RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: golfingref on November 19, 2011, 09:36:30 PM
-
As an official, when you have an IW do you admit it? As an official, I feel we should have display the utmost integrity. When your white hat announces over the intercom that there was no whistle or signal given, and you know you did both, shouldn't you admit to it? I feel bad for the Vandy players.
-
I just saw this and thought, Yikes!!! The H is in trouble. He had both a hand signal, a squared off spot, and an audible whistle on tape
-
Why do you say he did not admit the IW? The R's announcement said the player was ruled down.
SEC statement:
SEC issues statement on Vols' overtime TD
November, 20, 2011
By Chris Low
Steve Shaw, the SEC's coordinator of officials, released a statement on the final play of the Tennessee-Vanderbilt game on Saturday, and it sounds like the Commodores got the short end of the stick.
Here's Shaw's statement in full:
"On the last play of the Vanderbilt-Tennessee game, in overtime, the Tennessee defender intercepted the pass, his knee did not touch the ground and he returned the interception for a touchdown. During the play, the head linesman incorrectly ruled that the Tennessee player's knee was down when he intercepted the pass by blowing his whistle and giving the dead ball signal. The play was reviewed as if there was no whistle on the field, and as a result, overturned the incorrect ruling. By rule, if there was a whistle blown, the play is not reviewable."
An incensed Vanderbilt coach James Franklin could be seen going after the officials when the game ended.
-
Another story:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/948623-vanderbilt-tennessee-inappropriate-use-of-instant-replay-incorrectly-ends-game (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/948623-vanderbilt-tennessee-inappropriate-use-of-instant-replay-incorrectly-ends-game)
Tennessee controversially defeated Vanderbilt in overtime Saturday night, thanks, in part, to a misapplication of college football's instant replay rule—even if the end result was practically correct.
When Vanderbilt quarterback Jordan Rodgers attempted to connect with a Commodores receiver on third down in overtime, Volunteers' defensive back Eric Gordon stepped into the passing lane and came away with the football, returning it 90 yards for a game winning Tennessee touchdown.
Or did he?
As the Vols celebrated wildly on the field, Commodores head coach James Franklin pointed towards the ground while the on-field officials huddled up to discuss the play.
When the crew emerged from their conference, SEC referee Marc Curles explained the play to the Knoxville crowd: "The ruling on the field [is] the ball was fumbled, recovered by Tennessee [DB Gordon] with his knee on the ground. Therefore the runner is down, Vanderbilt's series is over and Tennessee gets the ball, first and 10 on the 25 [yard line]."
Ok, that is understandable even if it is distressing. An inadvertent whistle resulted in a dead ball, killing the play and ending Vandy's series of downs. Once the Vols kick their gimme of a field goal, the game will be over.
But that's not where it ended. Instead, the situation was drawn out and things got awfully screwy.
As any official knows, games can be at their easiest when the ball is live. Contests can fall to pieces when the ball is dead, which is exactly what happened here.
After a buzz from the replay booth, Curles once again addressed the Tennessee hometown crowd: "The previous play is under further review. Although the runner's knee was ruled down, there was no whistle or signal."
One problem.
Head linesman Gus Morris appeared to have blown his whistle while signaling Gordon down at the Vols' 11-yard line.
Relying on Curles' explanation, replay official Ben Oldham completed his review, logically ruling Gordon should not have been declared down en route to his game winning TD.
What Curles failed to tell Oldham was that Morris blew and marked the ball dead—Curles had said the exact opposite, that "there was no whistle or signal."
Per NCAA football rule 12-3-3, had there been no whistle or signal—as Curles had announced—the play would have been reviewable.
However, because there was both a whistle and signal, the play was not reviewable.
Unfortunately, per Fox Sport's in-house football officiating analyst Mike Pereira, there is no audio in the replay booth. In other words, Oldham was relying entirely on Curles' explanation to recreate the auditory events that occurred during the play.
It was therefore incumbent of Curles to inform the replay booth that a whistle had indeed blown and the ball had been signaled dead. Alas, he did not and Oldham had no way of finding out until the game was over.
When asked about the game's final play, Vols coach Derek Dooley happily agreed there was no whistle, though audio replay conclusive demonstrates otherwise.
This grave error ended up prematurely ending the game.
The incorrect call was so high profile that SEC coordinator of officials Steve Shaw saw it fit to issue the following statement:
On the last play of the Vanderbilt-Tennessee game, in overtime, the Tennessee defender intercepted the pass, his knee did not touch the ground and he returned the interception for a touchdown. During the play, the head linesman incorrectly ruled that the Tennessee player's knee was down when he intercepted the pass by blowing his whistle and giving the dead ball signal. The play was reviewed as if there was no whistle on the field, and as a result, overturned the incorrect ruling. By rule, if there was a whistle blown, the play is not reviewable.
On the one hand, it is important to note the correct call—an inadvertent whistle causing the ball to become dead after the interception at the 11-yard line—would have still resulted in a turnover and likely would have prolonged Vanderbilt's defeat as Tennessee would have just been required to kick a chip shot of a field goal to win the game.
On the other hand, this was an egregious misinterpretation of the rules—gross miss or ICC, we call them—that directly and immediately determined the outcome of the game.
In determining who to blame for an inadvertent whistle or missed call, that can usually be traced to the one official who inappropriately blew a whistle or threw a flag.
Had this play been reviewed correctly and called a dead ball at the spot of the inadvertent whistle, Vols fans would likely have been terribly upset with head linesman Morris, but only for a few mere minutes until Tennessee would have presumably kicked its game winning FG.
Inadvertent whistles and other simple mistakes are part of the game—officials rarely commit such mistakes, but they do happen and occasionally happen during very high profile plays.
In determining who to blame for an incorrect interpretation of the rules call, officials will tell you it's the entire crew's fault.
Misinterpretation of the rules calls are supposed to never occur. Officials are rules experts and have spent countless hours mastering their sport's rules.
Add that to the fact that a misinterpretation requires all on-field officials to incorrectly apply a rule and you can see why this type of a miss is an exceptionally rare event that might occur only once every three or more seasons.
Instead of Morris being in the hot seat for a few inconsequential minutes, Curles and the entire officiating crew have drawn the utmost ire from Vanderbilt fans for at least a week, because they disregarded what happened on the field of play.
We can't solely blame Oldham—he likely had no idea the whistle had blown.
We can't solely blame Curles—he was running down the field in anticipation of officiating Gordon's return for a touchdown. He might have never even heard the whistle.
We can't even solely blame Morris—we have no idea what he told his crew chief.
Commodores angry about how this game ended will perpetually use the "what if Tennessee's field goal would have been wide?" argument. For these fans, the officials acted as one to demolish Vanderbilt's overtime campaign.
It won't come down to Rodgers' inability to avoid the interception nor Gordon's ability pick off the star QB. It won't even come down to the logical conclusion of "even without the whistle, he would have scored that touchdown."
It will be about an appalling officiating error, a blatant disregard of the rules and—for the most ambitious Vanderbilt fans—yet another manifestation of the SEC's efforts to conspire against their team.
For Tennessee, this was a hard-fought battle that resulted in a well earned victory.
Unfortunately, the most devastating of officiating errors might have just marred this late-season overtime thriller.
It's always easier to blame someone else.
-
I am not a Vandy or Tennessee fan, but I am an official and this STINKS. From where I sit, the SEC officials both lied and cheated - and this is totally unacceptable. As officials, our integrity is always being questioned, and situations like this don't do anything but make it worse for us.
The original announcement was the ruling on the field was that a fumble was recovered by a Tennessee player with his knee on the ground. That was the first lie - there was never a fumble or anything that remotely resembled a fumble on the play. Then, the R announced that there was neither a whistle nor a signal - that is the second lie. There is clear visual (and audible) evidence of the official both whistling and signalling the play dead. Then, for the replay official to ignore that evidence and declare a dead ball live and award a touchdown is just flat out cheating.
I know I am being harsh, but our positions as officials demand integrity and responsibility - especially in difficult circumstances and the officiating crew yesterday failed miserably. Even if the H wouldn't admit to killing the play - what about the S? Why didn't he step up and say something? He was standing directly behind the H while the return was going on. What about the B? Did he not see the H killing the play? There are too many officials on the field to allow this blatant disregard for the rules to occur.
-
Why do you say he did not admit the IW? The R's announcement said the player was ruled down.
I believe the announcement also included words to the effect that a whistle was not blown. That was the only reason IR was able to take a sniff. So at the time, the IW was not admitted. While the game's ultimate outcome may not have been any different, H probably has some 'splaining to do. Not only does it appear he threw his R under the bus, he took his crew and IR with him, too.
-
The original announcement was the ruling on the field was that a fumble was recovered by a Tennessee player with his knee on the ground. That was the first lie - there was never a fumble or anything that remotely resembled a fumble on the play.
Of course there was a fumble. The Vandy receiver caught the ball, turned, and had the Tennessee defender pull the ball away. Since the Vandy player had and lost possession, that's a fumble. A fumble does not have to hit the ground. You say you're an official, read your rule book and learn the definition of a fumble.
Then, the R announced that there was neither a whistle nor a signal - that is the second lie. There is clear visual (and audible) evidence of the official both whistling and signalling the play dead.
Here I agree. There is clearly a whistle when the TN defender is nearing the 30. You can see the H putting his foot on the spot he felt the TN defender was down. I did not see him signal to kill the clock, however.
Then, for the replay official to ignore that evidence and declare a dead ball live and award a touchdown is just flat out cheating.
What did the replay official ignore? He does not have audio of the play, only video. The H never signalled to kill the play. The replay official was told there was no whistle. Based on his VISUAL information, his call was correct.
I know I am being harsh,
No you are being ridiculous and critical without knowing either the rule and the replay conditions.
Where there mistakes made here? ABSOULUTEY! Was the ultimate call wrong? You bet it was. But lying and cheating? No. Dumb mistakes for which they will be reprimanded, possibly even suspended. But no one cheated.
-
There was one camera angle that showed H marking a spot, raising what appeared to be a finger whistle to his mouth (which is the moment when you hear a whistle) and raising an arm to either signal dead ball or give a one-armed stop-the-clock signal (the camera doesn't stay on him long enough to really know what he was doing). Bottom line: major mess.
-
Of course there was a fumble. The Vandy receiver caught the ball, turned, and had the Tennessee defender pull the ball away. Since the Vandy player had and lost possession, that's a fumble. A fumble does not have to hit the ground. You say you're an official, read your rule book and learn the definition of a fumble.
Did you watch the same game that the rest of the free world was watching? Not only did the Vandy receiver not catch the ball - he never even *touched* the ball. So no need for you to reference the definition of a fumble. It might also help if you refer to Steve Shaw's (SEC Coordinator of Officials) statement posted above where he stated the ball was intercepted (or maybe Shaw should read his rule book too).
Here I agree. There is clearly a whistle when the TN defender is nearing the 30. You can see the H putting his foot on the spot he felt the TN defender was down. I did not see him signal to kill the clock, however.
Again, you obviously were not watching the game - there was an endzone shot that clearly showed the HL with his whistle in his mouth and his hand in the air. That same shot shows the SJ stopping next to him. Neither official officiating the play as a return.
What did the replay official ignore? He does not have audio of the play, only video. The H never signalled to kill the play. The replay official was told there was no whistle. Based on his VISUAL information, his call was correct.
Again, you obviously did not see the game - the endzone shot CLEARLY shows the official signalling the play dead. Replay cannot make a dead ball live - no way, no how.
...and I know I am being harsh, but the officials absolutely must have integrity and there was ample opportunity for someone on the crew to just admit to a mistake. They failed to do so and intentionally misrepresented the facts and misapplied the rules.
-
What I'm having a hard time understanding is how they didn't hear the whistle. Granted, there are 100,000 nuts in orange screaming, but whoever blew the whistle blew it loudly. And whoever that was should have fessed up when he heard the R announce that there was no whistle. This isn't cheating, just chicken****.
-
What I'm having a hard time understanding is how they didn't hear the whistle. Granted, there are 100,000 nuts in orange screaming, but whoever blew the whistle blew it loud. And whoever that was should have fessed up when he heard the R announce that there was no whistle. This isn't cheating, just chicken****.
This is my point. H knew he blew the whistle. He should have made sure Curles knew that.
-
H knew he blew the whistle and S also knew that H blew the whistle because he stopped right behind H on the play. Furthermore, I'm assuming H told R that there was a fumble recovered by the defense (which obviously wasn't true). I would doubt that R made it up himself - and he seemed to be pretty out of breath when he announced it, which would indicate to me that he ran down the field with the return. And even further - how could the ruling on the field be that the defender was down (which was announced) if there was no whistle or signal (which was also announced)? That seems to be contradictory.
-
So this whole discussion has gotten hot and interesting to read...but wheres the video?
-
I will have a longer one later tonight after the game replay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWlFbrTqHfM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWlFbrTqHfM)
-
Blue, pretty defensive of the SEC brethern huh?
How many ways can a ball become dead then? and which one or ones take place on this play?
-
Of course there was a fumble. The Vandy receiver caught the ball, turned, and had the Tennessee defender pull the ball away. Since the Vandy player had and lost possession, that's a fumble.
On the TXMike video I don't think the receiver ever had possession, so it was not a fumble but an interception. But, this is semantics, if the interception was made with the knee on the ground, then the ball becomes just as dead as if a fumble is caught with the knee on the ground.
What I don't understand is why on earth did the H not go to the R after the R made the announcement and correct him. There would have been a mess, but it would have been a much smaller mess.
-
What I don't understand is why on earth did the H not go to the R after the R made the announcement and correct him. There would have been a mess, but it would have been a much smaller mess.
Because the R had already gone over and spoken to him before the announcement. I can't say for sure, since I was up in Section CC, but I'd imagine the R was asking the H if there was a whistle or signal.
-
A short video version (appears to broadcast by some local station over there) http://youtu.be/-XKuVolWj-k (http://youtu.be/-XKuVolWj-k)
Longer version (national broadcast) http://youtu.be/J9pfDstX0Lk (http://youtu.be/J9pfDstX0Lk)
Seems to me the Vandy players never stopped so the actions of the covering official and the subsequent video review were immaterial, wrong as both might have been.
-
Seems to me the Vandy players never stopped so the actions of the covering official and the subsequent video review were immaterial, wrong as both might have been.
Maybe the result of the play would have been exactly the same without the obvious whistle and DB signal, but they, along with the video review most certainly are not immaterial.
My question is how does the R announce to the world that there was no DB signal and no whistle (that the world saw and heard), immediately after having a one-on-one discussion with each of his wing officials? I'd rather not speculate on that since that will be up to Mr. Shaw.
-
Maybe the result of the play would have been exactly the same without the obvious whistle and DB signal, but they, along with the video review most certainly are not immaterial.
My question is how does the R announce to the world that there was no DB signal and no whistle (that the world saw and heard), immediately after having a one-on-one discussion with each of his wing officials? I'd rather not speculate on that since that will be up to Mr. Shaw.
They were immaterial because, take them out and what do you have? TD by Tenn and game over. The "fact" is they WERE there, and what was the result of the play? TD by Tenn and game over. I thought our mantra was "get it right"? The "right" thing here was TD by Tenn and game over.
I am not saying there were not some side issues this crew and conference need to address internally but they had no impact on game outcome.
-
Interestingly, this is the same HL that did this:
http://www.refstripes.com/forum/index.php?topic=8485.0
It's one thing to err in judgment as in that case. It's a whole different category when one fails to take responsibility for an IW. It shows a complete lack of integrity and he is certainly not someone I would want to be part of my crew. This would apply to anyone else on that crew that knew what happened, as well.
As in almost all cases, the coverup here is far worse than the crime.
-
They were immaterial because, take them out and what do you have? TD by Tenn and game over. The "fact" is they WERE there, and what was the result of the play? TD by Tenn and game over. I thought our mantra was "get it right"? The "right" thing here was TD by Tenn and game over.
Wow. Based on that theory, there is nothing that anyone can't do in order to "get it right".
From the coaches Code of Ethics:
"b. To gain an advantage by circumvention or disregard for the rules brands
a coach or player as unfit to be associated with football."
Seems appropriate for officials as well. The officials in this situation blatantly disregarded the rules just to "get it right" and in the end did just the opposite based on the rules.
-
They were immaterial because, take them out and what do you have? TD by Tenn and game over. The "fact" is they WERE there, and what was the result of the play? TD by Tenn and game over. I thought our mantra was "get it right"? The "right" thing here was TD by Tenn and game over.
I am not saying there were not some side issues this crew and conference need to address internally but they had no impact on game outcome.
Mike, I will agree with you 99.99% of the time, but you can't "get it right" by ignoring an IW!
-
One thing we may see from all this is even fewer whistles or dead ball signals. More guys may be more likely to let things go, knowing they can be bailed out by IR.
-
Mike, I will agree with you 99.99% of the time, but you can't "get it right" by ignoring an IW!
On 99.99% of the IW's, you can't ignore it. But in this situation it appears only 2 people even acted like there had been a whistle, the H and the S.
-
One thing we may see from all this is even fewer whistles or dead ball signals. More guys may be more likely to let things go, knowing they can be bailed out by IR.
...which is what you you'd have thought they would have done here. But they didn't and we still don't know the rest of the story.
-
On 99.99% of the IW's, you can't ignore it. But in this situation it appears only 2 people even acted like there had been a whistle, the H and the S.
You still had one.
-
They were immaterial because, take them out and what do you have? TD by Tenn and game over. The "fact" is they WERE there, and what was the result of the play? TD by Tenn and game over. I thought our mantra was "get it right"? The "right" thing here was TD by Tenn and game over.
I am not saying there were not some side issues this crew and conference need to address internally but they had no impact on game outcome.
I would certainly agree with you that the "right" outcome likely was TD Tennessee, but I would certainly argue that we can't ignore the rulebook just to "make it right". And how can you be sure that NONE of the Vandy players stopped playing (or even slowed down a bit) based on the TV video? There is no way of truly knowing that. At the end of the day, getting it right is a lot different than making it right.
-
This whole mess started with bad mechanics by the H. I will assume that NCAA keys have him taking the 2nd receiver.
At the snap, he moves immediately downfield. However, this places you out of position when players need to "come back to the ball". At the time of the INT, he was actually closer to the B GL and than the players were. As such, he was not in position to see a bobble that may have taken place, and he was straight-lined in respect to the player's knees.
If he read the play better, he would have held the LS, or at least vacate the LS at a slow rate. Then, he would have seen the action from between the LS and the INT, and he would have properly seen that no knee touched the ground.
-
There is simply no excuse for allowing the R to make a fool of himself by announcing that there was no whistle or signal on the field. The cowardice on display at the end of that game is simply inexcusable. If it were up to me, I'd wish that H well in his future endeavors.
-
1 - Do we know yet that the whistle was blown by the H and not by someone else (or even by someone in the stands)?
2 -The only signal I have seen from the H in these videos is the begining movement of his right arm. We never see if he puts it up as in dead ball or waves as in stop the clock.
-
1 - Do we know yet that the whistle was blown by the H and not by someone else (or even by someone in the stands)?
At 3:51 in the long video, you can see him running in to mark the spot with a finger whistle in his mouth (left hand) as a whistle sounds. I guess it is much more likely that a fan in the stands would mimic an official by blowing a whistle in 3-4 short bursts while the H just happens to be in the middle of squaring off a spot and starting to signal the ball dead with his right arm (4:22).
::)
The S doesn't have a whistle in his mouth (1:45, 3:51). I'm betting the R would have known if he had blown the whistle and not made an announcement that would end up making himself look like a fool. Plus at 1:35, you can see the R is still looking the other direction at the passer. The U doesn't raise his hands (0:15-0:17) and I can't imagine he's officiating a play with the whistle in his mouth. If anyone else on the field blew a whistle, this crew has bigger problems.
2 -The only signal I have seen from the H in these videos is the begining movement of his right arm. We never see if he puts it up as in dead ball or waves as in stop the clock.
I guess we could pretend that he was going to stop raising his right arm and scratch his ear or something, but I think we all know that's not what happened.
-
I also noted at the time Curles came back on for the second announcement that the play was under review, in addition to being winded from the 70 yard sprint, he really looked PO'd. Can't say I blame him.
-
Harsh words from Pereira.
http://multimedia.foxsports.com/m/video/48852538/pereira-week-12-cfb-call.htm#q=mike+pereira
-
Harsh words from Pereira.
http://multimedia.foxsports.com/m/video/48852538/pereira-week-12-cfb-call.htm#q=mike+pereira
Wow - that's about as harsh as you can be while maintaining tact and diplomacy (which he obviously has to do when speaking to a worldwide audience comprised of both officials and the general public). It sucks that this whole situation happened, but hopefully it'll reinforce to the rest of the officiating world the importance of integrity and honesty and courageousness that we must exhibit every time we step onto the football field. These characteristics must be exemplified whether we are officiating a 6th grade game with no cameras present, to a high school game with maybe one or two cameras present for part of the game, to an FCS game where every play is recorded for coach's tape all the way up to the mighty SEC where the game is being broadcast *live* in HD with multiple cameras.
-
"...that was not the truth."
There's the damning comment right there. The official didnt even just blow an IW, it tweeted at least twice that I heard, and he had the whistle in one hand, waving the other. Yeah, no question this crew's credibility is shot because of this.
-
WOW!!!
What a tough group...
Haven't seen the play; don't even care to. Just would like to know, with all the technology available, WHY THERE IS NO AUDIO IN THE REPLAY BOOTH? Simply makes no sense...
As an aside, does the IR in the NFL have audio?
-
1 - Do we know yet that the whistle was blown by the H and not by someone else (or even by someone in the stands)?
2 -The only signal I have seen from the H in these videos is the begining movement of his right arm. We never see if he puts it up as in dead ball or waves as in stop the clock.
Yeah, 'cause nothing says the ball is still live like an official with goal-line responsibility coming into the field with his right hand up and his left hand at his mouth at the spot where the defender "nearly" touched a knee down rather than bothering to cover the play as it moves 70+ yds up field for a score.
I completely agree that Tenn would've scored on the play, unfortunately I don't see anything in tthe inadvertant whistle rule that allows for the officials to decide what is "equitable".
-
Haven't seen the play; don't even care to. Just would like to know, with all the technology available, WHY THERE IS NO AUDIO IN THE REPLAY BOOTH? Simply makes no sense...
As an aside, does the IR in the NFL have audio?
I can't speak to whether or not there is audio in an NFL replay booth, but I do know that an inadvertent whistle is not a reviewable play. Section 9 note:
Note: Non-reviewable plays include but are not limited to:
1. Status of the clock
2. Proper down
3. Penalty administration
4. Runner ruled down by defensive contact (not involving fumbles)
5. Forward progress not relating to first down or goal line
6. Recovery of a loose ball that does not involve a boundary line or the end zone.
7. Field-goal or Try attempts that cross above either upright without touching anything.
8. Inadvertent Whistle
-
I have a question. Surely you need audio to properly review the situation in which there is a fumble, the covering official blows it dead, the ball is recovered shortly afterwards, and there is a question about whether the whistle affected the continuing action?
-
It doesn't matter if an IW "affects the continuing action." An IW is an IW, and there are specific rules governing how they are handled.
-
I have a question. Surely you need audio to properly review the situation in which there is a fumble, the covering official blows it dead, the ball is recovered shortly afterwards, and there is a question about whether the whistle affected the continuing action?
The rules state the replay must show "the clear recovery of a loose ball occurs in the immediate continuing action". This takes the whistle out of the equation.
-
It doesn't matter if an IW "affects the continuing action." An IW is an IW, and there are specific rules governing how they are handled.
I think it might be a bit more complicated. Every IR reversal of runner down into a fumble is technically an IW, isn't it? But IR rules allow us to give it to the defense via clear recovery instead of a strict application of the IW rules. So I'm not sure about your post as written, unless I'm missing something.
-
I think it might be a bit more complicated. Every IR reversal of runner down into a fumble is technically an IW, isn't it? But IR rules allow us to give it to the defense via clear recovery instead of a strict application of the IW rules. So I'm not sure about your post as written, unless I'm missing something.
Agree, 99. I was responding to the statement/question: "Surely you need audio to properly review the situation in which there is a fumble, the covering official blows it dead, the ball is recovered shortly afterwards, and there is a question about whether the whistle affected the continuing action?" I suppose I was thinking more along the lines of considering not every NCAA game has the luxury of IR.
-
Unless I am completely misunderstanding the IW rules for immediate recovery (or interception in this case), if a ball is recovered by the opposing team immediately after an IW or IS (signal), the ball belongs to the recovering team, but (which is the most applicable part applying to this play) no advancement is granted after the change of possession. Play is dead, possession is awarded at the spot of the recovery.
-
Do you have a rule reference for that?
Edit...sorry, misread what you said. You're right the correct ruling should have been Tenn ball at the spot of the interception. Since they were the team in posession when the whistle sounded, they retain posession.
-
Unless I am completely misunderstanding the IW rules for immediate recovery (or interception in this case), if a ball is recovered by the opposing team immediately after an IW or IS (signal), the ball belongs to the recovering team, but (which is the most applicable part applying to this play) no advancement is granted after the change of possession. Play is dead, possession is awarded at the spot of the recovery.
I think you're combining rules for IW and instant replay. If you're working a game with no replay and you have an IW during a loose ball, you do not have the option of awarding it to an opponent that immediately recovers. There is no "immediate recovery" provision related to IWs.
-
Compare the crew of the November 19 Vanderbilt-UT game:
Referee: Marc Curles • Umpire: Brent Sowell • Linesman: GA Gus Morris [sic] • Line judge: Michael Shirley • Back judge: Rich Martinez • Field judge: Mike Washington • Side judge: Bobby Moreau
with the crew of the November 26 Ole Miss-Mississippi State game:
Referee: Marc Curles • Umpire: Brent Sowell • Linesman: Randall Kizer • Line judge: Jim Kelley • Back judge: Rich Martinez • Field judge: Mike Washington • Side judge: Rob Skelton
-
Compare the crew of the November 19 Vanderbilt-UT game:
with the crew of the November 26 Ole Miss-Mississippi State game:
and your point?
-
and your point?
Different H, L and S on the 26th. We're they docked a game?
---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=29.565797,-98.308089
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Different H, L and S on the 26th. We're they docked a game?
---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=29.565797,-98.308089
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wouldn't read too much into it. It is not uncommon for the SEC to shuffle personnel around from game to game.