Okie state vs central michigan debacle....

[thekimmer]

I find it incredible that nobody on a college football crew nor replay crew knew how to interpret such a rule. Even more when you consider that nobody apparently on the staff of a major college football program knew the rule either. Based on the stakes for such an error, every team should have a rules expert on the sideline who's only job is to keep the officials honest.

In any case, I read where both the on-field crew and the replay crew was suspended for two games and at least one of the crews from post season duty as well.

Also, I don't understand why in this instance OSU is not awarded the win because this was not just a bad call within a play that affected its outcome. It was a down that was played after time expired that should have never been played. There is no ambiguity at all about what the outcome of the game should have been so why not correct it?

 

[tenureplan]

I think the rule will be changed at the end of the year. If you intentionally ground it on 4th down to end the game, the other team SHOULD get one shot.

On a side note, why isn't spiking to stop the clock considered intentional grounding?

 

[xxxWalkTheDawg]

On a side note, why isn't spiking to stop the clock considered intentional grounding?

It is allowed by rule. Also, spiking the ball is not preventing a loss of yardage due to a sack.

 

[thekimmer]

Why should the other team get a shot?

I think the rule will be changed at the end of the year. If you intentionally ground it on 4th down to end the game, the other team SHOULD get one shot.

On a side note, why isn't spiking to stop the clock considered intentional grounding?

The purpose of the grounding rule is to penalize a team for avoiding a sack by intentionally throwing an incomplete pass (which you can do legally BTW. Go figure). The penalty therefore fits that infraction by essentially awarding the sack and loss of down, or safety if in your own endzone. The untimed down rule is more related to infractions that do not result in LOD thus it makes sense that the down must be replayed. If you want to change the rule then eliminate the LOD. The offense would still have the ball though so its a moot point.

But we are talking about a rule that does not exist. There currently is a rule that does exist and it says CLEARLY that game was over. In this instance I don't see why that can't and shouldn't be corrected.

 

[mount lefroy]

I find it incredible that nobody on a college football crew nor replay crew knew how to interpret such a rule. Even more when you consider that nobody apparently on the staff of a major college football program knew the rule either. Based on the stakes for such an error, every team should have a rules expert on the sideline who's only job is to keep the officials honest.

In any case, I read where both the on-field crew and the replay crew was suspended for two games and at least one of the crews from post season duty as well.

Also, I don't understand why in this instance OSU is not awarded the win because this was not just a bad call within a play that affected its outcome. It was a down that was played after time expired that should have never been played. There is no ambiguity at all about what the outcome of the game should have been so why not correct it?

1. I was under the impression the spirit of the rule is to prevent the offense from benefitting from an intentional penalty to continue the game. I realize you are correct that the rule states on loss of down situations. I just think that is geared to restrict the offense and if the rule exists beyond this year, it does need to allow for WHAT HAPPENED. That is to say, the defense deserved an untimed down even if the rule stated otherwise.

2. Why didn't OSU just run to the sideline and slide down? did central mich have a time out?

 

[WAdawg]

I agree. There is no judgment call involved. It was a mistake by the refs that if you rectify there is no time left on the clock and no plays left. The fact that they won't change the result is more troubling then the fact that the refs forgot/ misinterpreted the current rule. I don't think you could have a more cut and dry case for reversing the result.

 

[WAdawg]

2. Why didn't OSU just run to the sideline and slide down? did central mich have a time out?

It was fourth down. Clock stops on a turnover on downs.

 

[mount lefroy]

It was fourth down. Clock stops on a turnover on downs.

gotcha. forgot that. I think there were only 4 seconds on the clock to start the play. Still could have run it and slid.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Refs have bad calls that affect the outcome of every game. Should a committee sit down and watch replays of every game to make sure there were no missed holding penalties on each scoring play? Just being Devils advocate. If the coaches didn't know the refs had messed up, then they shouldn't be complaint after the fact.

 

[Drebin]

I find it incredible that nobody on a college football crew nor replay crew knew how to interpret such a rule. Even more when you consider that nobody apparently on the staff of a major college football program knew the rule either. Based on the stakes for such an error, every team should have a rules expert on the sideline who's only job is to keep the officials honest.

In any case, I read where both the on-field crew and the replay crew was suspended for two games and at least one of the crews from post season duty as well.

Also, I don't understand why in this instance OSU is not awarded the win because this was not just a bad call within a play that affected its outcome. It was a down that was played after time expired that should have never been played. There is no ambiguity at all about what the outcome of the game should have been so why not correct it?

The refs bungled the call, but OSU didn't deserve to be awarded the win. I think the way the refs called it is the way the rule should be....the game shouldn't end on an offensive penalty - even if it's a loss-of-down penalty, unless the defense declines the penalty.

The game should have never come down to that - and that's what OSU fans should be concentrating on. Stuff happens...that's why you can't allow yourself to be in a position where one call can beat you.

 

[mount lefroy]

I think the OP's point is that by rule, the game was over BEFORE the rule interpretation was botched.

If that is true, they would not be out of line to rule the game in the favor of OSU.

Put it this way. Would the national championship have been allowed to end like this?

 

[CookieMonster.sixpack]

To me, the call should be reversed. Think of it this way. If after the game was over, the scoreboard mistakenly said OSU lost, would that be final? Of course not! The game was over and a mistake was made post-game. ODU should be granted the victory.

 

[thekimmer]

That is exactly the purpose of the rule...

1. I was under the impression the spirit of the rule is to prevent the offense from benefitting from an intentional penalty to continue the game. I realize you are correct that the rule states on loss of down situations. I just think that is geared to restrict the offense and if the rule exists beyond this year, it does need to allow for WHAT HAPPENED. That is to say, the defense deserved an untimed down even if the rule stated otherwise.

2. Why didn't OSU just run to the sideline and slide down? did central mich have a time out?

So the defense can't, for example, just bear hug all eligible receivers on the last play. The offense cannot possibly extend the game by committing a penalty because the defense can just decline it. That does bring up an interesting thought. What happens if say a receiver pushes off in the endzone on the last play to make a catch and they call offensive PI. You can't decline the penalty, so does the offense get another untimed shot at it from 15 yds away?

I still don't get the logic as to why the team on defense deserves an untimed down in this situation. I can see it if there was a change of possession during the play and the offense committed a foul to stop the ball carrier.

In any case, this is a good reason to consider punting in these situations.

 

[RocketDawg]

I think the rule will be changed at the end of the year. If you intentionally ground it on 4th down to end the game, the other team SHOULD get one shot.

On a side note, why isn't spiking to stop the clock considered intentional grounding?

Spiking is a relatively new thing that is allowed in college football. As I recall, the NFL allowed it several years before the NCAA adopted the rule.

 

[Dawgzilla]

Central Michigan should man up and forfeit the game. There is a precedent for this (google Cornell Dartmouth 1940). I don't think the NCAA official records would change, but it would be a great gesture of sportsmanship.

I can understand why the NCAA wants to stick to the rule that the score is final once the referee declares the game over, but this is the one situation where changing the outcome would be justified. There was no more football to be played, so you cannot argue that you never know what might happen on the final play. The game should have been over.

If OSU works its way into playoff contention, I really wonder how the playoff committee would view this loss.

 

[121Josey]

To me, the call should be reversed. Think of it this way. If after the game was over, the scoreboard mistakenly said OSU lost, would that be final? Of course not! The game was over and a mistake was made post-game. ODU should be granted the victory.

The scoreboard is not the official record of the game. And the game is not over until the head official says that it is over. Replay officials have the final vote and what they say stands.

 

[121Josey]

Gundy is no longer a man. Gundy will no longer accept non-Power 5 officials on the field. Coaches from OK sure are little bitches.

Article

 

[mount lefroy]

So the defense can't, for example, just bear hug all eligible receivers on the last play. The offense cannot possibly extend the game by committing a penalty because the defense can just decline it. That does bring up an interesting thought. What happens if say a receiver pushes off in the endzone on the last play to make a catch and they call offensive PI. You can't decline the penalty, so does the offense get another untimed shot at it from 15 yds away?

I still don't get the logic as to why the team on defense deserves an untimed down in this situation. I can see it if there was a change of possession during the play and the offense committed a foul to stop the ball carrier.

In any case, this is a good reason to consider punting in these situations.

The defense team deserves the untimed down because the offense committed a penalty in order to end the game. The bomb down the field intentionally grounding the ball to use clock was against the rules and a penalty rightfully resulting in loss of down as that rule specifies. Cmu deserved another down just like osu would have if cmu had been offsides.

 

[RocketDawg]

Gundy is no longer a man. Gundy will no longer accept non-Power 5 officials on the field. Coaches from OK sure are little bitches.

Article

You don't agree with him? I do. Just like we shouldn't accept BYU's officials again (the Mountain West screwed us over in Starkville), wherever they get them from, being Independent.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Gundy is more to blame than the refs

Why were they in a position to lose? I'm sure they were heavily favored. I only saw the last 4 seconds of that game, but I'm assuming they played about how we did against USA. He should step up and take the blame for not having his team ready to play and for not knowing the rule book. Also, they allowed CMU to get 60 yards on that last play, when he knew they were going to throw a Hail Mary. OSU fans should be pissed at Gundy, not the refs.

 

[121Josey]

You don't agree with him? I do. Just like we shouldn't accept BYU's officials again (the Mountain West screwed us over in Starkville), wherever they get them from, being Independent.

I'm not sure if you're serious. You seem to indicate that you know that BYU is independent. 15 years later and Mormon missionaries, I mean referees, are still not welcome in Starkville.**

Gundy is butt-hurt and he should schedule Power-5 teams if he wants Power 5 refs. His Big XII(-2) replay officials screwed him out of that game.

 

[121Josey]

Yep. Gundy out-Mullen-ed Mullen. Just punt the football.

 

[thekimmer]

No, CMU did not deserve the untimed down...

The defense team deserves the untimed down because the offense committed a penalty in order to end the game. The bomb down the field intentionally grounding the ball to use clock was against the rules and a penalty rightfully resulting in loss of down as that rule specifies. Cmu deserved another down just like osu would have if cmu had been offsides.

Because the rules very clearly state that they were not. One might not agree with the rule but it is a rule nonetheless. Teams exploit the game rules all the time to secure a win. It is part of the game. This instance is no different. Opining that the rule should be changed is moot as is saying the game shouldn't have been that close. I agree, it shouldn't have been that close but that too is entirely beside the point.

I don't take lightly the act of changing the outcome of a game but this is a unique situation that is very clear cut. It can be fixed easily and should be.