Wisconsin/Arizona State ending

[StudyingFutureZebra]

Here's the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-ELRub8n7s

The play ended with 14 seconds, as the Wisconsin QB just places the ball on the ground to end the play. ASU players then jump on the ball, thinking it's a fumble as the clock continues to run, and when the umpire finally gets the ball to spot it there's 3 seconds and counting. Then, the umpire motions for the Wisconsin offense to stay back from the ball.Time runs out, and Wisconsin gets screwed. If players are obviously trying to prevent the officials from getting the ball so time expires, don't you stop the clock, spot the ball, and then start it again on the ready? I'd almost consider that a palpably unfair act to just hold onto the ball so the official can't spot it until there's no time to get the snap off.

[TXMike]

There are a few misstatements in your take.  1 - The U was not telling A to stay away from the ball.  He was telling them not to snap yet.  Wisconsin could have taken their positions on the ball and waited for U to ok the snap.  2 - Players were not "obviously" trying to prevent the snap.  There was legitimate confusion and at least 1 of Team B thought the ball might be loose so he fell on it.  I am pretty sure that is a common response in football when you think the ball is loose. 

[Kalle]

The play ended with 14 seconds, as the Wisconsin QB just places the ball on the ground to end the play.

This statement is factually wrong. Just placing the ball on the ground does not make it dead. We can argue if the kneeling motion by the QB was enough to simulate placing the knee on the ground (which does make the ball dead), but that is something strange enough that no official in his or her right mind should flag a team B player going for the assumed live loose ball.

[StudyingFutureZebra]

My thought was because ASU jumped on the ball after the whistle had blown, that could be considered a stalling tactic to allow time to run off the clock.

What are the rules regarding a review in this situation?

[Kalle]

My thought was because ASU jumped on the ball after the whistle had blown, that could be considered a stalling tactic to allow time to run off the clock.

What are the rules regarding a review in this situation?

Team B may well have been going for a loose ball in the continuing action after incorrectly being ruled dead - which could be reversed by replay. The QB should have given the ball to an official instead of leaving it down on the field.

DB player decisions are not reviewable (The QB took several seconds off the clock by arguing the call. The whole offense took off at least two seconds by not being set when the umpire allowed the ball to be snapped. Both actions were stupid and directly contributed to team A not being able to snap the ball before time expired.)

The knee down ruling is not reviewable as neither first down nor goal line was involved. The only time the replay may get involved for dead ball stuff is for an incorrect down number.

[Tommyjohn44]

I would love to know how R explained that to the Wisconsin coach. I didn't think he simulated a knee. I think he just bent down to set the ball down. It also looked like the QB tried to call a timeout just after setting the ball down.  QB then decides to tell the R that he wants to spike the ball on the next play. Looks like R says "well then go do it." U is clearly confused as to what happened as he sees ball on the ground, a whistle from somewhere and Arizona State jumping on it. ASU lineman are trying to tell him it's a fumble and their ball and he is conversing with them. L and H never indicate crash in to indicate the next play and the R weakly walks in to signal that the ball was down but then quickly backs out.  What a giant mess.  They definitely needed to conference and make a call.

[StudyingFutureZebra]

You can see from both the end zone cam and the sideline view if you look closely that his knee did go down, and the ready-for-play came when the clock hit zero. So even if everybody did get in formation and set as TXMike stated, time had expired when it became legal to snap the ball. I really don't care about either team, but at first glance, this one seemed like another 2008 Washington/BYU or 1990 Colorado/Missouri 5th down where a call or no-call by the officials cost one team the game.

[TXMike]

You proclaim yourself a "studying future zebra" so here is a basic lesson for you.  1 call in a game that has well over 200 plays with multiple calls possible on each one does not "cost a team the game"

[mardunn]

He was down.

Terrible awareness by him to set the ball down rather than hand it to the U though.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Tommyjohn44]

Thanks for that. I went to bed before the game was over and have only seen the espn replay clip online. Haven't seen any other views.

[Rulesman]

You proclaim yourself a "studying future zebra" so here is a basic lesson for you.  1 call in a game that has well over 200 plays with multiple calls possible on each one does not "cost a team the game"

+1 

[HLinNC]

Wait til Grass-hoppah call youth football.
 

[Welpe]

The 2008 Washington/BYU game where the Washington QB threw the ball 40 feet in the air and left themselves at the mercy of the judgment of the officials? And then Washington proceeded to miss the extra point?

You can't even compare that to a 5th down.

I wish you luck in becoming an official. We always need more good ones. I urge you to be slow to criticize the officiating,  especially when you've yet to take a snap yourself. 

[Kalle]

a call or no-call by the officials cost one team the game.

As I said, team A did it all by themselves.

1. QB leaving the ball on the ground instead of giving it to U to have it spotted faster (good hurry-up offenses always hand the ball to an official to minimise delays).

2. QB arguing the call.

3. QB not having his line set waiting for the U to allow the snap.

If I were the coach I would have a long discussion with the QB.

[TXMike]

And the Wisconsin QB admits it
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/pac12/2013/09/15/arizona-state-sun-devils-wisconsin-badgers-referee-controversy/2817637/

[Kalle]

That's an excellent article. Kudos to the QB and both coaches.

[Bullycon]

I wish you luck in becoming an official. We always need more good ones. I urge you to be slow to criticize the officiating,  especially when you've yet to take a snap yourself.

I was amazed at how much better the officiating got in all sports, not just football, after I became a football official. It was as if my mere presence in the ranks lifted the abilities of officials everywhere.

Either that, or I didn't know nearly as much about the rules as I thought I did before I started officiating. That seems unlikely, though.

[justaLJ]

For consideration by the collective wisdom on this board....what about invoking 3-4-3 in this situation?

Our gut on this play is telling us something isn't right.  The way the QB left the ball, B jumping on the dead ball, etc.  There was 15 seconds left when the ball was declared dead, which left plenty of time to line up and spike it.  Was B jumping on the ball an "obviously unfair" tactic?  Probably not, and I wouldn't go down the road of a possible DOG by B either, but the defense got a tremendous advantage, and the net effect was the game clock continuing to roll down while the crew was trying to sort it all out.

After B jumped on the ball, was there an opportunity to get everyone reset (including the crew), and winding it up again with both teams at the line ready to go?

[maven]

For consideration by the collective wisdom on this board....what about invoking 3-4-3 in this situation?

Why invoke anything? If the QB hands the ball to the U, there's no confusion. Why is the burden on the officials to fix the QB's mess?

And, for the record, my gut is fine.

[TXMike]

http://pac-12.com/article/2013/09/16/pac-12-reprimands-game-officials-wisconsin-arizona-state-game

PAC 12 speaks

[Rulesman]

Why blame the player, coach or team when you have an easy target to pin fault on?

[TheRulesGenie]

I'm not too excited about Larry Scott's statement. He understandably cannot criticize the Wisconsin QB/team for how they handled the situation. However, I would like to know what the Pac 12 and CFO think should have happened in that situation. Other than the U shifting to his position 1-2 seconds earlier, I don't think that there is anything else they could have done.

[TXMike]

None of us know what was going on down there and what was being said.  But maybe the PAC 12 was just watching the body language, and since the R and U seemed to be pretty calm, they took that to mean they were not "handling it with urgency".   Maybe if they had been jumping up and down and ripping at the B player to get him off the ball  they would have been judged differently.  In all of this the one thing I have heard that did make some sense was that they (and we when it happens to us, us) could have used the rules to shut it down, get the ball and spot with a RFP and wind on the whistle.

[maven]

I wonder what the "reprimand" amounts to. Might be a slap on the wrist to get the media off his back


maven

[StudyingFutureZebra]

The 2008 Washington/BYU game where the Washington QB threw the ball 40 feet in the air and left themselves at the mercy of the judgment of the officials?

I wish you luck in becoming an official. We always need more good ones. I urge you to be slow to criticize the officiating,  especially when you've yet to take a snap yourself. 

Washington/BYU was a horrible call by the officials to begin with. You don't call UNS unless it's something that's actually unsportsmanlike, like doing an end zone dance or the Lambeau Leap.

Bad officiating gave me the idea to get into it. This is what got my friend who's a Linesman into officiating back in the 90s, in his words: "If you want something done right, you do it yourself."