WichitaSooner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2015
- Messages
- 10,304
- Reaction score
- 6,987
It definitely is a missed call whether they cleared it or not. I gave the example of the MU/KU game -- it is the same thing. MU coaches asked the refs if they could punt a kickoff. The refs wrongly said they could, so Mizzou went ahead and did it (even though, in that case, they knew the refs were wrong.) Result: that crew got suspended for a game because they got the rule wrong. The fact they cleared it in advance didn't make them any less wrong.Ignoring that “holding” is somewhat subjective, I’ll have to disagree it’s a 1:1 comparison. If a ref pre-cleared a borderline blocking technique, it’s not a missed call. Feel like consistent enforcement within a game is all one can ask for, something that sadly rarely happens.
Others have pointed out that determining Santenga’s intent is impossible. TBC I think it was incorrectly officiated but can understand other’s argument, it’s a vague rule.
Also not sure if you’re trying to make this argument, but I find it impossible to believe the call was why OU won the game.
And it's not impossible to determine intent. Officials in all sports have to do that frequently. Intentional fouls. Intentional grounding. Throwing a pitcher out of a game for throwing at a batter. Hockey players getting penalties for diving (embellishment).
And I agree, it's impossible to say that is why we won -- which was my point in saying it is silly to say that Auburn "should" have beaten UGA without the controversial fumble call. What is certain is that we were in 2nd and 22 when that happened. Even great offenses are unlikely to end up scoring a TD on that drive. Statistically, the far more likely outcome of that drive is a FG, so we gained four points in a very close game.