Clemson v Ohio State- third quarter fumble call and reversal

coinkat

This question is solely related to the call and reversal of the OSU fumble recovery and touchdown... Nothing more. Was it the correct call? There are three choices... Yes....No... I don't know. The purpose is not to create an argument about the outcome of the game. Both teams had ample opportunities to win. It is more about instant reply and getting the call right. I will offer my thoughts later. Please let's do our best to limit the discussion to the question but feel free to write why you wrote yes... No ... Or I don't know.

PatsGuy5000

The referee in the booth indicated it was incomplete - they know the rules better than anyone. YES

dallasactuary

I don't know. I don't know so strongly that I have completely given up on trying to predict the outcome of booth reviews of completion/incompletion calls. They all hinge on whether or not a "football move" has been made, and that decision seems to be as much art as science. Based on the same basic sentiment that PatsGuy expressed, I just accept the decision whether it goes for or against the team I'm rooting for.

Brick

I am not a neutral observer but my thought was if a receiver has control of the ball and takes three, perhaps four steps, then has the ball stripped, he has certainly made a football move. But anyway congrats to Clemson, they played a great game and are very physical. BTW I am seeing more and more reviews that make no sense to me. It seems that years ago they got it right but now there are so many technicalities they go through they have lost all common sense.

coolstanley

Show me one call that went Ohio State's way? I'll wait. clemson got all the calls. The officiating was corrupt and should be investigated.

https://itsgame7.com/ohio-state-thinks-clemson-cheated-in-fiesta-bowl/

doubledragon

It probably won't matter, because LSU looks unstoppable. They dropped a 63 salad on Oklahoma like it was nothing. They have Clark Kent at quarterback. We have to remember, Kent won the heisman trophy. I smell trouble for Clemson. If Kent catches fire early, look out.

coinkat

Instant replay and what is required to overturn a decision from the field seems to have matured somewhat beyond the original intent...or so it would seem based on this decision to overturn. The Clemson receiver made the catch and was well covered at the time. Posession in my view is not an issue unless you buy into the proposition that a receiver does not have posession until he has safely secured the ball. In this instance seems he had Posession while trying to secure the ball. He took steps... And those steps were influenced by the defender as his forward progress looked to have been controlled but there was no whistle to end the play.

The ball was stripped...and it was stripped while the Clemson player was still on his feet and still making an effort to make something happen. And something did happen and it is part of the game. There was nothing revealed in the review to warrant overturning the initial decision that there was a completed pass followed by a fumble because the ball was stripped in an astute defensive play.

My point in starting the thread is not to re-write the history of the game. As I wrote initially, both teams had adequate opportunities to win. My point goes back to the first sentence which started in the form of a statement but might be more appropriate in the form of a question and that is has the use of instant reply really moved beyond what was originally intended?

s4ny

No, I saw it as a catch and fumble. I had no preference for either team.

Coinstartled

Didn't see it. Seems that first the pro and now the college game is micro officiated to a level of absurdity. With a 64" screen in every home both leagues fear making the wrong call and have destroyed the cadence of the once great game.

Maybe charge ten bucks a game and after each play, those that have paid up can yell "catch" or "fumbled" or "dropped" or "never had possession" or "bring me a Corona," into their smart TV and in 5 seconds all those opinions can be tabulated and the game will move fasted and no one can argue with the majority decision.

bronco2078

@coinkat said:
Instant replay and what is required to overturn a decision from the field seems to have matured somewhat beyond the original intent...or so it would seem based on this decision to overturn. The Clemson receiver made the catch and was well covered at the time. Posession in my view is not an issue unless you buy into the proposition that a receiver does not have posession until he has safely secured the ball. In this instance seems he had Posession while trying to secure the ball. He took steps... And those steps were influenced by the defender as his forward progress looked to have been controlled but there was no whistle to end the play.

The ball was stripped...and it was stripped while the Clemson player was still on his feet and still making an effort to make something happen. And something did happen and it is part of the game. There was nothing revealed in the review to warrant overturning the initial decision that there was a completed pass followed by a fumble because the ball was stripped in an astute defensive play.

My point in starting the thread is not to re-write the history of the game. As I wrote initially, both teams had adequate opportunities to win. My point goes back to the first sentence which started in the form of a statement but might be more appropriate in the form of a question and that is has the use of instant reply really moved beyond what was originally intended?

well originally it was intended to improve football so its moved beyond that. It does the opposite and makes games longer and more boring

lbcoach20

The receiver had the ball and took three or four steps before having it stripped. The referee announcer immediately said he didn’t make a football move. If by chance the receiver did the same thing and stepped out of bounds then wouldn’t it be called a catch?

coolstanley

I cant see Ohio State losing to their own(former) 3rd string Quarterback. Especially when they held Clemson to just 4.2 yards per play when Wade was in the game. LSU has a better chance at beating Clemson.

coolstanley

More OVERWHELMING proof that the Buckeyes were robbed.

https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football/2019/12/111086/clemsons-third-quarter-fumble-should-have-stood-according-to-multiple-officiating-supervisors

JRR300

I have no bias in this game but here's my take. The targeting call was correct; the play was not intentional but the defender did lower his head to hit the QB. My understanding is the lowing of the helmet constitutes a foul, and was correctly called as such. The issue is that there is no room for interpretation in the rule and the player must be ejected.
The catch/fumble call was so close that I just don't know if they got it right. The "expert" in the booth was adamant that it was an incomplete pass, yet other former referees have come out and stated the opposite.
The Ohio State people should be upset because their team had Clemson on the ropes early and could have put them away in the first quarter but were not able to do so. They left several TD's on the field and it wound up costing them the game.
Overall, a great football game. The old cliche is that neither team deserves to lose and that was certainly was true here. Give Clemson their props here; they were down and were all but left for dead early, got up off the amt and gutted their way to a victory over an excellent football team.

coolstanley

@JRR300 said:
Give Clemson their props here; they were down and were all but left for dead early, got up off the amt and gutted their way to a victory over an excellent football team.

The refs made sure of it. Clemson got ALL the calls(and no calls) Look at the snap shots and videos I posted.

coolstanley

@JRR300 said:
They left several TD's on the field .

Its hard to score in the red zone when Clemson defenders are grabbing and pulling on your jerseys. And getting tackled in a slot running a curl route.

bolivarshagnasty

Whining buckeyes. Every year. It's always someone else's fault. Bring a better football team next year.

Brick

I'm certainly not whining. I congratulated Clemson on staying tough and pulling out the game. The majority of those questioning the officiating and the replay official are those with no dog in the fight. I hope it is simply a matter of the officials missing some penalties or incompetence on their part as well as the replay official and not anything more sinister.

bronco2078

name your team after a wannabee acorn and suffer the consequences

doubledragon

The OSU vs Clemson game is over, it was played when Nixon was still president.

coolstanley

@Brick said:
The majority of those questioning the officiating and the replay official are those with no dog in the fight..

Fact.

dallasactuary

@coolstanley said:

@Brick said:
The majority of those questioning the officiating and the replay official are those with no dog in the fight..

Fact.

But if enough people whine about it long and loud enough, the football gods will come down from their mountaintop and declare OSU the winner.

Not a Fact.

coolstanley

@dallasactuary said:

@coolstanley said:

@Brick said:
The majority of those questioning the officiating and the replay official are those with no dog in the fight..

Fact.

But if enough people whine about it long and loud enough, the football gods will come down from their mountaintop and declare OSU the winner.

Not a Fact.

However, even people at ESPN included, still think OSU was the better team.

Fact.

bronco2078

@coolstanley said:

@Brick said:
The majority of those questioning the officiating and the replay official are those with no dog in the fight..

Fact.

to be fair , there is no downside to after the fact whining. People love the attention and not being invested in either team can say just about anything without fearing repercussions

coinkat

Let me take moment to remind everyone that the intent of the post is not about who won or lost... It is about the use of instant replay and how instant replay is utilized in confirming or overturning a call. Instant replay has limitations that really does not extend to allowing subjectivity to overturn a decision unless it is supported by photographic evidence.

I do not consider this whining.

dallasactuary

@coolstanley said:
However, even people at ESPN included, still think OSU was the better team.

Fact.

Yeah, I've often wondered why they keep score in sporting events when it's far more reliable to ask "people at ESPN" who was better. And really, why even play the game when "people at ESPN" can just tell us who they "think" is the better team. Then nobody would have to risk being injured.

Fact.

dallasactuary

@coinkat said:
Let me take moment to remind everyone that the intent of the post is not about who won or lost... It is about the use of instant replay and how instant replay is utilized in confirming or overturning a call. Instant replay has limitations that really does not extend to allowing subjectivity to overturn a decision unless it is supported by photographic evidence.

I do not consider this whining.

Instant replay isn't really the issue here; the issue is the inherently subjective rule requiring a "football move". As amply pointed out, even with instant replay professional referees still don't all agree on what that means and whether one was made in this instance.

And no, talking about rules or instant replay isn't whining. What coolstanley is doing is whining.

doubledragon

Everyone knows that when the refs are under the hood, they're watching re-runs of The Golden Girls.

PatsGuy5000

There have been several games over the past few years that have had questionable/bad calls. Three come to mind:

2019 OSU/Clemson Bowl game
2019 NE Patriots/KC Chiefs
2019 LA Rams/New Orleans Saints Playoff

In each game, the losing team (questionable/bad calls against them) had opportunities to win the game after the calls were made.

OSU had the ball at the edge of the red zone with less than a minute after refs made some questionable calls (2 touchdowns called back). They could have reclaimed the lead.
NE Patriots had the ball inside the 5 yard line after refs missed a touchdown (turned out to be a field goal) and pass interference call (no challenges left). They had their chances after the calls to win.
New Orleans had the ball first in overtime after refs missed the pass interference call late in the 4th quarter. Could have won the game.

coolstanley

Good team

Bullsitter

On the fumble play OSU was holding on a pass route before the ball was thrown.
Top of the screen #39 Harrison (OSU) grabbed #17 Powell (Clemson) before the ball was thrown. It wasn't called.
It clearly shows it during the replays.
So even if it was a fumble it should have been called back because of the hold on OSU.

coolstanley

@Bullsitter said:
On the fumble play OSU was holding on a pass route before the ball was thrown.
Top of the screen #37 Harrison (OSU) grabbed #17 Powell (Clemson) before the ball was thrown. It wasn't called.
It clearly shows it during the replays.
So even if it was a fumble it should have been called back because of the hold on OSU.

Harrison is #39 LOL. And no he didnt hold. #37 made contact with a receiver in the first 5 yards. Its a legal play.

Bullsitter

Contact and holding are two different things. He grabbed and held the jersey.

coolstanley

@Bullsitter said:
Contact and holding are two different things. He grabbed and held the jersey.

Nope. Those slight contacts like that never get called. If they did, every team would have 20 penalties lol

coolstanley

Saw 4 or 5 targeting calls not called in the bowls. This hit by a Alabama defender was way worse than Shaun Wade's hit. Yet, no targeting call was made.

https://saturdaytradition.com/michigan-football/alabama-defender-slams-into-michigan-wrs-head-no-targeting-call-or-review-ensued/?amp

Tabe

@coolstanley said:
Saw 4 or 5 targeting calls not called in the bowls. This hit by a Alabama defender was way worse than Shaun Wade's hit. Yet, no targeting call was made.

https://saturdaytradition.com/michigan-football/alabama-defender-slams-into-michigan-wrs-head-no-targeting-call-or-review-ensued/?amp

That no-call was ridiculous. They actually said the broadcast it was incidental contact. Unreal.

Bullsitter

He hit with shoulder pads not helmet.