Even Rome says we got jobbed.

[Dio]

Even the biggest west coast homer on the planet's not trying to explain it away. The duck fans are trying to say the bad calls went both ways. :rolleyes:

[proudsoonergal]

Overall, the game was poorly officiated. OU did the benefit of a few non-calls (for example, Kelly pushed off and it wasn't called PI), but the significant difference is their bad calls did not happen at the very end of the game.

[SelmaBamaFan]

Im guessing this is on his radio show?

[mfosterftw]

but the significant difference is their bad calls did not happen at the very end of the game.

Nor were they reversible (the push-off and the play clock rundown, at least).

Marc

[FaninAma]

Whether or not a penalty should have been called is a judgement call and is open to interpretation. Who touched a ball first and who has possession of a ball aren't really subjective values.

I'll never point to a penalty being called or not called as a reason for calling referees incompetent. Having at least 5 on-the-field officials and 1 in the replay booth miss 2 readily visible events that were both reviewable, unlike penalites, is a reason to use the term incompetence if not something worse.

[GrapevineSooner]

All this support from the national media is heart warming. What will really warm my heart is if the Pac 10 takes some disciplinary action against the officials. And if it's true that replay officials can't overturn an official's call on a live ball situation (such as the onside kick or a fumble), then that should immediately made reviewable by the replay judge as well.

[Taxman71]

The only positive that can come from this is a new rule that the replay official must have no relationship with the two schools or their geographic locality and be completely isolated from those two factors. With the billions of dollars the NCAA rakes in, the cost should be nominal.

[CtheB]

I want to know when Patrick Chung (Oregon #15) is going to come clean with his claim that he recovered the onside kick, when video evidence proves that not to be the case.

[Grimey]

I want to know when Patrick Chung (Oregon #15) is going to come clean with his claim that he recovered the onside kick, when video evidence proves that not to be the case.
I want to know what the refs on the field saw under the pile that made them call it for Oregon. They sure as hell didnt see the ball. Did they just take Chung at his word?

[ouwapiti]

does anyone besides me find it disgusting at with which exuberance/unbridled enthusiam (kramerism, hahah) the referee signalled that it was oregon's ball after the onside kick......

[soonerkaufmanII]

Did anyone else notice the referees voice tremble after he made the call following the review. He seemed nervous, as if he were knowingly making the wrong call.

[Paperclip]

"Nice win Ducks. I guess."

[OUTromBoNado]

I want to know when Patrick Chung (Oregon #15) is going to come clean with his claim that he recovered the onside kick, when video evidence proves that not to be the case.

Havent' you heard? Paysinger (the guy that touched the ball illegally) claims to have had it on the ground when it "squirted out" and away from him (reported on KOTV tonight at 10pm). And since you know, the ground can't cause a fumble. Well, it was Oregon's ball all the way.:rolleyes:

[Ike]

Havent' you heard? Paysinger (the guy that touched the ball illegally) claims to have had it on the ground when it "squirted out" and away from him (reported on KOTV tonight at 10pm). And since you know, the ground can't cause a fumble. Well, it was Oregon's ball all the way.:rolleyes:
If either Chung or Paysinger claim they had posession of the ball, I counter by saying that Latimer had posession of the ball on the first play of the game and should be awarded the INT. A touch does not make a posession.

[stoopified]

If either Chung or Paysinger claim they had posession of the ball, I counter by saying that Latimer had posession of the ball on the first play of the game and should be awarded the INT. A touch does not make a posession.
True dat.

[OUTromBoNado]

The part that makes Paysinger looks really stupid is that on the replay, after his initial, illegeal touch, he's not even in the same area code as the ball. KOTV showed the replay during Paysinger's sound byte. I just laughed and said, "WTF?? I guess those ugly uniforms do blind people."

[The Maestro]

Paysinger also claims to have blocked the field goal and he invented the internet.

[King Crimson]

Even the biggest west coast homer on the planet's not trying to explain it away. The duck fans are trying to say the bad calls went both ways. :rolleyes:

Rome used to rip USC when they were bad as much as anyone...and mysterously in about mid-season 2002 he became a much more vocal CFB socal homer....

[flopshotjoe99]

Did anyone else notice the referees voice tremble after he made the call following the review. He seemed nervous, as if he were knowingly making the wrong call.

he figured that if he made the call against Oregon he wouldn't make it out of the stadium alive.

[StoopTroup]

Did anyone else notice the referees voice tremble after he made the call following the review. He seemed nervous, as if he were knowingly making the wrong call.
I thought his response was weird.

Why didn't they just say the call on the field stands.

[KingDavid]

I want to know what the refs on the field saw under the pile that made them call it for Oregon. They sure as hell didnt see the ball. Did they just take Chung at his word?

Section IX.A of the Pac-10 officiating manual clearly states:

"In instances where a live or fumbled football cannot be easily or readily located, it shall be awarded to the Pac-10 team, or if intra-conference, the team representing the highest potential BCS pay-out for the Pac-10 conference."