pretty good analysis of the game

[leavingthezoo]

monday morning quarterback (http://story.scout.com/a.z?s=451&p=2&c=557921)

too many good points to hand pick.

sorry if it's already been posted

[Jewstin]

Ah, good stuff ... I posted it in another thread but was hoping someone would start up a new one.

The larger and much more important debate about the onside kick, though, is a debate that's worth having in football circles: where is the point when bad officiating (and bad replay evaluating) becomes something more than mere "bad luck," and winds up tainting the outcome of a game in a manner akin to a gambling fix or a stolen election? The point of this question is not to promote conspiracy theories; any suggestions that referees or conference commissioners are somehow "on the take" is irresponsible, grossly unfair, and mean-spirited. The point of the above question is to draw an important distinction between losses that are due to bad luck, and losses in which a team is truly robbed. Since pass interference is a judgment call, one can say that LSU received "bad luck" against Auburn, but that the outcome wasn't "tainted." However, it sure seems that Oklahoma didn't just get a bad break; the Sooners fell under the category of teams that got robbed in broad daylight. This opens up a larger discussion about officiating and luck in college football

That's one of my favorite parts.

[Texas Golfer]

The Pac-10 likes to claim superiority over other conferences when they play head up with them but, when it's their officials every time, doesn't it give the Pac-10 the advantage?

I wonder, with the undisputed biases of the Pac-10 officials, will the Pac-10 have difficulty scheduling non-conference opponents of any quality?

The Pac-10 is boasting that they went 4-0 against the Big XII. What they are not saying is that there were Pac-10 officials calling each of those four games.

[NC_Tigah]

any suggestions that referees or conference commissioners are somehow "on the take" is irresponsible, grossly unfair, and mean-spirited.:confused: Not in the case of blatant misinterpretation of an instant replay. Mean-spirited? --- hardly

[8timechamps]

What is most amazing to me is that EVERYONE that saw that replay (regardless of team loyalty) knows what happened with the exception of the officating crew.

How can that be allowed? Something more than a slap in the wrist needs to happen about this.

This ranks #1 on the list of bad calls in any sport in any era. Period!

[Texas Golfer]

What is most amazing to me is that EVERYONE that saw that replay (regardless of team loyalty) knows what happened with the exception of the officating crew.

How can that be allowed? Something more than a slap in the wrist needs to happen about this.

This ranks #1 on the list of bad calls in any sport in any era. Period!

I disagree. Even the officiating crew knows what happened. They knew what they were doing when they did it. It's not that they didn't see it the same way the rest of the world saw it. They called it like they wanted it to be, not was it was. It was a conscience decision.

[Sooner Eclipse]

Holy ****!!!

I sent him an email earlier this morning in regards to his 9/16 article in which I complained about the use of the word controversial among several other points. I think he actually read it, and responded to it.

Below is what I sent him. See if you agree. Anyway, I think this is one of the most well thought out and accurate articles I have seen yet.


Dear Mr. Zemek

Thank you for presenting an article concerning the poor officiating in the OU/UO game on Saturday. I share your feelings in this matter and applaud you for speaking out. However, the most egregious misdeed during the onside kick was the fact that the officials awarded possession of the football to Oregon despite the fact that OU clearly recovered the ball. Not the controversy over the illegal touch. The national media (read ESPN) continues to gloss over this play and refer to it as controversial. It is not controversial, it is WRONG.

It is not obvious in live action, but during the reviews it was obvious that no one in the scrum had possession. One of the reviews clearly shows the ball squirting out from beneath the players and ending up between the legs of OU player J. Iglesias (#9). OU player A. Patrick (#23) spots the ball behind the scrum and picks it up and walks off the field rightfully believing that he had recovered the onside kick.

You can review the coverage here: http://www.zshare.net/video/robbed3-wmv.html Please review the beginning of the coverage, keeping your attention on #23 from OU. At the end of the coverage, keep your eye on the legs/torso area of #9 from OU. You can clearly see that UO never had possession of the ball and that the referee awarded possession to UO players that never had control of the ball. Now you can argue that the whistle had blown but then replay can review who has possession. Replay clearly shows no one had possession at the time of the whistle. At worst, if you ignore the illegal touch before 10 yards, lack of possession by either team at the whistle means the ball goes to the receiving team. Replay is allowed to review that but did not.

Partisans from both sides can argue that there were poor calls on both sides of the ball, and that is true. However, most of that is in regards to penalties called for pass interference and holding, etc. None of those are reviewable and are largely subjective on the part of the official. I can and do accept these as part of the game of football. But both the illegal touching and possession are reviewable on the onsides kick.

This video clearly shows who had possession at the end of the series and I don't understand why it is being ignored by the national media. This game was given to the ducks by PAC 10 officials and they were supported in this by a replay official who is apparently incompetent, biased, or dishonest. There are rumors that come from an Oregon message board that the replay official is **** *******, who is an Oregon alum and an International Sales Rep. for Nike Inc. The CEO of Nike Inc. is of course Phil Knight. I'm sure you know he is the single largest Oregon booster by a wide margin. Regardless of the rumor, I would like to know who the replay official is and what, if any, ties he has to Oregon.

I don't know if it is true and certainly hope it isn't. But it would be appreciated if someone were to at least follow up on that information. As a fan of the Oklahoma Sooners it would be in poor taste for any partisan to claim this publicly without knowing for sure. That is why I am asking you, as a reporter, to follow this up with the NCAA, PAC 10 and the Oregon officials.

Had OU been awarded rightful possession of the football they could have kneeled on the ball and run the clock out with a 6 point lead and the game in hand. I know that this information coming from a fan of the Sooners may sound petty, but our last 2 regular season road games have ended with the same kind of controversy. I would have felt better about these 2 games if replay had not been in affect and I could have written off the endings as officials who made honest mistakes. But with replay there is no excuse for not getting it right, particularly in the Oregon onsides kick play.

Needless to say, I am very disgruntled with the state of the NCAA and the lack of accountability with their officials. Our coach recently removed 2 players from the team after it was clear that they knowingly violated NCAA rules. It is time for the NCAA and college officials to show the same kind of integrity and at least admit that they made a mistake the changed the outcome of the game.

This game had huge BCS implications for the Big XII and OU, as well as the PAC 10 and Oregon. I fear that money is at the root of this incorrect decision. At the very least they should admit that replay is not working and needs to be changed to work more like the NFL system or done away with all together.


Thank you for your time and any effort you put forth in this matter.

Kind Regards,

XXXXX XXXXX
A college football and Oklahoma Sooners fan

FYI - my beef in the TT debacle is with the 4th down play where the ball was spotted 1 yard beyond where the TT player gained control of the pass. Not the ill-fated TD.

[boomersooner28]

OU fans should direct their anger to the NCAA, the Pac-10 Conference, and to the media for soft-pedaling the story

DAMN STRAIGHT!!

[David Earl]

Needless to say, I am very disgruntled with the state of the NCAA and the lack of accountability with their officials. Our coach recently removed 2 players from the team after it was clear that they knowingly violated NCAA rules. It is time for the NCAA and college officials to show the same kind of integrity and at least admit that they made a mistake the changed the outcome of the game.

Well said.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

This is my favorite part.

Among the timely and relevant questions that have been asked by Sooner and Duck fans in the wake of the game, one would do well to ponder these offerings:

1) Did Oklahoma's defense collapse? 2) Did Bob Stoops coach poorly in the game's final minutes? 3) Why no credit given to Oregon for the finish? 4) Wasn't the game played on even terms, making the unpredictable ending a matter of luck and not injustice? 5) Why has the media not been much more forceful in emphasizing the nature of the outrage here?

Let's tackle these one by one. On question one, the answer is an emphatic NO. Oklahoma's defense, in fact, was the unit that saved the Sooners on Saturday. After buckling early on, the Sooners limited Oregon to 10 points in 51 minutes, before the final 80 seconds witnessed 14 quick points for the Ducks. While Paul Thompson and Adrian Peterson slowly but steadily found their footing, the OU defense--with dramatically increased toughness--rattled Dennis Dixon and knocked Oregon's own spread option off balance. When the game hung in the balance late in the third quarter and early in the fourth, OU's defense made key plays to cement an advantage for the Sooners. This isn't a defense that collapsed; it was responsible for the Sooners being in position to win in the first place. And as for the final, winning touchdown scored by Oregon? Well, let's put it this way: I dare you to play your best as a 20-year-old man after seeing an emotional turnaround (and a legitimately bad call that was not overturned) go against your team. That was not a normal football situation; the emotions were so intense that they should not be held against the Sooners' defense.

[Readyfor8]

This is my favorite part.

Among the timely and relevant questions that have been asked by Sooner and Duck fans in the wake of the game, one would do well to ponder these offerings:

1) Did Oklahoma's defense collapse? 2) Did Bob Stoops coach poorly in the game's final minutes? 3) Why no credit given to Oregon for the finish? 4) Wasn't the game played on even terms, making the unpredictable ending a matter of luck and not injustice? 5) Why has the media not been much more forceful in emphasizing the nature of the outrage here?

Let's tackle these one by one. On question one, the answer is an emphatic NO. Oklahoma's defense, in fact, was the unit that saved the Sooners on Saturday. After buckling early on, the Sooners limited Oregon to 10 points in 51 minutes, before the final 80 seconds witnessed 14 quick points for the Ducks. While Paul Thompson and Adrian Peterson slowly but steadily found their footing, the OU defense--with dramatically increased toughness--rattled Dennis Dixon and knocked Oregon's own spread option off balance. When the game hung in the balance late in the third quarter and early in the fourth, OU's defense made key plays to cement an advantage for the Sooners. This isn't a defense that collapsed; it was responsible for the Sooners being in position to win in the first place. And as for the final, winning touchdown scored by Oregon? Well, let's put it this way: I dare you to play your best as a 20-year-old man after seeing an emotional turnaround (and a legitimately bad call that was not overturned) go against your team. That was not a normal football situation; the emotions were so intense that they should not be held against the Sooners' defense.

thats my favorite too.

[KingDavid]

This article is about as good as it gets and still I ache. Nothing will give us back the W, and that's all I really want.

That's when I know it's time that I choose to move on . . .

[leavingthezoo]

One must understand that in sports, the worst and most uncomfortable place to be is the mind of a fan whose team won in a tainted way.

this is the only point i don't fully agree with. though an unearned win is difficult to accept, i don't believe it compares to an unearned loss. but... that's might be because of which side of the chaos i'm on. grrrrrrr.