A perfect example... BYU vs. Washington contoversy

[motorman4life]

I was watching Sports Center on ESPN this evening and I'm not a big college football fan, but there was a bit of controversy today (Saturday) that caught my attention. It was not the incident, it was the response from one of the ESPN commentators that really irked me.

Here is the full story on ESPN.com.
Here is an ESPN Blog on the controversy.

The short version is, a player rocketed a ball up in the air in celebration after making a clutch touchdown and putting his team in reach of a tie with the extra point. He was flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct for his celebration, a particular point of emphasis for college officials this season. So, they had to move back 15 yards to kick the extra point and it was blocked.. game over. Huskies lose.

The response from commentator Mark May of ESPN was that the call was a bad judgment call and he and others on ESPN called the officiating "pathetic." Writer Tim wrote (at the 2nd link above) that it was "one of the worst judgment calls you will ever see." Mark May added that the officials had no place making a call that had such an impact of the outcome and that the outcome should be up to the coaches and players.

Personally, I think the call was correct. It was unsportsmanlike conduct, as per the rules, which are very, very clear. This is a call that has been called many times for the same penalty this season and last season. If you disagree with the RULES.. that does not make the officiating bad.. or "pathetic" as it has been called by many on ESPN. The official did not "TAKE AWAY" the game.. the player made a choice and the officials made the call (delivered the consequences). The official did not determine the outcome, the player(s) did. He made a choice, granted, it was in the heat of the moment, but it was a choice and it was the wrong choice. Anyone that disagrees, please show me an instance where ANY NCAA player has done this and NOT been similarly penalized.

In looking at the video, it wasn't a judgment call. Locker (the player) fired the ball straight up in the air (20 to 30') in celebration, before all of the usual chest bumping and high-fives and other questionable (and arguably excessive) celebration activity. The rule specifically requires a player to drop the ball where the play ended or give it to an official. It also specifically prohibits throwing the ball high up in the air. It also prohibits excessive celebration. Only the LAST rule violation could be considered a "judgment call."


How this relates to the LEO forum.. well, it should be clear. It seems like people tend to get upset with the police when they get stopped or end up facing the consequences for their actions. We have had a few threads on this topic recently and the negative media response to the controversy is a prime example of the problem with our culture.. blaming the police for your consequences then they are merely enforcing the rules. The ref did not make the rules. He observed a violation and issued the appropriate penalty in accordance with the rules. If you don't agree with the rules.. it does not change the fact that there was a violation.

 

[JPM]

I think that's a violation of my constitution rights! Isn’t that covered under the 123rd amendment?

 

[Shaggy]

I can't believe the people who's job it is to know and understand sports disagree with the call... That is what's "pathetic."

 

[rritterson]

It's completely obvious to anyone who knows the rules that it was unsportsmanlike conduct under the language written in the rule book.

However, the counter argument is that the referees are there to enforce the spirit of the rules, not the letter, especially in situations where the call entirely changes the outcome of the game. It is my belief that the 'throwing high in the air' rule was designed to keep cocky wide receivers from pointing the ball at the camera and then purposely heaving it as high as possible into the air as a display.

If you watch the game, I think you'll see the quarterback made a great play, was excited and carelessly tossed the ball away in joy and then hugged his teammates. He didn't stop, think, and then throw the ball as high as he could into the air. That is to say, he didn't create an intentional over celebration, as the rules in college football are designed to prevent. It was just a happy kid. It wasn't self-aggrandizing, it wasn't over the top, it wasn't cocky.

But, Washington did not make a decent kick on the 35 yard try. It wasn't a fairly good kick that sailed wide because of the extra 15 yards. It was a shitty kick that would have had a hard time making it through on a regular PAT, so it wasn't the refs that ultimately decided the outcome of the game.

 

[Xenos]

However, the counter argument is that the referees are there to enforce the spirit of the rules, not the letter, especially in situations where the call entirely changes the outcome of the game. It is my belief that the 'throwing high in the air' rule was designed to keep cocky wide receivers from pointing the ball at the camera and then purposely heaving it as high as possible into the air as a display.

I see what you are saying but the problem becomes consistency. If the ref isn't consistent people get pissed and call him biased and if he is, people get piss and say he is dumb for enforcing a rule, like what just happened.

 

[BillSmith]

MM4L, I agree.

Officals--and LEOs--are involved in making decisions on which rules to "call" and which to ignore. Referees, umpires, officials, etc. are versed in the term TPoA/D, the Theory of Advantage/Disadvantage. Application can be uneven. When it is, officiating crews are given a list of Points of Emphasis (POEs) at the beginning of a given season. MM4L intimates that such was given to NCAA football officials regarding this very issue.

Want to continue getting game assignments? Make that call. Simple business for that official. Having officiated at the high school level, I can testify to occasionally just shaking my head when I've be "forced" to call a foul or violation on a player or coach in a situation I'd just love to ignore or apply TPoA/D, but...the call was either too obvious or just what the POE ordered.

I caught the end of a highlight of this game with the sound down and wondered why the PAT was being kicked from Siberia. Then I remembered an earlier clip of the TD and some celebration. I figured it was the cause. Reading here, deservedly so.

As a coach, I need stories like this to remind my players to "follow the rules", as the penalty can be devasting, as it was in this case. For riders, just "follow the rules" and stop asking LEOs to give you a break. That ain't there job. And if you get a ticket, ask this ESPN writer to plead your case. It'll probably get you what it got the Huskies.

 

[Anti-Hero]

I didn't watch the game, I was too busy watching Penn st. rake Oregon over the coals. But I agree with the analogy.

Go Longhorns!

 

[nonamiss]

I think that's a violation of my constitution rights! Isn’t that covered under the 123rd amendment?

Was he black?:later











I kid, I kid

 

[fawndog]

Yeah it was a good call, some people get caught up in the hype though. He made a clutch play, and a good start to a fairytale finish. We just have too many babies who expect the fairytale.

 

[motorman4life]

Yeah it was a good call, some people get caught up in the hype though. He made a clutch play, and a good start to a fairytale finish. We just have too many babies who expect the fairytale.

I guess it is just that it irks me that when people make bad choices (whether it is intentional or in the heat of the moment) screw up, they blame the people that are just enforcing the rules, whether they are cops or refs.

 

[rritterson]

I see what you are saying but the problem becomes consistency. If the ref isn't consistent people get pissed and call him biased and if he is, people get piss and say he is dumb for enforcing a rule, like what just happened.

Some editorial I read (sorry, i read about 5 different college football sites) pointed out several instances this season where the rule wasn't enforced, even though the violations were more egregious and the call would have had less of an effect on the outcome.

My supposition is that the ref was briefed at the beginning of the season to focus on these unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, so when he saw the toss, a bell went off in his head and he tossed the flag. Yes, it was the 'right' call under the rules (as I mentioned before), but the flag was thrown without a careful analysis of the situation.

But, MM4L is right-- don't shoot the messenger. Locker knew the rules and if he were thinking, probably wouldn't have tossed the ball. It's just like if I get tagged for going 59 in a 55. You can't argue that you shouldn't get a ticket, because you are clearly in violation, even if most of the time going 59 doesn't attract any attention.

 

[LongGoneJohn]

Clearly it was a violation of his 4th amendment rights.

Just like the guy in traffic court that said it was a violation of his 4th amendment rights to get pulled over because the cop was sitting in a private driveway without written authorization.

People are whiners and don't take responsibility for themselves. That's all it comes down to...