Jump to content

Big12 games are rigged

Zavala

By Zavala
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54012

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

You’re an idiot. 

I'm starting to think he's trolling, because no one is this stupid.  

This is like my wife complaining about penalties -- she doesn't know the rule book or watch football enough to understand what a penalty is and what isn't.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beau Vine

Beau Vine 54012

Posted
Posted

I don't know how anyone could think that this fucking clownshow of a conference could rig a game of musical chairs, let alone a football game:

Quote

The Big 12 Conference office Monday acknowledged that a Kansas State player initiated the block that caused Oklahoma’s Trejan Bridges to touch the ball on an onside kick with fewer than two minutes left in the Wildcats’ 48-41 upset Saturday.

After Bridges made contact with the ball, Oklahoma’s Brayden Willis recovered it and officials initially ruled the Sooners had possession. But after a three-minute review, it was determined that because Bridges made contact with the ball before it had traveled 10 yards — known as “illegal touching” — it was Kansas State’s ball. Per NCAA Rule 2-11-4-c, illegal touching can’t happen when a player on the receiving team is blocked into the ball by an opponent, which is known as “forced touching.”

OUrulebookexplainer.jpg

Big 12 coordinator of officials Greg Burks said during a Monday media teleconference that while illegal touching is reviewable, forced touching is not. “If you don’t have a touch ruled on the field, you obviously can’t have forced touching, and even if you did, the question of forced touching is not something that falls under the replay review guidelines,” Burks said.

But Bridges’ touching of the ball isn’t the only thing Big 12 officials reviewed during that play.

Under NCAA replay review guidelines, only five plays involving kicks can be reviewed: 1. Touching of a kick. 2. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball. 3. Kicking team player advancing a ball after a potential muffed kick/fumble by the receiving team. 4. Scrimmage kick crossing the neutral zone. 5. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch the ball on an onside kick.

In an email to The Athletic late Monday afternoon, Big 12 spokeswoman Joni James Lehmann wrote, “Replay looked at both aspects of the play that by rule is reviewable: touching of the kick; and timing of a block by the kicking team. In looking at the timing of the block, it was determined the block was initiated by the receiving team.”

Once that was determined, the only thing left to review — per NCAA rules — is whether Bridges touched the ball. And he clearly did.

If this all seems confusing to you, well, that’s because it is. And the Big 12’s response — from a statement to the pool reporter to Burks’ 13-minute teleconference appearance — has only muddied the waters further.

So let’s review — pun absolutely intended — what happened.

After Oklahoma cut K-State’s lead to seven with 1:45 remaining, Sooners kicker Gabe Brkic attempted the onside kick, which bounced toward the OU sideline. Bridges collided with a Kansas State player, then hit the ball, causing it to change its course. The review changed the recovery. But because it seemed as if Bridges had been pushed into the ball, many questioned the ruling.

The media is allowed to request a pool reporter to get answers on confusing rules situations after a game. The Tulsa World’s Kelly Hines was required to submit her question — if the forced touching rule was applicable — and everyone waited about 30 minutes while referee Reggie Smith and conference officials in Dallas decided how to respond. At one point, Hines said a Kansas State official told her “he didn’t think the situation warranted a pool reporter talking to the officials.” Smith eventually read a statement to her (that statement later was disseminated to the media), and no follow-up questions were permitted.

Smith’s statement: “We did consider all aspects of forced touching. However, based on Rule 2-11-4-c, this is why we came to the decision that we came to. Rule 2-11-4-c was the primary determination for considering forced touching.”

What Smith didn’t say was that forced touching is not reviewable. His statement implied that officials did review for forced touching and created confusion over the ensuing 48 or so hours. Thus, Burks’ appearance on Monday’s teleconference.

Burks was asked if officials had missed forced touching on the field.

“Generally, we don’t talk about judgment,” Burks said. “But after having this conversation with Rogers Redding, the national coordinator, I do not believe there was forced touching on this play. The rulebook talks about ‘engaged’ and ‘blocked into.’ As officials, what we discussed is active and passive. If a player is actively involved in a block and is touched by the ball, that is not considered to be forced touching. The additional contact by the second Oklahoma player on the play, all of those things went together. … I don’t believe we would have had forced touching.”

That is a judgment call. The K-State player extended his arms and pushed Bridges into the ball, and the Big 12 acknowledges that Bridges did not initiate the block. And the “second Oklahoma player” referenced — Austin Stogner — only came in after Bridges already had been pushed.

It all happened quickly and reasonable people can come to different conclusions. But the bottom line is this: Smith, Burks and the Big 12 generally are on solid footing in terms of the way things played out when it came to the replay.

As confusing — or, depending on your perspective, frustrating — as it may be that officials can make a call, review to see if there was illegal touching without determining why there was illegal touching, then overturn the call, the Big 12 seems to have followed the letter of the law in this case.

The problem is what happened after the game. The pool reporter system exists for transparency’s sake, and what happened after the game in Manhattan was in diametric opposition to transparency. Smith’s statement was perplexing. All he had to do was explain what parts of the play were reviewable and which weren’t. Sure, a lot of people may have been angry or annoyed by the lack of a forced touching call on the field, but at least there would have been some measure of clarity.

Asked Monday about the confusing statement, Burks said, “The pool reporter’s question was about forced touching. So we responded to the pool reporter’s question and quoted the rule. … What should have been asked was, ‘Is that reviewable? And what is reviewable on a kick?’ which is a different question.

“I think we leave it up to the media to figure out what question they want to ask. And so while that probably didn’t answer the question the way (she) intended, we answered the question the way it was asked.”

First, they did not answer the question. And second, five extra words — “Forced touching is not reviewable” — or simply allowing a follow-up question or two would have helped immensely. Burks has no idea what Hines’ follow-up questions might have been.

Burks went on Monday to say that the Big 12 is “reviewing the policy” regarding pool reporters, which right now is, apparently, that a pool reporter submits a question, which is then forwarded to the Big 12 office.

“We’re very clear that the only thing we can talk about is rules, not judgment,” Burks said. “So I just made it clear to Reggie that he was to quote the rule that was questioned. … It’s difficult for the referees because we understand that media wants all aspects covered, but under our current policy, we just address the rule that was questioned.”

I’m not saying that referees should hold a news conference after every game (that’s not the worst idea in the world, though), but allowing for a little more back-and-forth between the official and the pool reporter in these types of situations definitely would be beneficial to everyone.

Heck, we’ve seen the Big 12 ignore their stated policy of “rules not judgment” this season.

After the Red River Showdown, a pool reporter was allowed to ask referee Mike Defee several questions about why he called a pre-game unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on every player from both teams. During that interview, Defee said, “At the end of the day, I guess disappointment to a certain extent. We’ve got two of the best teams in the country, let alone the Big 12 Conference. This is the 115th playing of this great game and to have that kind of thing happen is disappointing. We can’t control that as officials. The primary responsibility of the officials is two-fold outside of just the playing rules. One is player safety and two is the integrity of the game. What happened out there is an embarrassment to everyone.”

“Disappointing”?

“Embarrassment to everyone”?

That sounds like “judgment” to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Hot Dog Buffet

The Hot Dog Buffet 1291

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

I don't know how anyone could think that this fucking clownshow of a conference could rig a game of musical chairs, let alone a football game:

 

It's kind of amazing how so many people are upset about OU not getting bailed out of their loss by the referees. A forced touching call on that play would have been a travesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3649

Posted
Posted
On 10/26/2019 at 3:49 PM, BigVegasHorn26 said:

I don’t know if games are rigged, but it’s utterly amazing how bad we routinely get fucked.  

Yep.  I don't remember the last time a judgement call went in our favor, but I can name about two examples from every game where a specious penalty eliminated a big play or extended the opponent's drive.

The gray area where it's hard to figure out what exactly consitutes holding or pass interference or roughing the passer pretty much always works against us.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Zavala

Zavala 1384

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Iowa State reciever is held, flag is thrown. On third down, pivotal point in the game where Iowa State is trying to find some life and get back in the game.

Nope, Mike Defee the juice head talks him out of it and he picks up the flag. 

Edited by Zavala
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Zavala said:

Iowa State reciever is held, flag is thrown. On third down, pivotal point in the game where Iowa State is trying to find some life and get back in the game.

Nope, Mike Defee the juice head talks him out of it and he picks up the flag. 

That guy has been on a payroll for a long time 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Squared

El Squared 1793

Posted
Posted

Since there is no actual accountability or significance to obviously bad calls , there I no incentive to stop refs from affecting game outcomes with their agenda. People who act like this is somehow impossible are still in grade school and don’t understand the universe I’m its most basic form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted

As horribly obvious as the PI by OU DBs on the last 2 point conversion were,  the ISU WR couldof/shouldof caught it anyway to win the game.  Still got mauled from the left and right before the ball got there and it certainly was in the air.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gravy Train

Gravy Train 974

Posted
Posted (edited)

Not quite, the agenda is still pumping OU.  Baylor has been fucked by three calls in this game, two of which led to 14 points.  Fowler even called them out on a too-generous 3rd down spot that wasn't reviewed and offered an extra two yards that was converted.

Edited by Gravy Train
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1384

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

There is clear video evidence to anyone with fucking eyeballs. 
 

The conference needs to die. The review system needs to die. It’s all bullshit 

The review system is rarely used in all the real college football conferences, it works fine when they do use it.

B12 refs stop the game every other play to have a little huddle and get their story together. Then the review system is used just to fix the game if they slip up.

I mean the ref closest to the fumble when Hurts got the ball taken away didn't make a call. Nobody made a call. They had a conference and had to talk about hmmm are we gonna call that a fumble err wut...

No other conference does that, because the refs just call what they see. They immediately make the calls. If they get it wrong they maybe review a quick replay and fix it or not but they don't have a conference to see if they should call a fumble a fumble when the official is 2' away from the action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trey3216

Trey3216 15325

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Zavala said:

Every bailout call

Every close call

They get every call all game lulz

Apparently you didn’t see the tackles holding #93 and #99 for Baylor all game and never getting called for it.   It was another pathetically called game in the Big XII, which is pretty much every game.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wood

wood 11186

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Zavala said:

Every bailout call

Every close call

They get every call all game lulz

Yeah we got outplayed by Baylor for sure, but got damn, it was pretty unreal. Their DBs could do whatever they wanted to our WRs, esp Eagles, right in front of the refs. No flags at all, but if we breathed on their guys, you better believe that shit's getting called. One time the Rapelor DB obviously interfered with and facemasked Eagles. Right in front of the ref. Nothing.

How about the BU rb with the stiffarm to the facemask? Don't we get called for that shit every time the last few years? And did anyone see what actually happened with the run of OL Unsportsmanlike penalties? 

Edited by wood
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trey3216

Trey3216 15325

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Not a Sock said:

Zavala can you fuck off to SEC Rant and stay there?

Or create zebrarant dot com, so he can bitch and moan about referees in every sport.  Make all kinds of forums so he can bitch about FINRA, the real SEC, then top it off with sports referees.  Would have tens of members 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...