Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Identifying The 19th-Best Team In Baseball

Boise State 33, Virginia Tech 30: In Which I Break My Own Rule About Not Complaining About Officiating

I can't stand fans who complain about the officials or try to use them as an excuse to why their team lost. It's really just stupid. Unless there's a blown call at the end of the game that negates/allows points, then there is no way the officials can actually cost you the game. At the end of the day, the officiating usually effects both teams the same, unless you play in the SEC. Then the officials are actually out to get your team.

That said, allow me to complain about the officials in Virginia Tech's loss to Boise State on Monday.

Star-divide

My one question is about a play on Boise State's final drive. On second-and-five, Kellen Moore completed a pass to Austin Pettis, who scampered down the sideline and stepped out of bounds at the 26.

However, Pettis didn't know he stepped out of bounds and kept running down the sideline for another half second before getting tackled by Bruce Taylor, who also didn't know Pettis had stepped out of bounds. Taylor was flagged for a late hit taking the ball from the 26 to the 13.

The way the Broncos were moving the ball, it was inevitable that Moore would find Pettis in the end zone two plays later for the score. Does the 13 yards Taylor was penalized affect the outcome of the game? Probably not. Was it the right call? I don't think so.

Here's my issue with that call. Before the 2008 season, they expanded the replay rules to include plays where it was originally ruled a player had stepped out of bounds. The ruling could be overturned by replay and, in some cases, result in a touchdown being awarded to the player who was originally ruled out of bounds.

I forget who it was who said it at the time, maybe Mack Brown, but one prominent coach complained about the rule, basically saying that instead of teaching kids to play to the whistle, they were now having to teach them to play through the whistle and it could result in penalties like the one assessed to Taylor.

Pettis didn't know he was out of bounds and tried to advance the ball and Taylor did his job by trying to stop him. I don't think either player heard the whistle, if there was one. The officials even conferenced after the play before announcing the late hit penalty.

It's absolutely incredible that we can have a rule in effect where a call of a player being out of bounds can be overturned by replay and still penalize defenders for trying to stop ballcarriers who are obviously trying to advance the football because they don't know they've stepped out of bounds.

It was a bad call, the officials on the field should have discussed it and waved the flag off and it's something I'm sure we're going to see again at some point in the future. The call itself didn't affect the outcome of the game, although it did affect field position. I also hope it doesn't affect the way Bruce Taylor plays in the future.

Taylor did his job and got flagged for it. If he lets up in another situation, there's a chance Pettis scampers into the end zone while Taylor tries to not draw a flag. I think this is a case where college football has two rules that contradict each other and it needs to be fixed before it does have an effect on the actual outcome of a game.

[PS - The odds of me correctly using the effect/affect rule in every use above is zero.]

Comment 21 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Agreed

I’m a bronco fan and I have to agree with you that the call was very suspicious. It appeared to me that Pettis looked in-bounds to the VT defense and he was appropriately tackled by Taylor.

It is an unfortunate thing for that call to have been made.

I want to believe that even without that call we would have still come up with 7 points, but who can ever know.

All I can say is that it was a heck of a game from both sides, and I salute you guys and your team.

"The brothers, they don't think I know a butt-load of crap about the gospel, but I DO." -Nacho

by BroncoFever on Sep 8, 2010 4:39 PM EDT reply actions  

Classy to hear from a BSU fan

by chicagomaroon on Sep 11, 2010 1:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

Pettis didn’t know he was out of bounds and tried to advance the ball and Taylor did his job by trying to stop him. I don’t think either player heard the whistle, if there was one. The officials even conferenced after the play before announcing the late hit penalty.

The whistle blew at roughly the same time that Taylor hit Pettis (it not just a little bit before). I think the referees really need to re-evaluate what they can expect of a player with regards to stopping when the whistle blows. The late hit personal foul should only be used when it is obvious that the player has a chance to stop the hit. Taylor was in mid-hit motion when the whistle blew. What is he supposed to do? Defy the laws of physics to stop moving? Just because the whistle blows doesn’t mean the players can stop right away.

↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → b a (select) start

by renstar on Sep 8, 2010 4:55 PM EDT reply actions  

You’re absolutely right!

by chicagomaroon on Sep 11, 2010 1:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

AP was going out of bounds at the same time the VT player dove to knock him out of bounds

Where the VT dude wrapped up AP was clearly out of bounds. I don’t think the late hit call is about AP stepping out of bounds a couple yards up the field. I think it’s because where AP was tackled was out of bounds.

Now, it wasn’t intentional. The VT guy’s momentum carried himself out of bounds. As his momentum was carrying him out, AP was moving to the left (ie, out of bounds). It wasn’t anyone’s fault, but where the tackle occurred was out of bounds. AP landed in the grass after getting tackled. That’s why there was a late hit called.

Doesn’t get called every time, but that will get called enough not to make it controversial – unless it happens on a scoring drive in a close game.

We want to build a university our football team can be proud of. -- Dr. George Lynn Cross

by marktgarten on Sep 8, 2010 5:00 PM EDT reply actions  

if the officials agreed with your accounting of what happened, they would not have thrown a flag. The rules don’t say that you’re not allowed to hit someone who’s out of bounds, period. They say that you can’t hit someone out of bounds when you could have stopped yourself upon seeing that they were going out.

by hokiegrad on Sep 9, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good point, except

I looked at it again yesterday from a better you-tube clip which showed more of the play than what I saw on the 8th.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg1hwrN5bok&feature=player_embedded

See around 4:38. The VT guy clearly could have chosen not wrapped up AP’s legs. Bumping into AP might not have been intentional, but actually tacking him was. Good call and still not controversial.

We want to build a university our football team can be proud of. -- Dr. George Lynn Cross

by marktgarten on Sep 10, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed.

I don’t want to place blame on the refs for losing the game. After all, they didn’t cause VT to give up 17 points or run a poor drive at the end of the game. But that call was borderline at best and should not be called in that situation. Taylor was trying to make the tackle (and keep the clock from stopping/stop potential touchdown), not delivering a late hit. That’s extra yardage that BSU really did not need. Do they score without the Taylor penalty? Yes, I bet, but that’s only because I have 0 confidence in any of my teams protecting a lead. But still, horrible call.

Pirates, Vikings, Hokies. I'm used to heartbreak. At least I have the Penguins....

"When I put on my uniform, I feel I am the proudest man on earth."
-The Great One

by blackjackfishtaco on Sep 8, 2010 6:06 PM EDT reply actions  

yeah.

We’re not blaming the refs for this game one bit. In fact, we were on the favorable end on 2 pass interference no-calls. Late hits can be tough calls, but I was going bananas after this one. The rule has to be more subjective. If a player is running completely parallel to the sideline and is just inches out of bounds like that, you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the defender. It’s just too difficult for a defender to react to a whistle so quickly, if he even heard it. Who knows, maybe Pettis was being smart and knew he was barely out of bounds in order to confuse Taylor. But i think we all agree that a TD on that drive was inevitable. KM had all day to throw.

btw i think the rule of thumb is ‘effect’ is usually used as a noun, and ‘affect’ is the verb. looks pretty good to me.

by Jodoma on Sep 8, 2010 8:11 PM EDT reply actions  

Yep

The officiating was spotty the entire night. A couple of pass interference calls against Boise State were nothing short of ridiculous, and there were two that should have been called against Virginia Tech that were not. At the same time, the block in the back on VT’s final punt should not have been waved off. That looked like a clear cut penalty to me. All in all, it is very difficult to complain about the officiating in this game as bad calls and bad no-calls were prominent against both teams. When Austin Pettis was hit out of bounds it ended up being a 13 yard penalty, as it was half the distance to the goal. The way Kellen Moore was focused and in the zone on that drive it would not have mattered whether or not the penalty on Bruce Taylor was enforced. As a viewer by television or if you were there at the stadium, it is impossible to tell what the officials saw. They were there on the field right in front of the action, a much better view than any spectator/viewer has. The officials determined that Pettis was out of bounds and that Taylor had sufficient time to see that. Whether the whistle was heard or not or when it was blown, the refs felt that Taylor had time to see where Pettis was and make a decision, and he decided to finish the hit. It resulted in a penalty and that is that. If our offensive coordinator had not chosen the most idiotic plays for Tyrod Taylor and the offense to run the possession before then we would not even be having this conversation. Let’s focus on the things we can control and let the refs officiate. Tell whoever is calling the plays that running the ball on the third down keeps the clock running and an incompletion stops it. Blame him for the loss, not the referees.

by zelf112 on Sep 8, 2010 10:40 PM EDT reply actions  

counter-point

i agree about the late-hit call on Austin Pettis being a bad one. Unless you were a fan with a birds eye view from the television or an official with a sideline view you never would have seen Pettis stepping out of bounds. The official was obviously not an Isaac Newton groupie.

In regards to the block-in-the-back call, however, after watching the replay of the game tonight I heard Kirk Herbstreit make an interesting comment that I missed on Monday. After it happened he relayed a conversation he had with an official at the NCAA Football Officials Conference (slow summer?) he attended, which boiled down to the official saying they are taught to call a potential block-in-the-back by looking at the direction in which the blocked player falls. If he falls on his stomach they throw the flag. If he falls on his side or on his back they do not. The VT player falls on his side which is I guess why it was overruled. Anyway, interesting to know. Good game Hokies.

by intergalactic_bronco on Sep 9, 2010 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

Big Ten officals hate the BCS

No not really there were bad calls and missed calls going both ways, hell I lost my voice yelling at them all night calling them BCS homers.
Fact is on the late hit call the official blew his whistle loudly which can be herd long before the hit.

This thread however is unbecoming of the V-Tech fans I meet before during and after the game you have harmed your reputation.
One should always follow their own advice.

by Darth Prophet on Sep 9, 2010 1:01 AM EDT reply actions  

No one in this comments section

has blamed the officials for the loss. In fact, I’m kind of impressed at how civil and somewhat thought-provoking both sets of fans have been here. And my entire point was this particular call sheds light on the dangers of having a rule that makes it possible to overturn a referee’s decision that a player was out of bounds. You’re basically teaching kids to hit late, just in case the replay comes back to rule otherwise.

A bullhorn, a bottle of whiskey and a dream. Gobbler Country | Twitter | Facebook

by furrer4heisman on Sep 9, 2010 2:23 AM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed to your response to Darth Prophet

The whole conversation has been very reasonable.

I think DP post is precisely why I wanted Tech to win this game specifically so bad.
I think the BSU fans needed to lose this game to come back down to Earth a little bit.

by VT1996 on Sep 9, 2010 6:53 AM EDT up reply actions  

VT1996;

I am actually really surprised as well at how civilized this has all been from both sides. Most comment sections turn into either racial remarks or personal attacks on someone who may disagree with a point of view. I think that if Boise State had lost, their fans would have been absolutely devastated, while the team would have been fine a day or two after. Fans always take things harder than they should. As far as BSU fans coming back down to earth, they would have gone lower than that! Intergalactic_bronco (love the name, by the way); that is an interesting point about what the refs look for when they decide whether to call a block in the back or not. Again from my bad view of what was going on from my couch, it sure looked like a block in the back. But that’s why the referees are there and that’s why they get paid. They see things a lot better than we do.

by zelf112 on Sep 9, 2010 11:30 AM EDT reply actions  

VT HOLDING on every play

Are you JOKING??? VT was holding all night long. I was actually seriously contemplating conspiracy theories (and still am) regarding the bcs and the big ten officials (Jim Delaney’s boys) calling the game. There was one play in particular when one of the Boise DE’s GOT TACKLED right in front of the official and no call. The only reason VT came back was because of all the holding.

by Art Pennypacker on Sep 9, 2010 2:34 PM EDT reply actions  

Art, you obviously don’t know a lot about football, or else you would have heard the old adage “there is holding on every play of the game”

by chicagomaroon on Sep 11, 2010 1:48 AM EDT up reply actions  

Amazed

@ VT’s speed and agressiveness. We were lucky to come out of there with a “W.” I sincerely hope VT continues to compete the same way it did against Boise State. And I’m not just saying that because it will help our BSC bid.

by boisest8 on Sep 9, 2010 4:44 PM EDT reply actions  

One more thing, then I'm done with this game

Guys,
The refs are always bad. Every game, for every team. It evens out in the end. VT lost this game because of lack of execution and poor clock management at the end. I have no worries that they’ll bounce back. I’m actually going to go bold and predict that they do not lose the rest of the year.

by Leonard Thompson on Sep 10, 2010 11:27 AM EDT reply actions  

Ouch...

Nobody could have prdeicted that loss. Ouch.

by boisest8 on Sep 13, 2010 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

Anyone who thinks that the alleged block in the back call should NOT have been waved off is clueless. As the announcer on ESPN said the next day – when they were commenting on the game and on that play specifically – the refs look to see how the “affected” player lands. If he lands on his front then it IS a penalty as that indicates that he was clearly hit in the back. BUT……..stay with me now clueless ones………IF the “affected” player lands on his BACK (which is how the Virginia Tech player DID land) then it is a LEGAL hit and he was NOT hit in the back.

Secondly, the replay, which they showed over, and over, and over, and over, and OVER again the next day on ESPN clearly showed that the Boise State guy initiated that BLOCK from the SIDE……..if you couldn’t see that then you either are blind or you are just incapable of seeing what is true and what is not true.

Lastly, it matters not………….Boise State – which had already been called for 11 (mostly ridiculous) penalties in that game would have still scored on that drive. It only took Boise State 38 seconds to cover 56 yards on their last drive and they still had more than a minute left when they did score. Another 25 yards would have made no difference.

The officiating in that game – as a whole – was very poor. But that call that they waved off is one of the ones which they got correct. If you can’t agree with that then you simply aren’t worth talking to about much of anything. As the old saying goes – there are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

by Kelly G on Sep 11, 2010 12:21 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to SB Nation's Virginia Tech Hokies community.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Can we still call it Beamerball?
Small
VT beat themselves, they were the more dominate team.
Small
VT caps 12-2 season with 27-20 victory over Michigan!
Small
My Good Hokie Fans
Small
NYE in New Orleans
Small
University of Michigan fans...
Small
Three Important 4 Stars
Small
Worried. We are outmatched here against Michigan
Lazy_sit_small
This needs to be played and repeated . . . often
Small
Can Virginia Tech make the 2011 National Championship Game?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managing Editor

Vt_jug_band_small furrer4heisman

Contributing Editors

36937_1407079748247_1570020053_30963868_6279841_n_small Casey Richey

Photo_3_small chicagomaroon

Photo_276_small Mark Trible

Small Courtney Lofgren

Meeee_small Ty Hodges

Me_small VTCody

Small debbieballard