College Football Official Week 2 Thread

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Yeah, the ruling was wrong, but it was just.

The rule makes sense for situations other than 4th down. They want to prevent the offense from getting another opportunity when they commit a loss of down foul. (And this is what the example in the official rules is about). I agree with the rules being written that way. There needs to be an exception added for 4th down situations.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

The rule makes sense for situations other than 4th down. They want to prevent the offense from getting another opportunity when they commit a loss of down foul. (And this is what the example in the official rules is about). I agree with the rules being written that way. There needs to be an exception added for 4th down situations.

There should be. We'll agree on that much. It's just too bad a team had to get ripped off so it's discussed.

As to what pisses me off, it isn't people trying to have a deeper conversation about the rule, it's people justifying the call yesterday to do it. The call was NOT just. It was wrong and it screwed the correct team out of a win.

I knew the rule on this for a long time and it never bothered me. I can see now why people might not like it, but it's been in existence for a long time and nobody gave a crap about it or questioned how "fair" the rule was until yesterday.

If it was Central Michigan beating Michigan, I would guess the conversation would be going the same way. If it allowed Ohio State or Alabama to beat a team like Boise State in the playoff, I doubt there would be a lot of "well, they missed the call, but the right thing happened, so that's cool"

[JPhillips]

We just disagree on whether it was just. IMO the offense shouldn't be allowed to end the game on a penalty. I get that was the wrong call, but I'm not going to get upset that a team wasn't able to win on an offensive penalty.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by TroyF

As to what pisses me off, it isn't people trying to have a deeper conversation about the rule, it's people justifying the call yesterday to do it. The call was NOT just. It was wrong and it screwed the correct team out of a win.

Except that's not what I was doing when I responded to the post about what OK State's plans were on that final play.

I knew the rule on this for a long time and it never bothered me. I can see now why people might not like it, but it's been in existence for a long time and nobody gave a crap about it or questioned how "fair" the rule was until yesterday.

And I'm still confused as to your whole take on this. I mean, your first post described situations that didn't even include a penalty and now you're acting like this is a situation that has come up all the time. I can tell you I've never before seen a situation where it was 4th down and intentional grounding was called with no time left on the clock. If so, I would've complained about the rule whenever I first heard about it.

[JPhillips]

tarcone?

[tarcone]

That's awesome. But not me. Typical looking Iowan though.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by Butter

In fact, if there is such a thing as civil disobedience by football referees to allow that play while still knowing the rule says the opposite, I'd be OK with it.

Yeah I basically couldn't disagree with this more. The refs have one job. That job is not to make sure the team that they think deserves it wins. It's to officiate the game according to the rules. How stupid the rules are or are not is not the slightest bit relevant to their job. That's other people's jobs, not theirs.

I'm glad CMU won the game, but I would much prefer them to lose than win on a blown call.

[dawgfan]

In the interest of piling on to a rival school, gotta love Mike Leach opting to go for it on 4th and 1 at the Boise State 13 yard line late in the 3rd quarter, down 24-7. A field goal there makes it a 2-score game. So of course the Air Raid offense fails to convert there, and the Cougs end up losing by...3 points.