Fuck Big 12 refs

[USNALonghorn 5022]

Frustrating. But if we valued playing defense we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

[Nivek 16772]

12 hours ago, theBlackJuanba said:

Few of the spots they gave OU were hella short. I just looked at it as making up for them missing calls against OU. 

I would happily trade a few 1 yard short spots (which we had) for 10 yard, 5 yard, and 15 yard penalties to be ignored.  

[Nivek 16772]

Just now, USNALonghorn said:

Frustrating. But if we valued playing defense we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

What defense can have 250-300 lbs guys holding them all game long and not wear out?  

[USNALonghorn 5022]

Just now, Nivek said:

What defense can have 250-300 lbs guys holding them all game long and not wear out?  

Nebraska, West Virginia, Kansas State, Tulane (kind of)

[Nivek 16772]

40 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:

Nebraska, West Virginia, Kansas State, Tulane (kind of)

OU vs NU  (8 penalties for 70 yards)

OU vs WV (7 penalties for 43 yards)

OU vs KSU  (10 penalties for 85 yards)

OU vs Tulane (6 penalties for 48 yards)

OU vs Texas (2 penalties for 15 yards)

During the last play of the game, OU committed 3 obvious penalties during one play.  Zero were called.  

[DFW Horn 6088]

1 hour ago, Hookem2147 said:

SIAP but here is the final TD run. That’s Brockermeyer getting hugged as he’s trying to fill the hole.

I worked a little U, too, and that looks like classic "grab & restrict" to me.

[USNALonghorn 5022]

9 minutes ago, Nivek said:

OU vs NU  (8 penalties for 70 yards)

OU vs WV (7 penalties for 43 yards)

OU vs KSU  (10 penalties for 85 yards)

OU vs Tulane (6 penalties for 48 yards)

OU vs Texas (2 penalties for 15 yards)

During the last play of the game, OU committed 3 obvious penalties during one play.  Zero were called.  

The refs were atrocious, but that excuse is tired. Our defensive personnel are not great, but they’re not 106/130 bad. 323 passing and 339 rushing given up to a backup QB that likes to drop snaps is embarrassing. The more I re-watch the second half, the worse it gets. Our DL has terrible pad level and creates no pressure. DEs shoot upfield and take themselves out of the play, just like during the Arkansas game. Our LBs have poor eye control and no ability to shed blocks (even when not held). Our DBs can’t contest an arm punt and look uninterested in tackling by the end of the game. As some point that all comes back to the coaching.

Edited October 12, 2021 by USNALonghorn

[Nivek 16772]

34 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

I worked a little U, too, and that looks like classic "grab & restrict" to me.

Do they teach that when a players upper body is being pulled toward the blocker yet his legs are going toward the ball carrier that is a forward pass?

[DFW Horn 6088]

5 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Do they teach that when a players upper body is being pulled toward the blocker yet his legs are going toward the ball carrier that is a forward pass?

If you ask a legitimate question, I'll attempt to answer it for you honestly. But, once again, I was just a 10-year TASO official who has a decent grasp on NCAA rules and mechanics. I don't know what Big 12 officials have been instructed or trained to do recently.

Fun Fact - TX and MA are the only two states whose high school associations play by NCAA Rules. All other states use NFHS rules and mechanics.

[Nivek 16772]

35 minutes ago, USNALonghorn said:

The refs were atrocious, but that excuse is tired. Our defensive personnel are not great, but they’re not 106/130 bad. 323 passing and 339 rushing given up to a backup QB that likes to drop snaps is embarrassing. The more I re-watch the second half, the worse it gets. Our DL has terrible pad level and creates no pressure. DEs shoot upfield and take themselves out of the play, just like during the Arkansas game. Our LBs have poor eye control and no ability to shed blocks (even when not held). Our DBs can’t contest an arm punt and look uninterested in tackling by the end of the game. As some point that all comes back to the coaching.

Actually complaining about cheating refs is valid when it is valid.  If they weren't corrupt then no one would be complaining.   

[Nivek 16772]

6 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

If you ask a legitimate question, I'll attempt to answer it for you honestly. But, once again, I was just a 10-year TASO official who has a decent grasp on NCAA rules and mechanics. I don't know what Big 12 officials have been instructed or trained to do recently.

Fun Fact - TX and MA are the only two states whose high school associations play by NCAA Rules. All other states use NFHS rules and mechanics.

It was a joke or rather an attempt at one.   I was trying to lighten the mood in here.  And apparently I nose-dived on that one.  

[DFW Horn 6088]

Just now, Nivek said:

It was a joke or rather an attempt at one.   I was trying to lighten the mood in here.  And apparently I nose-dived on that one.  

I get it, you're pissed.

I'm just trying to explain why there was no instant replay on the forward/backward pass ruling based on my understanding of NCAA mechanics. Having not officiated in awhile, things may have changed regarding what plays are reviewed and which aren't. If the H already "punched it back" and ruled it incomplete on the field, it won't be reviewed.

FWIW, I was yelling at the TV on the ineligible receiver non-call and the Williams non-fumble. The many Holding no-calls are also making me ragey, now that I've seen a few more. I'm starting to think we really got fucked.  

But, having done the job, I try to take the high ground when it comes to officiating and share what insights I have into their roles, NCAA rules, and their mechanics. 

[Eskimohorn 5594]

Yep, that's the mechanic taught to both NCAA and TASO officials. 
Unlike [mention=689]Eskimohorn[/mention], you sound like you've actually called football before. Were you a flank official, too, at some point? Some of these guys should sign themselves up immediately with their incomparable vision, being able to discern a 3-inch margin on a "lateral" pass.

It’s taught that way to avoid being controversial, most of the time favoring the offense. That’s bad officiating. But if a ref in good position cannot determine a forward trajectory, then by rule, its not a forward pass. You’re being taught a rule made up by officials because they don’t want to be yelled at or change the game. That a straight line throw is a forward pass, when the rule indicates it is not a forward pass. Change the rulebook.

Take the scenario: Hook and Ladder play. But the lateral is sideways with no visible direction forward or backward. Are you taught to call an illegal forward pass in that scenario? I hope not. You’d be calling something you didn’t see.

If your interpretations are done out of expediency and not the letter of the rulebook, then you’re being taught incorrectly.

To change this, a point of emphasis should be conveyed to teams that sideways passes where the official does not see the ball go forward will not be ruled a forward pass. This will change how teams operate. And, correctly interpret the rule.

[Tex Pete 20123]

30 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

I get it, you're pissed.

I'm just trying to explain why there was no instant replay on the forward/backward pass ruling based on my understanding of NCAA mechanics. chanics. 

Whether it was reviewed or not, it wasn't a forward pass, therefore it was a live ball with a clear recovery by Texas.

[Js1 85008]

45 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Actually complaining about cheating refs is valid when it is valid.  If they weren't corrupt then no one would be complaining.   

I am absolutely going to bitch about the refs when, in a 7 point loss, they didn't overturn that catch on a so obvious illegal touching penalty that Helen Keller would have seen.  That led directly to a TD. 

[DFW Horn 6088]

29 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

If your interpretations are done out of expediency and not the letter of the rulebook, then you’re being taught incorrectly.

Do you really want every hold - by the letter of the law as written in the rule book - to be called? Even those that don't impact the play? This is what you're suggesting here.

[DFW Horn 6088]

41 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

I'm just trying to explain why there was no instant replay on the forward/backward pass ruling based on my understanding of NCAA mechanics. Having not officiated in awhile, things may have changed regarding what plays are reviewed and which aren't. If the H already "punched it back" and ruled it incomplete on the field, it won't be reviewed.

CORRECTION: The H and L will only "punch it back" - with an arm extended behind the LOS - if they're ruling a backwards pass.

My bad 

[taybo20 2812]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I am absolutely going to bitch about the refs when, in a 7 point loss, they didn't overturn that catch on a so obvious illegal touching penalty that Helen Keller would have seen.  That led directly to a TD. 

Or stop to review 2 possible fumbles that could have again changed momentum to us..

[DFW Horn 6088]

11 minutes ago, Tex Pete said:

Whether it was reviewed or not, it wasn't a forward pass, therefore it was a live ball with a clear recovery by Texas.

By the strictest definition in the NCAA Rule Book, yes, a ball thrown 3 inches backwards should be a live ball. I'm just saying most flank officials will probably rule the pass in question forward at game speed depending on his perception, viewing angle, and sight line.

In my opinion, this call wasn't the most egregious error made that day. It's an honest mistake.

[taybo20 2812]

1 minute ago, DFW Horn said:

By the strictest definition in the NCAA Rule Book, yes, a ball thrown 3 inches backwards should be a live ball. I'm just saying most flank officials will probably rule the pass in question forward at game speed depending on his perception, viewing angle, and sight line.

In my opinion, this call wasn't the most egregious error made that day. It's an honest mistake.

It’s kind of the play review was made to help with tho at the same time. Let the play, play out if it isnt extremely clear then use replay to determine if it indeed was forward. 
 

what pisses me off is in that situation and the Williams fumble it was ruled dead immediately which sucked as we got the ball both times 

[DFW Horn 6088]

Just now, taybo20 said:

It’s kind of the play review was made to help with tho at the same time. Let the play, play out if it isnt extremely clear then use replay to determine if it indeed was forward. 
 

what pisses me off is in that situation and the Williams fumble it was ruled dead immediately which sucked as we got the ball both times 

Agreed

Maybe the mechanic should read, "when in doubt, don't rule on a forward/backwards pass". It's mind-boggling to me what instant replay is permitted to correct versus what isn't. I never had it as a crutch, though. Must be nice.

[utee94 15733]

1 minute ago, DFW Horn said:

Agreed

Maybe the mechanic should read, "when in doubt, don't rule on a forward/backwards pass". It's mind-boggling to me what instant replay is permitted to correct versus what isn't. I never had it as a crutch, though. Must be nice.

I mean, I guess it could be nice, if they bothered to use it to review close calls like the sooner fumble in question.  But they didn't.  So it's pointless and useless.  

[Tex Pete 20123]

11 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

By the strictest definition in the NCAA Rule Book, yes, a ball thrown 3 inches backwards should be a live ball.

It was a backwards pass. It was a live ball. This is not confusing whatsoever.

[Tex Pete 20123]

Just now, utee94 said:

I mean, I guess it could be nice, if they bothered to use it to review close calls like the sooner fumble in question.  But they didn't.  So it's pointless and useless.  

Right. It only benefitted them. Lincoln Riley would walk out on the field and cry, then the officials gave him whatever pacifier he cried for.

[DFW Horn 6088]

1 minute ago, Tex Pete said:

It was a backwards pass. It was a live ball. This is not confusing whatsoever.

You should call the NCAA and volunteer to don the whistle and stripes ASAP, because you've obviously got superior vision and judgement than most mere mortals. I'm not confused about the rules whatsoever. I'm trying to explain why it was interpreted as a forward pass.

Reading comprehension fail

[Tex Pete 20123]

Just now, DFW Horn said:

You should call the NCAA and volunteer to don the whistle and stripes ASAP, because you've obviously got superior vision and judgement than most mere mortals. I'm not confused about the rules whatsoever. I'm trying to explain why it was interpreted as a forward pass.

We've had several plays reviewed to call uncalled penalties. There is literally zero legitimate excuse why they can do that but not correct obvious errors on the field.

I saw the play from the upper deck across the field at the time it occurred and yelled about it. If I can see that and tell that it is at least close, an official standing nearby can see that. The replay guys can certainly see it. The question then becomes "Why did they do nothing about it?" They had no issue reviewing the fumble on the kickoff.

[immamac 42400]

No amount of bitching gives the Longhorns a win. The game is over it's time to move on, at this point anyone saying that the refs weren't jobbing Texas is just an idiot. Complaining about it still makes you a fucking whiney asshole though. 

[DFW Horn 6088]

Just now, Tex Pete said:

We've had several plays reviewed to call uncalled penalties. There is literally zero legitimate excuse why they can do that but not correct obvious errors on the field.

I saw the play from the upper deck across the field at the time it occurred and yelled about it. If I can see that and tell that it is at least close, an official standing nearby can see that. The replay guys can certainly see it. The question then becomes "Why did they do nothing about it?" They had no issue reviewing the fumble on the kickoff.

I said the same thing to myself while watching the game, "Was that backwards?"

But, then I heard the whistle and saw the H rule incomplete and let it go. Having never officiated an NCAA game, I honestly don't know what plays are subject to instant replay review and which aren't. Maybe I'll take a deeper dive into the NCAA Rule Book to find out.

Keep in mind that rules, mechanics, and "points of emphasis" change every year. 

[Tex Pete 20123]

2 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Having never officiated an NCAA game, I honestly don't know what plays are subject to instant replay review and which aren't. Maybe I'll take a deeper dive into the NCAA Rule Book to find out.

Watching our games, it is extremely subjective. Lincoln Riley always gets what he wants. Maybe our coaches should try saying something to the officials.

[DFW Horn 6088]

4 minutes ago, immamac said:

No amount of bitching gives the Longhorns a win. The game is over it's time to move on, at this point anyone saying that the refs weren't jobbing Texas is just an idiot. Complaining about it still makes you a fucking whiney asshole though. 

UT wins 99 out of 100 games when scoring 48 points.

It's just venting at this point.

[DFW Horn 6088]

1 minute ago, Tex Pete said:

Watching our games, it is extremely subjective. Lincoln Riley always gets what he wants. Maybe our coaches should try saying something to the officials.

Well, that is Sark's job after all.

He should've been raising hell. I didn't notice. Maybe he's too "California cool"? IDK

[USNALonghorn 5022]

4 minutes ago, Tex Pete said:

Watching our games, it is extremely subjective. Lincoln Riley always gets what he wants. Maybe our coaches should try saying something to the officials.

We can fault butter tits Mack all we want, but one thing he was good at was being up refs asses when required. I hope Sark learned that while shadowing Saban.

[Tex Pete 20123]

2 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

UT wins 99 out of 100 games when scoring 48 points.

It's just venting at this point.

I am merely stating facts. It's a lot harder to play defense when the offense you're trying to stop has its own set of rules.

I am not claiming that is some conspiracy, but obviously Texas isn't the only school that feels victimized.

Again, that piece of shit Bob Bowlsby's comments about Texas (not Oklahoma) were quite telling to me. The conference certainly has a feeling about Texas.

[Nivek 16772]

56 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

Do you really want every hold - by the letter of the law as written in the rule book - to be called? Even those that don't impact the play? This is what you're suggesting here.

The problem with B12 officiating is that they absolutely have called us for holding away from the point of attack and irrelevant to the outcome of the play.   So yes, if the option is to apply the rules evenly throughout the game vs. subjectively called depending on the teams involved of the crews involved, I will happily accept consistent rules and and more ticky-tacky penalties.   It seems that we are seeing the latter already and not the former.  

 

[dcar00 14006]

2 minutes ago, Nivek said:

The problem with B12 officiating is that they absolutely have called us for holding away from the point of attack and irrelevant to the outcome of the play.   So yes, if the option is to apply the rules evenly throughout the game vs. subjectively called depending on the teams involved of the crews involved, I will happily accept consistent rules and and more ticky-tacky penalties.   It seems that we are seeing the latter already and not the former.  

 

if they call the obvious holds early, the OL adjust because they have to or they kill drives.  Thats what I want to see.  but usually its one holding call late against OU to give the appearance that they've been looking for it all game.  It happens all the fucking time.   they love to call a couple if the game is not in doubt and OU is gonna win anyway.

[JBJ 3646]

1 hour ago, DFW Horn said:

Agreed

Maybe the mechanic should read, "when in doubt, don't rule on a forward/backwards pass". It's mind-boggling to me what instant replay is permitted to correct versus what isn't. I never had it as a crutch, though. Must be nice.

It is worded this way:

"When in question a pass thrown in or behind the neutral zone is forward rather than a backwards pass."

That's rule 2.19.2.b.  It is a reviewable ruling.

Edited October 12, 2021 by JBJ

[Tex Pete 20123]

4 minutes ago, JBJ said:

It is worded this way:

"When in question a pass thrown in or behind the neutral zone is forward rather than a backwards pass."

That's rule 2.19.2.b

And then replay clears it right up. Just like reviewing our plays (only Texas plays, though) for OPI a few years back. 

[Nivek 16772]

1 hour ago, DFW Horn said:

I get it, you're pissed.

I'm just trying to explain why there was no instant replay on the forward/backward pass ruling based on my understanding of NCAA mechanics. Having not officiated in awhile, things may have changed regarding what plays are reviewed and which aren't. If the H already "punched it back" and ruled it incomplete on the field, it won't be reviewed.

FWIW, I was yelling at the TV on the ineligible receiver non-call and the Williams non-fumble. The many Holding no-calls are also making me ragey, now that I've seen a few more. I'm starting to think we really got fucked.  

But, having done the job, I try to take the high ground when it comes to officiating and share what insights I have into their roles, NCAA rules, and their mechanics. 

I am actually more disturbed than pissed (that has faded).   When I watch MLB, I am impressed with the officials generally speaking, 80-95 mph balls and they nail the placement what 98% of the time?   

I have actually been impressed with some officials calls and spots before.  I thought Tuta's guys did a nice job in the Louisiana game this season.  Only to watch them fuck up the TCU game.    It almost seems that they switch roles during the game going from spectators on the field (OU on offense) to officials (Texas on offense).   I have no doubt they can do the job.  I doubt their ethics.

 

[JBJ 3646]

Yeah.  I editted to say that it is reveiwable, but the on-field officials are supposed to rule a directly sideways pass from behind the LOS as a forward pass.

[DFW Horn 6088]

8 minutes ago, JBJ said:

It is worded this way:

"When in question a pass thrown in or behind the neutral zone is forward rather than a backwards pass."

That's rule 2.19.2.b.  It is a reviewable ruling.

If it's reviewed after the flank blows it dead, does the defensive team retain possession at the spot of the recovery? What if the whistle is blown before COP?

[Tex Pete 20123]

2 minutes ago, DFW Horn said:

If it's reviewed after the flank blows it dead, does the defensive team retain possession at the spot of the recovery? What if the whistle is blown before COP?

Yes, which is a. why they're not supposed to blow it dead and b. why they often talk about "clear recovery." We just don't get the benefit of the actual rules when OU is our opponent.

[JBJ 3646]

Clear and immediate recovery.  It doesn't matter if a whistle is blown.

[Eskimohorn 5594]

I am merely stating facts. It's a lot harder to play defense when the offense you're trying to stop has its own set of rules.
I am not claiming that is some conspiracy, but obviously Texas isn't the only school that feels victimized.
Again, that piece of shit Bob Bowlsby's comments about Texas (not Oklahoma) were quite telling to me. The conference certainly has a feeling about Texas.

The SEC wants Texas, but know Texas doesn’t have to be elite to bring in viewers. I expect routine screwjobs in the SEC, maybe even more egregious. Out of the frying pan, into the fire. Think we should be independent in football and we’ll regret the move to the SEC where the power teams covet our recruiting pipeline.

[dcar00 14006]

19 minutes ago, JBJ said:

Clear and immediate recovery.  It doesn't matter if a whistle is blown.

correct.  which is why it needed to be at least reviewed but a review would have benefitted Texas only at that point sooooo....

[Eskimohorn 5594]

It is worded this way:
"When in question a pass thrown in or behind the neutral zone is forward rather than a backwards pass."
That's rule 2.19.2.b.  It is a reviewable ruling.

I stand corrected.

[BigHornedLurker 1888]

9 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

The SEC wants Texas, but know Texas doesn’t have to be elite to bring in viewers. I expect routine screwjobs in the SEC, maybe even more egregious. Out of the frying pan, into the fire. Think we should be independent in football and we’ll regret the move to the SEC where the power teams covet our recruiting pipeline.

Im actually not convinced of this, go watch the A&M Bama game. A&M got considerably fairer ref action than we typically get against OU or the infamous OSU game 

If A&M v Bama happened in the Big12, there is 0 chance A&M pulled that off 

[theBlackJuanba 71]

4 hours ago, Nivek said:

I would happily trade a few 1 yard short spots (which we had) for 10 yard, 5 yard, and 15 yard penalties to be ignored.  

Yeah I gotcha man. I destroyed a plastic coke bottle on the Mims touchdown because the holding was so blatantly obvious. Not even gonna mention the receiver stepping out of bounds that led to their first 7 points and the non review of the Williams fumble. 
 

When we get our rematch with those fucks in Arlington, I’ve already planned for bail money to be set aside. 

[Pato del Muerto 52239]

58 minutes ago, JBJ said:

It is worded this way:

"When in question a pass thrown in or behind the neutral zone is forward rather than a backwards pass."

That's rule 2.19.2.b.  It is a reviewable ruling.

That is the dumb way to look at it, now that there is replay. Before replay, defaulting to the safest and least penal choice makes sense. Better to call a fumble an incomplete pass than it is to call an incomplete pass a fumble. 
 

but now with replay, the most damage is done by stopping the play early. Keeping the play live and reviewing it to potentially stop the play when the ball hits the ground is the way it should go.  Otherwise things like clear recovery come into play, and even then there’s some inequity in that the change of possession is awarded but not the result of the play- in this example foster jogged into the endzone for what would be a touchdown.  Awarding the ball at the recovery gives ou a chance to stop the score. 

[JBJ 3646]

11 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That is the dumb way to look at it, now that there is replay. Before replay, defaulting to the safest and least penal choice makes sense. Better to call a fumble an incomplete pass than it is to call an incomplete pass a fumble. 
 

but now with replay, the most damage is done by stopping the play early. Keeping the play live and reviewing it to potentially stop the play when the ball hits the ground is the way it should go.  Otherwise things like clear recovery come into play, and even then there’s some inequity in that the change of possession is awarded but not the result of the play- in this example foster jogged into the endzone for what would be a touchdown.  Awarding the ball at the recovery gives ou a chance to stop the score. 

I believe the rule is that way to protect defenses from questionable double passes.  It existed that way prior to replay.

[JesusSweatDuck 17780]

15 minutes ago, JBJ said:

I believe the rule is that way to protect defenses from questionable double passes.  It existed that way prior to replay.

That makes sense but in the era of reviews it should probably be changed