Football question

[WichitaSooner]

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.

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.

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.

 

[SoonerDutch]

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.

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.

Again, we’ll have to agree to disagree that it’s not the same thing.

The Missouri example is pretty objective to me - the rule is explicit that one cannot punt a kickoff. The holding example is closer but again I struggle to see exact similarity given the preclearance.

As others have pointed out, there is some subjectivity in determining intent on substituting. So for sure officials are occasionally charged with determining intent, and they determined that Santenga did not intend to substitute.

You & I may think they made the wrong call but it’s subjective at the end of the day.

 

[WichitaSooner]

Again, we’ll have to agree to disagree that it’s not the same thing.

The Missouri example is pretty objective to me - the rule is explicit that one cannot punt a kickoff. The holding example is closer but again I struggle to see exact similarity given the preclearance.

As others have pointed out, there is some subjectivity in determining intent on substituting. So for sure officials are occasionally charged with determining intent, and they determined that Santenga did not intend to substitute.

You & I may think they made the wrong call but it’s subjective at the end of the day.

My opinion doesn’t matter at all. I’m going off of 100 percent of rules analysts and former officials asked about it, and the conference itself.

 

[SoonerDutch]

My opinion doesn’t matter at all. I’m going off of 100 percent of rules analysts and former officials asked about it, and the conference itself.

Lol, then why are you bringing up comparisons to holding penalties or the Kansas/Missouri game to try & prove your point?

Yes, I agree with you that the ABC rules god think the officials missed a call…I’ve watched replays too…

 

[WichitaSooner]

Lol, then why are you bringing up comparisons to holding penalties or the Kansas/Missouri game to try & prove your point?

Yes, I agree with you that the ABC rules god think the officials missed a call…I’ve watched replays too…

I was directly responding to your argument that “if the refs cleared it in advance it wasn’t a missed call.”

And if you think the ABC guy is the only one, you’re living under a rock. There have been dozens of articles written about it talking to different officials. The league came out and publicly swallowed their pride and admitted it was blown.

 

[Eielson]

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

This is another great example of how it's not a penalty if you ask the refs permission and they clear it.