OT: SIAP I swear I checked...Could OK State Appeal?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/oklahoma-state-stunned-by-central-michigan-…
I swear I checked to see if anyone else had posed the question and didn't find anything. If I missed it, neg away and I'll never create another thread again.
What, if any options would Oklahoma State have to appeal the result of the game against CMU this past weekend? If the play never should have happened, and the clock read 0:00, why cant Oklahoma State just mark it down as a W? Why wouldn't the NCAA allow such an egregious error be corrected?
September 12th, 2016 at 12:17 PM ^
The NCAA does not have anything in effect that can change the outcome of a game, at least that is what talking heads have stated.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:21 PM ^
In 2011 the Pac-12 changed the final score of the USC Utah game to reflect an officiating error as time expired: www.espn.com/los-angeles/ncf/story/_/id/6957111/pac-12-changes-usc-troj…
This score should be changed too, period. It was a completely egregious error by the officials, and just because this one happened to affect the winner doesn't mean the error can and should not be corrected. If we can change the final score, why can it only be in situations when the ultimate outcome is not in doubt?
I also will just not hear the argument that OK State should not get the change because "they didn't deserve to win anyways" based on their play. That team has as much a right to win ugly and by a small point spread as anyone else. They, in fact, clearly did deserve to win by the score of 27-24.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:23 PM ^
So, the NCAA can punish a team by pretending entire seasons (sometimes, many seasons) didn't exist because infractions occurred, but cannot change the outcome of a game when it is clearly obvious a bad call by officials led to one team winning when another should have? Yup, sounds like perfect NCAA logic to me...
September 12th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 12:50 PM ^
In this case I would disagree with you. I could see the Big 12 and the NCAA allowing Ok State to mark the game as a win while not taking the win away from CMU. If vacating wins while not removing the loss from the other team is acceptable, why not vacating a defeat?
September 12th, 2016 at 1:05 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 1:34 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 12th, 2016 at 4:58 PM ^
So could the NCAA then potentially take a drastic stance and allow Oklahoma State to vacate the loss?
In reality, of course any rule could be initiated to allow both teams to claim a Win based on an incorrect last call of the game under certain circumstances.
The issue I see more than the paper records (which are easy to change given there is a rule to do so) is that a million sports accounting systems will have issues with it as their databases have a column for winner and a column for loser...not two winners. They would have to have the game listed twice with each as a winner which would screw up other things in their database.
Anyway, vacate the loss I say!
September 12th, 2016 at 5:43 PM ^
will ignore it and put them in the playoff if Ok State wins out.
If they lose only one more and still win the Big 12, then it'll be interesting to see if the committee treats them as a one-loss conference champ.
Two more losses, and it's a moot point for Ok State anyway. And that's highly likely to happen.
September 12th, 2016 at 4:59 PM ^
September 13th, 2016 at 12:07 AM ^
September 13th, 2016 at 12:07 AM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 12:30 PM ^
Egregeous or not, that rule is fucking stupid. The team with the lead should not be able to end the game by committing a penalty. It's so dumb.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:33 PM ^
Okay, but that is the rule. You can't backdate rule changes. The game was played under a clearly defined set of rules and by those rules OK State won the game. That's inarguable, so the outcome should reflect that.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:39 PM ^
You also can't change the outcome of a game.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:48 PM ^
So OK St. won then?
September 12th, 2016 at 12:53 PM ^
rules say that when the refs say the game is over, it is final and can't be changed. It's a stupid rule but apparently that doesn't matter because rules are rules and we have a clearly defined set of them. Central won and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:24 PM ^
What the rules say is that the refs should have ended the game. The refs literally changed the outcome of a completed game, according to the rules.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:54 PM ^
double post
September 12th, 2016 at 12:53 PM ^
don't know about that. By the rules in place, the game was over. So, if you think about it, the CMU touchdown was not part of the game. The game had ended and the refs incorrectly extended it. It was the refs that changed the "outcome" of the game after the game had ended. There is no question that the clock expired so there is a clearly established ending to the game. I think Ok. State may get some traction if they continue to push this.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:55 PM ^
by the rules in place the game is not over until the refs say it is, whether it should have been over or not before that is a different arguement.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:06 PM ^
for the act of an official, the game was over. Does an official have to declare something in order for it to be? A touchdown does not happen when a ref says it does, a touchdown happens and the ref signals that it has. Everything is reviewed, even when a ref makes a call of the field. Why should this be anything else than an extended video review? It is a very unique situation.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:10 PM ^
" Does an official have to declare something in order for it to be?"
Yes, the official has to declare the game over for it to be over.
The game SHOULD have been declared over, but it wasn't. So the game was not over.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:31 PM ^
but not fully aware.
September 12th, 2016 at 2:08 PM ^
That's why they've been suspended too. The question is why should this call be subject to a further review and not others? If others are, where would you draw the line?
The reverse of this case. Refs misapplied a rule and didn't allow a final untimed down.
Time should have expired before the final play, but the clock was stopped too early.
Time did expire, but only because the clock was stopped too late, depriving a team of another play.
Missed call on the final play that does not involve judgement, like too many men on the field.
A mistake on whether a game ending FG was good.
Blatantly missed calls that do involve judgment.
I could go on, but it should be obvious that whatever grounds there are for granting an appeal need to be clearly spelled out. I think it's hard to justify overturning one specific type of mistake while ignoring the others. CFB has decided to trust the refs and replay officials to handle things, rather than deal with the alternatives.
September 12th, 2016 at 4:54 PM ^
in that there would be subsequent play of unknown outcome.
In this case, the facts were indisputable, no judgment was involved, a rule was applied incorrectly by the officials, and CMU wouldn't have had any opportunity to adjust their play if the officials had switched to the correct call state of the world.
I know there is a rule that the game is over when the refs say it is, but if I was Okla St, I'd get my lawyers working on this.
September 12th, 2016 at 9:09 PM ^
Let's gets lawyers involved every time a call goes the wrong way at the end of the game.
Are we only fixing the end of game mistakes when they are most convenient? As I pointed out, there are plenty of similar scenarios. You either have to spell out just what can be appealed or open up the process to politicking, charges of favoritism, etc.
There's a clear precedent. The game where Colorado scored on 5th down while time expired. The refs realized their mistake, but did not overturn the play. Missouri's appeal was rejected by the Big 8. If schools wanted a process for overturning calls after a game, they'd have one. They don't.
September 13th, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^
from their own one with two seconds left. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Missouri would have fumbled and Colorado recovered for a touchdown.
The circumstances are rarely this 100% clean without the need to make any assumptions.
September 12th, 2016 at 2:23 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 4:57 PM ^
the NCAA join in on the party? I'd push that if I were Okla St.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
Except that's already happened in the case of an incorrect official decision after time expired, see USC Utah 2011 which I linked earlier.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
That article makes it sound like the officials on the field counted the touchdown but did a bad job communicating with the press box. They changed the score that was reported but did not change the official score.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:24 PM ^
then they would have put it in the rulebook. This was by no means the only time an official's error at the end of the game did or could have changed the outcome.
I don't think it's ever going to happen.
September 12th, 2016 at 1:39 PM ^
think it is more rare than you think that an official's act or omission of a "procedural nature" changes the outcome of the game literallty after the game has ended. Even the Spartan Bob incident, an argument could be made that the game had not ended because the clock had not expired, albeit erroneously. Here, the refs took a completed game and unended it. I don't think this is a slippery slope situation. I think here, believe it or not, the right move is to reverse the play and give Ok. St. the win.
September 12th, 2016 at 5:04 PM ^
The Spartan Bob game involved Spartan Bob's judgment bias. There is no error in judgment involved here. And further, if a transformation is performed from the officiated set of events to the correctly called set of events, there are no "what ifs"/unknown play outcomes in the correctly called set of events. (I imagine it's fairly unusual for the facts to be this clean.)
September 12th, 2016 at 7:07 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 12:33 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 12:41 PM ^
CMU won... check the final score.
And the only possible way to even remotely consider a reverse of the final score would be for the respective teams and their conferences to agree to it... and THAT ain't happening.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:46 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 1:29 PM ^
OK State only "won" because of a poorly worded rule that failed to anticipate a particular situation.
On the basis of the principle that "you should be able to acheive the end a game by committing a penalty," CMU earned its extra play. A poorly written rulebook is robbing CMU of the legitimacy that their win deserves.
September 12th, 2016 at 2:33 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 4:15 PM ^
CMU won on an officiating error, but this sometimes happens. A bad call on the last play -- or the second to last play -- is part of the game. The human element. I don't see it as all the different from a scenario in which the refs had, say, made a bad interference or holding call. Unfortunate, yes. But the game continued. And the end of the game can't retroactively be erased because the refs made a bad call two plays earlier.
September 12th, 2016 at 6:04 PM ^
In the case of a judgement call, the ref knows the rules of the game and is trying his best to apply the rules to what he saw. And those judegment calls are often impossible to determine even with the benefit of instant replay.
In this case, the refs DID NOT KNOW THE RULES and applied a black and white situation incorrectly. That is unacceptable, and that's why they were suspended.
September 12th, 2016 at 6:04 PM ^
Sorry, double post.
September 12th, 2016 at 2:27 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 5:08 PM ^
intervenes.
And surely you can't be saying the Supreme Court has never overturned a cases like this.
September 12th, 2016 at 12:47 PM ^
But considering all the stupid and inane rules and rulings of the NCAA, who would really call foul if the NCAA allowed both schools to mark that game as a W in their records? The asterisk would have to be applied, but still. I get that the lesson Ok State gets to learn here is that you never should allow yourself to be in the position to allow the refs to make a bad call that costs you the game. But this seems excessive...
September 12th, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^
September 12th, 2016 at 5:24 PM ^
That analogy doesn't hold here as the question does not involve a missed call or even a wrong call during the game while time was still on the clock. The clock read 0:00 in the OK State game, and the ball was dead. Under normal circumstances and 999 out of 1,000 times, that means the game is over. While I don't particularly care if OK State gets to win that game, I do wonder if there is a precident on which OK State could appeal the outcome. Haven't teams play games under protest because of bad calls or weird situations in the past? Has anything ever come from situations that would give OK State a leg to stand on? As a fan of OK State, would you want the Universiy to appeal, or would it just feel petty and like a useless gesture anyway? Even if the NCAA uphelp the appeal, would OK State fans feel good about it?
September 12th, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^
TIMMMAY, your spelling here was...wait for it....hold on.....ergregious...