Is PJ's explosion about the refs on Youtube?

The ref on the side line who had zero chance of "not seeing it", should be fired. There is no excuse. Even if he was wearing a welder's visor during the play the Head Ref should have corrected the call. ACC needs to send a message!!!
 
I almost fell out of my chair when I saw the part on the field where CPJ kinda jumps at the ref while screaming at him and the ref gets the 'almost crapped my pants' look
 
ramblinwise1 said:
Yeah, where's the darn press release from the head of officials yesterday apologizing for the blown call. He was sure ready to run his mouth after the "illegal" fake FG against Clemson.

I wonder if CPJ was ordered to show contrition...

http://www.macon.com/169/story/861446.html
Click to expand...


In the heat of the battle, you get frustrated,” Johnson said. “But the bottom line is those guys are trying to get it right. I don’t think they’re doing it intentionally; they’re trying to get it right.”
Click to expand...

:bs:

I don't think the officials were trying to get anything right. They didn't even bother to listen to his arguments. All it takes is PJ saying "Stop the clock, he got out of bounds, or first down" and they could have had a conference about the amount of time on the clock.

Worthless.

27250.jpg
 
“I don’t think there’s any secret that it didn’t go down the way it should have..." CPJ on why the clock didn't stop.

What we've all been saying? Swofford and the refs are bitches...
 
ramblinwise1 said:
Yeah, where's the darn press release from the head of officials yesterday apologizing for the blown call. He was sure ready to run his mouth after the "illegal" fake FG against Clemson.

I wonder if CPJ was ordered to show contrition...

http://www.macon.com/169/story/861446.html
Click to expand...

That is the thing that puzzles me the most as well. After the Clemson game, there was a BIG, B-I-G public announcement about how the officials got that call (a judgement call IMO) wrong.

However, after a black and white, first down, stop the clock call that was just wrong and took points off the board, there is nothing from the ACC head office?????
 
Is this not a reviewable play?

I can see getting the call wrong, but why wasn't it corrected? The ref should have at least stopped the clock and put back on time from the first down. Is that not allowed for some reason?
 
Buzz4Him said:
That is the thing that puzzles me the most as well. After the Clemson game, there was a BIG, B-I-G public announcement about how the officials got that call (a judgement call IMO) wrong.

However, after a black and white, first down, stop the clock call that was just wrong and took points off the board, there is nothing from the ACC head office?????
Click to expand...

The ACC didn't want other coaches to try the FG trick. So you make a very public announcement that it is illegal. That way when you call the penalty the next week during the Clemson-BC game, the home crowd doesn't go nuts and start pelting the field with water bottles.

What good does it do you to make a big announcement about piss poor first-down clock management? It just tells everyone in the country that your refs can't hand even the most basic calls. That won't help the image of the conference.
 
lonestarjacket said:
Is this not a reviewable play?

I can see getting the call wrong, but why wasn't it corrected? The ref should have at least stopped the clock and put back on time from the first down. Is that not allowed for some reason?
Click to expand...

I don't think so...missed calls are not reviewable. Neither are 'official judgement calls', like when a play is dead. So if the official 'ruled' that the play was dead before BeBe went out of bounds, then it can't be reviewed.

I don't know that you can have an official review for an official forgetting the rules of the game either(like stopping the clock on first downs).
 
Buzz4Him said:
That is the thing that puzzles me the most as well. After the Clemson game, there was a BIG, B-I-G public announcement about how the officials got that call (a judgement call IMO) wrong.

However, after a black and white, first down, stop the clock call that was just wrong and took points off the board, there is nothing from the ACC head office?????
Click to expand...


The funny thing is that Clemson has used lots of plays over the years that could be intepreted as "deceptive substitution."

That rule needs to be replaced by something with specific requirements for when players need to be on the field and where. Huddling on the sideline should also be illegal since that is "deceptive subsitution."

Any last second players running off the field could also be "deceptive substitution." In short, you could call that rule several times in just about every game. Purposeful or not, there are lots of situations that could confuse a defense.

I like the ACC position that the reason it wasn't called was because it confused the officials as well as the defense. That theory falls apart when we learn they were advised of the play in advance.:laugher:
 
Buzz4Him said:
That is the thing that puzzles me the most as well. After the Clemson game, there was a BIG, B-I-G public announcement about how the officials got that call (a judgement call IMO) wrong.

However, after a black and white, first down, stop the clock call that was just wrong and took points off the board, there is nothing from the ACC head office?????
Click to expand...

Because this play ended up not affecting the outcome of the game.

lonestarjacket said:
Is this not a reviewable play?

I can see getting the call wrong, but why wasn't it corrected? The ref should have at least stopped the clock and put back on time from the first down. Is that not allowed for some reason?
Click to expand...

It's absolutely a reviewable play. That's the worst part; I can see how a ref might wind the clock by accident...but surely one of the other ones should notice it and blow the whistle. I think the best thing we could have done would have been for Josh to not snap the ball and just go talk to the official about it. Once you snap the ball obviously you can't go back and review anything.
 
gth816f said:
Because this play ended up not affecting the outcome of the game.
Click to expand...

Are you implying the play that gave us a TD in the FIRST quarter of the game 'affected the outcome of the game'?

As I recall, Clemson had 3 more quarters to adjust to that 'missed' play and actually overcame it by having more points on the board than us at one point.
 
My understanding, fwiw, is that the "his forward progress was stopped prior to going out of bounds" call was not an obvious misjudgment. I have seen calls like that plenty of times. I could be wrong but I don't even think PJ was arguing about that.

As for the temporary clock stop that's supposed to happen on first downs: Because it is undisputed that there was a first down, any official at anytime before the next snap could have blown the whistle, conferred with the others, put time back on the clock, and asked the timekeeper to start the clock on their signal. Haven't we seen refs do this a thousand times before? They do it when it doesn't matter, like with 8:14 left in the 3rd quarter, so why not then?

What happened here is that our coach pointed out an obvious error to the officials that had the authority to fix, but they flat out refused to fix it.

There's really no reason for the ACC to make an announcement about this because there's no disputing that they messed up. Their admission that they ****ed up is meaningless and would benefit nobody. I don't want it anyway; **** them; I already know they ****ed up. I'm just glad PJ has not been fined for telling them off (yet, to my knowledge.)
 
unforgiven108 said:
Are you implying the play that gave us a TD in the FIRST quarter of the game 'affected the outcome of the game'?

As I recall, Clemson had 3 more quarters to adjust to that 'missed' play and actually overcame it by having more points on the board than us at one point.
Click to expand...

Of course I am. We got seven points on a touchdown there; had that play been flagged, we only would have gotten three points. That's a difference of four, more than we won by. It's pretty simple math.

No one's lobbying for the result to be changed(except Dabo as a joke); officials blow calls all the time. But when you can go back and see how a controversial no-call or call accounted for enough points to change the outcome of the game, that'll get people to start talking about it.

EDIT: Also, everything GEHJ said. In fact, they even stopped play in the third quarter to add time back to the clock. I still think they would have acknowledged it though had we lost by 2 points or something.
 
gth816f said:
Of course I am. We got seven points on a touchdown there; had that play been flagged, we only would have gotten three points. That's a difference of four, more than we won by. It's pretty simple math.
Click to expand...

That's silly to think that football is that linear, that if that play we don't score, the same scoring/playing would have taken place. It wasn't the last play of the game that we won on, or on the winning drive of the game. That's the ONLY way I think your corollary works.

It did not affect the outcome of the game. The score differential may have been 3 pts, and we got 7 points on that play, but that in NO way relates to the outcome of the game.

If we didn't get that play, who knows, our defense might have played tighter in the 3rd quarter and not given up another TD, or we could have gone for a TD instead of a FG at the end of the game.

That is an asinine statement that that 'missed call' affected the outcome of the game.

The ONLY way I agree with you is if it happens on the last drive/play of the game.
 
unforgiven108 said:
That is an asinine statement that that 'missed call' affected the outcome of the game.
Click to expand...

I think it's asinine to say that a play on which we gained 7 points didn't affect or relate to the outcome of the game. It DIRECTLY relates to the outcome of the game, because the outcome of the game is based on how many points you score.

Nowhere did I say that we won because of that play or even that that play was a major factor in the game. If you took away that play, of course we might still have won. We would have played differently as the game approached the end, among other things. But we ended up only winning by three, and four of our points came from that controversial play, so people are going to want a ruling on it.

Kind of like if a coach goes for it on fourth down in the first quarter instead of taking a chip shot FG and doesn't get it, then they lose by 2 points, people are going to ask him why he made that decision, even though they might not have won after taking the FG either. However, if they win by 20, probably no one's going to ask much about it. Close endings magnify everyone's interest in the controversial plays of the game.
 
gth816f said:
Because this play ended up not affecting the outcome of the game.
Click to expand...

gth816f said:
Nowhere did I say that we won because of that play or even that that play was a major factor in the game.
Click to expand...

What exactly is your definition of 'outcome'? Mine is winning or losing.

It appears, and I may be WAY off here, that you are implying that the play in question caused us to win the game. And if that play is taken out, we don't win the game. I get your argument that we got points on the play, and take that play (and the points which isn't necessarily true) away and we would have 'lost the game'.

But I'm saying you can't claim that play affected the outcome of the game, because the outcome of the game was 3 FULL quarters away with lots of time in between to change the outcome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top