Front page link to ACC office -- please be polite

[OldPhiKap]

If anyone wants to share a nice thought with the ACC about the final play last night, Julio has a link on the front page. Keep it classy, but keep 'em coming.

Hard for me to think of a more articulate bunch than what we have in our little cyber-community.

Here you go: http://www.theacc.com/page/ContactUs

[buddy]

Nice thought, but just remember that they all report to UNCheat grad John Swofford. Ever wonder why the NCAA held their investigation to post-Dean years. It also has the advantage of cutting off the Swofford AD years. Wouldn't do to have to ask the Commissioner of a Power 5 conference what he knew and when he knew it.

[OldPhiKap]

My letter:


I am writing to request that the ACC correct an error in last night's final play. The referees announced that they utilized instant replay to review and ultimately overturn a blocking in the back penalty called on Miami. As you are aware, this is not a reviewable penalty and thus it was improper to overturn the call on the field (to my knowledge, the flag was not simply picked up -- it remained on the ground and apparently was the specific matter under review). Given that this was the last play of the game -- time had expired -- the correct ruling must be that the ball is brought back to 15 yards from the point of infraction. With no time on the clock, however, the game is over and the touchdown is disallowed. Duke wins by any and all proper applications of the rules.

I realize that this request is unusual, and that the job of refereeing a game such as this is difficult. It is rare, however, that a conference actually has the ability to overturn a facially incorrect application of the rules in a meaningful manner. This is not simply a question of who wins and loses (although I admit a strong rooting interest), it is about the integrity of the game and this conference. The ACC either stands for correctly applying the law and rules, or it does not. All are looking to see what path is chosen, and I sincerely hope that my faith in you is not misplaced.

College sports is at a crossroads. Its leadership either has the moral authority to do what is right, or it does not. I have been a diehard ACC fan since I could first Sail with the Pilot and listen to Dinah Shore; the integrity of this conference in comparison to others is a matter of great personal, regional, and national pride. Correcting this error shows that, regardless of what may happen off the field, when it comes to student athletic competition the rules are applied properly and fairly. Please do not let us down.

Thanks, and with respect,

{OPK}

[captmojo]

My letter:

Make it an even dozen sporks for OPK!
I appreciate the use of appealing to the conference's sense of integrity. Whether they show possession, or not.

I have to spread my love some more before I can approve of your post.

[OldPhiKap]

Thanks, and please let them know your thoughts on the play as well. I don't want to call it poll skewing, but -- volume matters.

[JasonEvans]

I think it is better to also include the fact that there are frame grab images that show one of the Miami players had a knee down with the ball still in his hands. The review should have caught that and, rather than allowing Miami an extra play (which the penalty would), the player being down would be the end of the game, period. It is clean and one simply changes the L to a W. Viola, case closed.

The truly horrid thing is that the refs missed a couple clear block in the back calls but could not review to "see" a new penalty, they only chose to review to take away an existing one. That's some bad officiating, right thar!

-Jason "win out and we are still Coastal champs, right?" Evans

[OldPhiKap]

I think it is better to also include the fact that there are frame grab images that show one of the Miami players had a knee down with the ball still in his hands. The review should have caught that and, rather than allowing Miami an extra play (which the penalty would), the player being down would be the end of the game, period. It is clean and one simply changes the L to a W. Viola, case closed.

The truly horrid thing is that the refs missed a couple clear block in the back calls but could not review to "see" a new penalty, they only chose to review to take away an existing one. That's some bad officiating, right thar!

-Jason "win out and we are still Coastal champs, right?" Evans

Agreed, and if someone puts that together and submits I would appreciate a repost of it here.

And yes, we win out and we are champs. Eye on the prize.

[CDu]

I think it is better to also include the fact that there are frame grab images that show one of the Miami players had a knee down with the ball still in his hands. The review should have caught that and, rather than allowing Miami an extra play (which the penalty would), the player being down would be the end of the game, period. It is clean and one simply changes the L to a W. Viola, case closed.

The truly horrid thing is that the refs missed a couple clear block in the back calls but could not review to "see" a new penalty, they only chose to review to take away an existing one. That's some bad officiating, right thar!

-Jason "win out and we are still Coastal champs, right?" Evans

Not sure why they would get an untimed down as Miami had the ball. Untimed down applies when the penalty is on the defense to prevent the leading team from committing a game-saving penalty. Just another way the refs blew the call.

[JasonEvans]

Oh, and when you send your note, please include a link to this photo (https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t31.0-8/12194818_983249795083980_2644600283129266848_o.jpg ).

https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t31.0-8/12194818_983249795083980_2644600283129266848_o.jpg

-Jason "as I said, case closed" Evans

[CDu]

Oh, and when you send your note, please include a link to this photo (https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t31.0-8/12194818_983249795083980_2644600283129266848_o.jpg ).

https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t31.0-8/12194818_983249795083980_2644600283129266848_o.jpg

-Jason "as I said, case closed" Evans

Don't waste your time pasting that picture. That was a photo and NOT available to the replay ref. So they would easily disregard that argument. Stick to the video evidence.

[oldnavy]

Not sure why they would get an untimed down as Miami had the ball. Untimed down applies when the penalty is on the defense to prevent the leading team from committing a game-saving penalty. Just another way the refs blew the call.

This is correct. The game ends on an offensive penalty when time runs out, otherwise you would have intentional fouls committed to continue the game indefinitely.

Only makes sense.

That is why I want to know WHY the play went to review in the first place? I suspect the official word will be that the penalty was waved off, so they wanted to review the laterals, etc...

But that is CLEARLY NOT what happened. There was absolutely NO VALID REASON for a review on this play once the penalty was called. Nothing found on a LEGAL review would benefit either team. Laterals? who cares, game over. Knee down, who cares game over..... anything else is not a legal review as far as I know and have heard the experts report...

So ACC, tell us WHY a review took place in the first place?

Stand by for a bunch of "UNCesq" BS TAP DANCING... it's coming.

[oldnavy]

My letter:

Much better and kinder to the refs than my letter, very well done!

[OldPhiKap]

Much better and kinder to the refs than my letter, very well done!

Blast away, they deserve it.

[CDu]

This is correct. The game ends on an offensive penalty when time runs out, otherwise you would have intentional fouls committed to continue the game indefinitely.

Only makes sense.

That is why I want to know WHY the play went to review in the first place? I suspect the official word will be that the penalty was waved off, so they wanted to review the laterals, etc...

But that is CLEARLY NOT what happened. There was absolutely NO VALID REASON for a review on this play once the penalty was called. Nothing found on a LEGAL review would benefit either team. Laterals? who cares, game over. Knee down, who cares game over... anything else is not a legal review as far as I know and have heard the experts report...

So ACC, tell us WHY a review took place in the first place?

Stand by for a bunch of "UNCesq" BS TAP DANCING... it's coming.

Totally agree. I posted in another thread, but there were 5 steps of incompetence on the play by the officials:

1. Missing that the runner was down (tolerable, given that it was somewhat bang-bang and we have a review system to correct that mistake)
2. Missing the blatant block in the back at Miami's ~15-20 on our side of the field (only sort of tolerable, as that is one of the main jobs of the officials, but it happens).
3. Getting the "untimed down" part wrong (not tolerable but a bit understandable given all the confusion, hopefully they'd have corrected if it came to that)
4. Getting the call wrong on review for the knee being down (not tolerable, that's awful officiating)
5. Inappopriately overturning a non-reviewable penalty after review (not tolerable, and it will be especially not tolerable because the ACC will lie and say that the officials picked up the flag before the review - which they most certainly did not do)

[devildeac]

Not sure why they would get an untimed down as Miami had the ball. Untimed down applies when the penalty is on the defense to prevent the leading team from committing a game-saving penalty. Just another way the refs blew the call.

While I was listening to the radio on the way home last PM, I'll swear I heard the referee say something to that effect, paraphrasing that there was a flag on the field for an illegal block in the back and Miami would get an untimed play. And no, it was NOT Bob Harris and one of his (partially) in/accurate homerisms:o . But. like you said, just another way they blew the calls. I likewise thought that a flag on the team with the ball on a game-ending play did just that and end the game. :confused:

[CDu]

While I was listening to the radio on the way home last PM, I'll swear I heard the referee say something to that effect, paraphrasing that there was a flag on the field for an illegal block in the back and Miami would get an untimed play. And no, it was NOT Bob Harris and one of his (partially) in/accurate homerisms:o . But. like you said, just another way they blew the calls. I likewise thought that a flag on the team with the ball on a game-ending play did just that and end the game. :confused:

Yeah, the ref definitely said it. And it was definitely wrong.

[arnie]

Nice thought, but just remember that they all report to UNCheat grad John Swofford. Ever wonder why the NCAA held their investigation to post-Dean years. It also has the advantage of cutting off the Swofford AD years. Wouldn't do to have to ask the Commissioner of a Power 5 conference what he knew and when he knew it.

If ACC refuses to issue statement or issues statement that replay officials got it right, Duke needs to step up publicly (even if it means Cut is suspended for UNC game). Hopefully league off will do the right thing and suspend replay booth team and issue apology - but if not, we should come down hard on Swofford. His integrity should be "under review" particularly with what we know about his previous job.

[Papa John]

Not sure why they would get an untimed down as Miami had the ball. Untimed down applies when the penalty is on the defense to prevent the leading team from committing a game-saving penalty. Just another way the refs blew the call.

Since the penalty was on Miami, presumably it would have been a runoff play, thus game over.

As well-crafted and articulate as OPK's letter is, this isn't going anywhere. They're not going to reverse the call. The officiating was absolutely awful all game. Miami commits a lot of penalties, but 23 flags against them? Even with my Duke-blue glasses on, I have to agree that was a tad ridiculous... That said, I still want someone to explain to me how McCaffrey can possibly fumble the football from a prone position [on his back] with possession, whence he then has the ball stripped away—that was horrendous on-field call #1 compounded by horrendous video-review call #1, and had a pretty significant impact on how the game flowed from that point...

I think both teams have reason to complain about the officiating, though I think the two most horrendous errors on the night negatively impacted us far more than Miami. The league office can't change the outcome, but they should certainly discipline the entire officiating crew [on-field and video review] in a manner that is appropriate, meaningful, and public.

As for our guys... Next play—we still have a Coastal Division title to win, and this should provide plenty of motivation for our guys to come out punching and knock both UNCheat and Pitt in the teeth from the get go... Win out and this fiasco is irrelevant. Go Duke!


EDIT to comment...


2. Missing the blatant block in the back at Miami's ~15-20 on our side of the field (only sort of tolerable, as that is one of the main jobs of the officials, but it happens).


We'll agree to disagree on your #1—I thought it was pretty clear in real-time that Walton was down, but it should have certainly been obvious upon video review. This fact is the baffling one to me... Regarding your #2, however—I completely disagree. The block at the 20 where our defender is laid flat was perfectly legal—it just looked awful because of opposing momentum and the fact that our guy was looking to the side at the runner rather than ahead of him so never saw the block coming... Totally in agreement with your other points...

[devildeac]

Yeah, the ref definitely said it. And it was definitely wrong.

At my "old" age, my vision is still pretty good but my hearing could use some help so thanks for being my hearing and memory aids on this one. And I was 100% sober, too.

[OldPhiKap]

And I was 100% sober, too.

ahhh, I think we have isolated the problem . . . .

[captmojo]

http://www.theacc.com/news/acc-announces-11-01-2015

[brevity]

Viola, case closed.

Is this a Stanford-Cal reference? What does your musical instrument have to do with this?

[sagegrouse]

http://www.theacc.com/news/acc-announces-11-01-2015

Save you the effort:


GREENSBORO, N.C. – The Atlantic Coast Conference has announced the suspension of the on-field officiating crew as well as the replay official and communicator following the Miami at Duke game on Saturday, October 31.

The announcement follows the league’s weekly review of game footage, as well as reports and interviews with officials and administrators.

The series of errors during the final play of the game will result in the suspension of the entire crew for two ACC games.

The errors that occurred during the last play of the game are:

The replay official erred in not overturning the ruling on the field that the Miami player had released the ball prior to his knee being down. If called, this would have ended the game.
The on-field officials erred by failing to penalize Miami for an illegal block in the back at the Miami 16-yard line. If called, the ball would have been placed at the Miami 8-yard line and the game would have been extended for an untimed down.
A block in the back foul was called at the Duke 26-yard line. After the officials conferred, which is appropriate, they correctly determined that the block was from the side, which resulted in the flag being picked up. The replay official was not involved in the decision to pick up the flag; however, the referee did not effectively manage communication and properly explain why the flag was picked up.
In addition, the on-field crew failed to penalize a Miami player for leaving the bench area and entering the field prior to the end of the play. This foul would not have negated the touchdown because it would have been enforced as a dead ball foul.

“The quality of our officiating program is of the highest importance to the league and its schools, and the last play of the game was not handled appropriately,” said ACC Commissioner John Swofford. “Officiating is an extraordinarily difficult job but our players, coaches, programs and fans deserve the best that can be offered. We will continue to strive to meet that standard.”

It left out, "Duke wins! Duke wins!"

[Faison1]

Wow, what a load of hooey. 2 game suspension. How much longer do we get Swofford? Aren't there term limits? Is he a lawyer by trade?

I was starting to feel a little better until I read the ACC release....now I'm back to grim annoyance.....

[mattman91]

http://www.theacc.com/news/acc-announces-11-01-2015

Not good enough.

[CDu]

Save you the effort:


It left out, "Duke wins! Duke wins!"

Garbage. They predictably went to the "the refs picked up the flag" defense. That is very clearly not what happened, but they are hiding behind that. And they didn't acknowledge that the review of the knee being down was substandard.

The only things they acknowledged were "live action" mistakes. The real issues were the failure of the review, and the use of review to overturn the penalty. By not acknowledging those mistakes, they of course absolve themselves of any need to address "why not change the outcome?"

And the punishment for the complete incompetence of the entire crew is just 2 games?

Predicable and spineless.

[CDu]

We'll agree to disagree on your #1—I thought it was pretty clear in real-time that Walton was down, but it should have certainly been obvious upon video review. This fact is the baffling one to me... Regarding your #2, however—I completely disagree. The block at the 20 where our defender is laid flat was perfectly legal—it just looked awful because of opposing momentum and the fact that our guy was looking to the side at the runner rather than ahead of him so never saw the block coming... Totally in agreement with your other points...

I think you may be thinking of the wrong block. There is a block on THEIR side of the field (at about the same yard line, close to where the runner was downed) that was legal. There was a block on OUR side of the field that was, unquestionably, in the back. The latter was the one I was referring to.

The foul that the officials called was on our 25 yard line as the returner approached the end zone. That one appeared to be in the back as well, but was more borderline.

[Papa John]

http://www.theacc.com/news/acc-announces-11-01-2015

I'm satisfied... Not much else they can do at this point. Suspending the crew for the remainder of the season might have been warranted and sent a clearer message, but I think the league office did a good job of stating what was done incorrectly, and they did clearly state that the replay crew should have overturned the play and ruled Walton down, thereby ending the game, but you can't really do so after-the-fact [and I, for one, wouldn't want a W to come in such an unprecedented manner anyway—this is football, not civil court].

Anyhow, next play—we still have a Coastal Division to win!


EDIT to comment...

I think you may be thinking of the wrong block. There is a block on THEIR side of the field (at about the same yard line, close to where the runner was downed) that was legal. There was a block on OUR side of the field that was, unquestionably, in the back. The latter was the one I was referring to.

The foul that the officials called was on our 25 yard line as the returner approached the end zone. That one appeared to be in the back as well, but was more borderline.

You're probably correct... I haven't had the stomach to watch the play yet again [I figured the 10,000 times during the 9-minute review and then the first couple of loops of SportsCenter were enough to burn it in my brain, but clearly not]. ;)

Walton's block at the end of the play would normally be flagged as a block-in-the-back, whether on Saturdays or Sundays... Penalties aside [because they're largely irrelevant to the bottom line], Walton was down—period. If replay can't figure that out, then there's not much point in having replay, is there? I accept the league office's explanation for picking up the flag, and figured such was going to be the case, whether or not it actually went down that way [i.e., the replay review was to make sure all of the laterals were legal and that no knee was down (which, by the way, they completely f'ed up, as Walton's knee was clearly down), then the officials conferred and decided to pick up the flag but the official communicating the explanation completely botched the explanation]...

[moonpie23]

keep writing , folks.....get your relatives and friends to write as well

write from all your fake email addresses....

[Papa John]

They predictably went to the "the refs picked up the flag" defense. That is very clearly not what happened, but they are hiding behind that. And they didn't acknowledge that the review of the knee being down was substandard.

The only things they acknowledged were "live action" mistakes. The real issues were the failure of the review, and the use of review to overturn the penalty. By not acknowledging those mistakes, they of course absolve themselves of any need to address "why not change the outcome?"

And the punishment for the complete incompetence of the entire crew is just 2 games?

Predicable and spineless.

Actually, they did acknowledge that the review of the knee being down was substandard—it was the first thing they mentioned. And would you really want them to change the outcome? I can't recall that ever happening before—it would be unprecedented for a league office to change the outcome of a football game after the fact like that (even in situations where the NCAA has vacated wins the team that lost on-the-field doesn't get awarded a win after-the-fact). Would you really want to win a game in such manner? I wouldn't... Bottom line—win the game on the field [court, etc.], and don't put yourself in a position to lose because of a horrendous call by the officials.

As for the punishment—I agree it could have been harsher, but who cares? The message was sent ["you guys did a crappy job last night, we noticed, and you're not going to be working for a few weeks because of it, so make sure you brush up on the rulebook and up your game next time, otherwise the next time you mess up we'll go nuclear on you"], so there's not much more to be done...