials missed the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for the guy removing his helmet. They could also have called defensive holding on Ramsey (he was the one "guarding" Prosise?). But........ we could have also executed the last play better. There were two guys standing wide open at the ten yard line on that play, one on each sideline. Koyack was on the near side, and I couldn't tell who was on the other side. But all of Florida State's DBs had run into the end zone with the deep routes. A dump to either one of those guys would have been a better option than just throwing the ball out of the end zone.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

HLS' NDTex posted a rebuttal to LAX's article on Pat Ryan titled, "Notre Dame Fans, There Is No ACC Referee Conspiracy":

Look, I understand that everyone is upset about the offensive pass interference call against Notre Dame which took away a win from Florida State. I am right there with you. But this whole, “there are ACC refs conspiring against us” needs to stop immediately. It’s a terrible look and it isn’t even close to factual.

Thanks to a comment on HLS on Tuesday, I was made aware of a forum post that linked to another blog post which claimed that Pat Ryan, the back judge that flagged that fateful OPI this past Saturday, has a huge anti-Notre Dame bias. The problem is that these claims aren’t based in any kind of fact (the post linked doesn’t even bother to cite these accusations). It’s all rumor and conspiracy theory, hoping that there is something else out there that we can blame more than just the FSU, and other, losses on.

The claim is that Ryan was a back judge in both Michigan 2013 and Pitt 2013 (which he was). Further, David Epperly served as referee for all three games as well. Therefore, there were questionable calls in all three games, notably including a questionable ejection of Stephon Tuitt. All of this supposedly proves that Notre Dame was hosed in each of these affairs.

This is beyond ridiculous and I’m going to kill this now even though it’s probably too late considering Every Day Should Be Saturday has already made a mockery out of this.

Let’s start dealing in facts. Ryan did indeed call the the OPI against ND this past Saturday as he was the back judge for that game. However, let’s take a look at the Pitt ejection of Tuitt:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/SCxuVXRTt3I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Notice, the official with an “H” on his jersey throws the flag (and the ACC officials in the booth, not Pat Ryan or David Epperly, confirmed the call). That stands for head linesman and that man was listed as “Clein, S.” who wasn’t even on the officiating staff of the Florida State game (please see previous link…actually, here it is again). Further, if you look at the discussion between the officials, the back judge, hilariously abbreviated as “BJ”, is nowhere to be found in this discussion.

So let me make this abundantly clear: Pat Ryan had absolutely nothing to do with the Stephon Tuitt ejection against Pitt in 2013. Got it? Good.

Also, Pat Ryan had nothing to do with the three turnovers committed by the Fighting Irish and that -3 turnover margin had a lot more to do with that loss than the questionable ejection. Oh, another fun fact, ND and Pitt received both the same amount of penalties and penalty yards that game.

As for 2013 Michigan, yeah, Ryan and Epperly were there. However, I seriously doubt they were responsible for Rees’ two INTs that game. Also, Michigan actually had more penalties and penalty yards assessed against them.

I’m struggling to see a pattern of the ACC refs trying to screw us over here.

Look, sometimes officials make bad calls. I stand behind my post earlier this week 100%. I don’t think ND committed OPI or should have been called for it. Further, I think the INT at the end of the game shouldn’t have been counted. However, bad calls happen. That doesn’t mean there is some larger conspiracy that the ACC officials are out to get us.

Hell, we even reached out to the ACC asking about officiating crews and how they are comprised. Mike Finn, associate commissioner of football communications, gave us the following feedback:

Even though we have certain base crews that remain the same each week, several members of that crew may change from week to week due to potential conflict of interest rules we have, such as an official cannot officiate a game of his alma mater, or of the city where he works and he cannot work a game if he is a contributer [sic] to a participating school. There are about eight of those rules in all, so several members of the crew may change each week.

And no, we didn’t bother pressing our new partners at the ACC for all of the other rules because everything else that we dug up showed up that would be a waste of both our time and their time.

Again, I say all this not agreeing with the OPI call at the end of the game. The ACC admitted they dropped the ball on the helmet removal as well. These things happen. Even with all of this, Florida State still had more penalty yards than ND did. As I said on HLS TV, this isn’t the reason we lost even though it certainly removed a win.

Yes, it sucks. Yes, I think we got hosed. No, the ACC doesn’t have some larger conspiracy against us.

Remove your tin foil hats. It’s a terrible look.

 

[IrishLax]

HLS' NDTex posted a rebuttal to LAX's article on Pat Ryan titled, "Notre Dame Fans, There Is No ACC Referee Conspiracy":

Well, guess he's right about Tuitt ejection, I had read that elsewhere. And by elsewhere I mean at least a half dozen places prior to writing that article. Should've checked video.

The post doesn't claim -- at all -- that Ryan has some sort of super duper anti-ND bias. In fact it clearly says you can't know what was going on in his head. The STATEMENT is that there is a pattern of ND getting bad calls in games with this guy (and generally Epperly's crew... which was suspended in 2012 by the ACC for incompetency). The IMPLICATION is that the most plausible explanations are bias or incompetency.

It does point out that we're 14-2 in games not reffed by this guy in the last 2 years and 0-3 in ones that are. Every loss had a game-changing bad call in it by that crew, and the "WELL WE COULD'VE PLAYED BETTER REFS ARE NEVER THE REASON YOU LOSE" adage is just completely irrelevant to a discussion on officiating competency.

It does point out that he made a laughably bad call on the last interception, and it does point out he missed the helmet removal.

So half of his post I agree with and my bad for taking something I read elsewhere as fact without double checking.

Sure, it's probably not a grand conspiracy... so if the other explanation (gross incompetency that just happens to go against ND) is the justification we're going with, how is that any better?

 

[Guest]

I'm not sure why you bolded the second sentence here. The "It is not offensive pass interference..." sentence? All that sentence does is set up the conditions where contact would not be considered offensive pass interference. But none of those conditions existed, in Fuller's case.

I'm not sure why the "pass is not catchable" is bolded, either. It was clearly catchable, as it was caught.



I'm not sure why you would think that. The rule lists exceptions to the contact rule, and a DB cutting off his route is not one of the conditions listed.



I have never heard an analyst say that a defender has to get out of the way of a receiver, if his route takes him further than 5 yards down the field. In fact, many coaches TEACH their corners to run a guy into the sidelines, to give him less field to catch the ball. Not only that, but the rule specifically states that is the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponent, not the responsibility of the defender to allow the receiver to run his route.




As I have previously stated; I don't think that the initial contact was OPI. But I do think that Fuller caused the flag to be thrown, when he tried to run through the guy. He basically looked like he was trying to "pancake" Darby. This would violate his responsibility to avoid the opponents, spelled out in the rule. At least, I think it leaves an official plenty of room to justify throwing a flag.




I don't think it would be Defensive Pass Interference, as Fuller was never the intended receiver. If the officials wanted to, they maybe could have called Defensive Holding on Darby, in that case.



The offensive player absolutely can be held accountable. If not, then why is there even language about it being the offensive player's responsibility to avoid the opponents?

When the WR passes 5 yards, the DB cannot hold him nor impede his route to the ball in the air unless he is looking back at it and making a play on the ball. None of that happened as the ball was not thrown to Fuller. What really happened was Fuller ran a fake outside, cut inside, and met the DB who tried to jump the route. At that point, Fuller could not avoid the defender because the defender initiated contact. The rule is not intended to penalize WRs who are running routes and get run into by DBs. If the pass had been thrown to Fuller, it would have been defensive PI. As it stands, it is a no call. Trying to make the argument that Fuller was in any way blocking or setting a pick is ridiculous as the multiple camera angles show.

Any other discussion on Fuller is moot. And we have already discussed (in detail) in this thread how CJ did not commit a penalty. No need to revisit that.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Sure, it's probably not a grand conspiracy... so if the other explanation (gross incompetency that just happens to go against ND) is the justification we're going with, how is that any better?

It's not. I shared the article here mostly just to get your thoughts on it. I agree that it's irrelevant whether Epperly's crew is incompetent or corrupt. Swarbrick ought to tell Swofford that those clowns aren't allowed to officiate another ND game ever again.

It's not like IE has been going on about some grand ACC conspiracy against ND (though I have no idea what was said at NDNation). The vast majority of our discussion on the issue has centered around the propriety of the call.

 

[Cackalacky]

Ha ha ha! The joke is on you...that horse is only MOSTLY DEAD

"TOOO BLAAAVEEEE!"

 

[Guest]

Well, guess he's right about Tuitt ejection, I had read that elsewhere. And by elsewhere I mean at least a half dozen places prior to writing that article. Should've checked video.

The post doesn't claim -- at all -- that Ryan has some sort of super duper anti-ND bias. In fact it clearly says you can't know what was going on in his head. The STATEMENT is that there is a pattern of ND getting bad calls in games with this guy (and generally Epperly's crew... which was suspended in 2012 by the ACC for incompetency). The IMPLICATION is that the most plausible explanations are bias or incompetency.

It does point out that we're 14-2 in games not reffed by this guy in the last 2 years and 0-3 in ones that are. Every loss had a game-changing bad call in it by that crew, and the "WELL WE COULD'VE PLAYED BETTER REFS ARE NEVER THE REASON YOU LOSE" adage is just completely irrelevant to a discussion on officiating competency.

It does point out that he made a laughably bad call on the last interception, and it does point out he missed the helmet removal.

So half of his post I agree with and my bad for taking something I read elsewhere as fact without double checking.

Sure, it's probably not a grand conspiracy... so if the other explanation (gross incompetency that just happens to go against ND) is the justification we're going with, how is that any better?

My view on the referee is that he made a split second decision without all of the information needed to make that decision. He probably thought he was making the right call, but he lacked the visibility to make the call and jumped the gun. It was clearly poor judgement.

He assumed that because two WRs got tangled up with DBs, and that the third ND WR was wide open, that there must have been a penalty on ND. We know that the ACC had to change the official call when it was ruled out that CJ committed a penalty and changed their story after the game. That means the official was wrong in his original call on the field. Also, video analysis of the time he threw his flag, the reaction of the FSU DB's to each other, and the questioning from other officials show the original call was suspect from the outset.

The revised ruling on Fuller was, in my opinion, an attempt by the ACC to save face on a game-ending call on an incredibly big stage. Fuller did nothing on the play to commit a penalty. He simply ran a route including an outside fake and was run into by the DB. None of the DB made any attempt to cover the ND WR in the flat at any time, and therefore any sort of offensive PI call is ridiculous. Internally, the ACC officials will review the tape in detail and offer some sort of discipline along with training on making the right call in those situations. Those types of plays are very common and officials should know how to call them in future games.

In the meantime, one team gets screwed and has to make their own justice. That would be us. Frankly, I am looking forward to the rematch. The first game was simply a great game on a big stage. The rematch will be a statement game of the highest order. Not only to the ACC officials and FSU, but to the entire college football watching world.

All ND has to do is win out and wait their chance while hoping they draw FSU. Then the fun really begins. Given that we are playing more ACC games, this should be the start of a juicy new rivalry much more relevant than Michigan or Purdue.

 

[kmoose]

Trying to make the argument that Fuller was in any way blocking or setting a pick is ridiculous as the multiple camera angles show.

You honestly don't think that Fuller and Prosise were running "rub" routes?

 

[GDomer09]

For the love of God, who gives a shit!!!!!!!!!!

We could all argue this forever with our opinion. The point to make is if it wasn't called NO ONE would be saying we won because the lack of a flag on that play. Therefore there is no argument it should have indeed been a no call. They called a shit penalty and not enough talking heads are against it for anything to happen.

Furthermore you don't go into the undefeated champ’s house and leave it up to a tie breaker for the refs to decide. If we had better clock management at the end we wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. We out played them for 3qrts with shit refs.

 

[tussin]

The fact that we are still having this discussion is all the evidence needed to show that it was an all-time terrible call.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Stewart Mandel just asserted (again) in his most recent mail bag that the call was "clearly correct", and Rick Reilly just tweeted the same fvcking thing. Virtually every sports writer is uncritically repeating the same bullsh!t, and several are going so far as taunting us for believing in an anti-ND officiating conspiracy (seriously though, where are these conspiracy theorists?)

There are three objectively reasonable grounds for criticizing the call:

1. Situational Discretion-- It was a decisive play in arguably the biggest game of the season. FSU had busted coverage, and none of the three DBs on that side of the field were even attempting to cover Robinson (which calls into question whether any of them were "impeded" in the first place). Since the contact at issue had no impact on the outcome of the play, any ref worth his salt would have swallowed his whistle there.
   
2. Not OPI-- As the WSBT video showed, OPI itself is questionable, especially when you take FSU's busted coverage into account, since none of their three DBs were actually impeded from covering Robinson.
   
3. Missed Calls on FSU-- Even if you dismiss the first two arguments, the ACC admitted to missing the Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty on Williams for removing his helmet. And there's a case to be made for DPI against Ramsey and/or Darby as well.

So even if we make every possible inference in FSU's favor, ND still should have at least gotten 1st and goal at FSU's 9 with 13s remaining, which is enough time for 2-3 more shots at the endzone. That's a pretty major fvcking mistake by the officials any way you slice it.

And yet I've not read a single sports writer allude to any of the above. Some have called it a "controversial" call, but far more have simply asserted the refs were right, with a few going so far as to taunt us for being upset by it. Since perception is reality in CFB, this is not simply adding insult to injury.

If you're going to write about the call, be a professional and do some fvcking research. There are plenty of rational bases for criticizing it.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

The head ref sounds like Lurch if Lurch was the product of generations of incest, and he looks like it too. Also his wife is probably ugly and cheating on him. And his dog sucks.

 

[tussin]

Stewart Mandel just asserted (again) in his most recent mail bag that the call was "clearly correct", and Rick Reilly just tweeted the same fvcking thing. Virtually every sports writer is uncritically repeating the same bullsh!t, and several are going so far as taunting us for believing in an anti-ND officiating conspiracy (seriously though, where are these conspiracy theorists?)

There are three objectively reasonable grounds for criticizing the call:

1. Situational Discretion-- It was a decisive play in arguably the biggest game of the season. FSU had busted coverage, and none of the three DBs on that side of the field were even attempting to cover Robinson (which calls into question whether any of them were "impeded" in the first place). Since the contact at issue had no impact on the outcome of the play, any ref worth his salt would have swallowed his whistle there.
   
2. Not OPI-- As the WSBT video showed, OPI itself is questionable, especially when you take FSU's busted coverage into account, since none of their three DBs were actually impeded from covering Robinson.
   
3. Missed Calls on FSU-- Even if you dismiss the first two arguments, the ACC admitted to missing the Unsportsmanlike Conduct penalty on Williams for removing his helmet. And there's a case to be made for DPI against Ramsey and/or Darby as well.

So even if we make every possible inference in FSU's favor, ND still should have at least gotten 1st and goal at FSU's 9 with 13s remaining, which is enough time for 2-3 more shots at the endzone. That's a pretty major fvcking mistake by the officials any way you slice it.

And yet I've not read a single sports writer allude to any of the above. Some have called it a "controversial" call, but far more have simply asserted the refs were right, with a few going so far as to taunt us for being upset by it. Since perception is reality in CFB, this is not simply adding insult to injury.

If you're going to write about the call, be a professional and do some fvcking research. There are plenty of rational bases for criticizing it.

Is the FoxSports website complete crap for anyone else?

Also, Whiskey, main stream sports writers are all idiots. 99% of them have likely never played football in their entire life, and are defending the call primarily on the basis that the ACC came out and said it was correct. That or because Herbie called it correct real-time during the play-by-play. Anyone who objectively takes a step back, looks at the film from all angles, and then takes another step back, and considers the context of the situation will come to the conclusion that it was an all-time bad call. Seriously, among the worst of the worst all-time calls.

Sadly, these guys are national writers... so they don't have the time or motivation to actually do any sort of in-depth due diligence on one play from one team before they write their mailbags.

 

[Emcee77]

Yeah, no one wants to believe that any big game is decided by an incorrect call. The whole point of officiating is to guarantee a fair outcome, and everyone wants to believe that the officials did that here. It just sucks.

 

[Luckylucci]

The one guy thats been driving me nuts recently is Danny Kannell, he's got the Lou Holtz homer thing going on. Kudos to David Pollack who said that the call was BS. He agreed that the coverage was blown and there was nothing the WR's were doing that was stopping the Db's from making a play on Crob.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Newsweek's John Walters just published an interview with Herbstreit on ND v. FSU:

As for the game’s controversial and climactic play, Herbstreit believes the officials got it right (even if the Atlantic Coast Conference has flip-flopped twice as to which Notre Dame receiver committed the infraction, Will Fuller or C.J. Prosise). “I hate it that we had such a great game – in which both teams performed so heroically – get decided by a judgment that an official is forced to make,” says Herbstreit. “That play in that situation is in every playbook in college football, and you may see [offensive pass interference] called one or two times per season. But I have bumped into a lot of people whose opinions I respect and who have no rooting interest since that play, and I have yet to come across a person who considered it a bad call.”

So Herby admits that it happens all the time and is rarely called, but is apparently cool with it deciding the biggest game of the season because of some bullsh!t groupthink? That's not an argument.

 

[kmoose]

Newsweek's John Walters just published an interview with Herbstreit on ND v. FSU:


So Herby admits that it happens all the time and is rarely called, but is apparently cool with it deciding the biggest game of the season because of some bullsh!t groupthink? That's not an argument.

I think the important thing is to keep your eye on the prize. The goal for the season was not to beat Florida State, but to win the National Championship. This team is still in the running for that. If we win out, including the playoffs, then this will become much more of a theoretical exercise than the emotional dumpster fire that it currently is.

 

[yankeeND]

Newsweek's John Walters just published an interview with Herbstreit on ND v. FSU:


So Herby admits that it happens all the time and is rarely called, but is apparently cool with it deciding the biggest game of the season because of some bullsh!t groupthink? That's not an argument.

Yeah he sucks. I've been saying this for awhile. Tired of the ridiculousness that is Herbstreit, Corso, and Howard. I have stopped watching and will continue to do so because it makes me irate. They are a joke, but we will get the last laugh.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Newsweek's John Walters just published an interview with Herbstreit on ND v. FSU:


So Herby admits that it happens all the time and is rarely called, but is apparently cool with it deciding the biggest game of the season because of some bullsh!t groupthink? That's not an argument.

Whiskey, Herbie made an asshole of himself the other night, because his in game justification narrative just isn't what happened. What he said, and why it was wrong, therefore, were absolutely wrong. He hadn't a clue, so there is nowhere for him to go on this. The only play left for him is he has is to shut his mouth. Or refer to outside authority, (what we all did in Sister Mary Elephant's Second Grade class!)

Referring to anonymous sources beyond reproach is the thinnest veiled ploy of all time. "Everyone in the know thinks it was a good play!" Yeah right Herbie, who do you even see since they banished you from Columbus?