This is pretty bad. Clemson vs. Maryland in Death Valley on November 4th, 2006. First, an obvious safety was correctly called a safety by the officials on the field, and then was mysteriously overturned by the booth official upon review.
Watch the video below, and see for yourself. There is no possible way that the player had full possession of the ball before it touched the goal line. It’s not even close!
So now Clemson has the ball at their own 1/2-yard line. Now they run the ball, and the runner is clearly tackled for another safety. Not in Death Valley, with these referees.
Somehow, the refs determined once again that the player was not tackled for a safety, but somehow made it out of the endzone, despite all evidence to the contrary.
If Maryland hadn’t eventually won the game 13-12 on a last-minute field goal, this may have ended up as a much bigger issue for this officiating crew.
Alright, this is probably the worst instance of terrible instant replay officiating that has ever existed.
First, Oregon touches the ball before 10 yards, which automatically results in Oklahoma’s ball at the spot.
Second, The ball clearly ends up in an Oklahoma player’s hands. He’s not even down. He could have run it in for a touchdown if he wanted to, but the refs inexplicably blew the play dead without the ball being in anyone’s possession.
Well that’s why we have instant replay. Surely, the replay official will see all of these obvious indicators that clearly point to Oklahoma being awarded possession. Nope.
Somehow, the replay official determined that it should be Oregon’s ball, despite the fact that no Oregon player ever actually had possession of the ball at any time during the play.
It should also be noted that Pac-10 teams require that their own officials work all non-conference home games, despite the fact that most conferences have the exact opposite policy. If one team gets to play at home, the other conference provides the officials, just so everything is fair. Not the Pac-10, which after watching this, makes you wonder if there’s a reason they insist on this unusual policy.
I just hope that other conferences take note, and start refusing to play away games (or any games) against Pac-10 teams.
As much as I hate bad officiating, I do realize how difficult it can be to make the right call when the play is going at lightning speed. That’s why I think instant replay is so great…. or at least it would be if the instant replay officials were competent.
In this replay, Louisville picks up a bouncing punt, turns and starts running cross-field, when he gets hit by a Connecticut player. The ball comes loose, Terry Baltimore picks it up and runs it in for a touchdown….. or so it would seem.
With the full benefit of replay, the official somehow determines that the Louisville player did not in fact ever have possession of the ball. Huh? Then what was he holding when he took those four steps across the field?
It’s amazing to me that these officials don’t have to answer for such obvious bad calls made when they have a slow motion replay and several angles to work with. Ridiculous!
Okay, so the timekeeper can screw up sometimes. It happens. Everyone makes mistakes. The thing is, when you have video replay, there’s no excuse for not making the right call.
Right here, we have a case where Duke inbounds the ball with 5 seconds left, but passes it right to a Clemson player who shoots and makes a three-pointer. At this point, there should be 2.8 seconds left. The timekeeper doesn’t start the clock on time, and then lets it run after the play in an attempt to compensate. The refs look at the video replay, and somehow determine that it took .6 seconds for the Clemson player to catch the ball, shoot the ball, and make the basket. That’s obviously impossible, which means these refs are obviously favoring Duke on purpose, or completely incompetent. Either way, it’s hard for me to imagine how the ACC could possibly conitinue to employ these referees.
The video shows where the clock would have stopped had the correct amount of time been put on the clock. Obviously, if Duke had 2.8 seconds instead of 4.4, they would have run a different play, but it still would have been far more difficult to convert a shot under those circumstances.
Take a look for yourself, and tell me what you think.