Neck Sharpies: Let's Talk About the Calls
Why?
What, are you worried Spartans are gonna be all "Typical Wolverines, whining about the refs."?
Well, yeah.
[Interference on Desmond.gif] [Spartan Bob stops the clock.gif] [etc.] Things that happen happened. Plus can you name a Spartan anyone actually takes seriously?
Chris Vannini.
Granted. But is this hypothetical Spartan in your life Vannini, or this Youtube commenter?
Wow. That's— uh, that is…
…a person whose opinion does not matter.
I was going to say my brother-in-law. But they outgained us!
Special teams matter.
Indeed.
Dude.
Still can't we be above blaming the refs? Steel in the spine and all that. It won't change the outcome of the game. At most we'll get an apology from the Big Ten that's worth exactly as much as Rutgers in a post-cable bundling media landscape.
Nice one. I'm not making a "Michigan should have won…" argument, because every play matters. The last play had a huge effect on the outcome. Connor Cook throwing perfect back shoulder passes and Aaron Burbridge being an NFL-caliber receiver was very relevant. Jake Rudock being bad at deep balls was relevant. If they'd won, Michigan's stops on 4th downs were relevant. All of it is relevant, and the game, as they say, is over.
So then what's the point?
The point is to assess how good this Michigan team is at football. IE were they significantly better than a Michigan State team that nearly lost to Purdue and Rutgers, and was absent its Rimington-quality center plus half the legs of its bookends, and is fielding a pretty awful secondary. But I'm also doing this for some more personal reasons:
- For myself, and for posterity, I want a thorough canvassing of the things I saw and thought I saw.
- I want to point out where the refs are getting a bad rap. Not everything we thought we saw was a legit gripe, and some of the legit gripes may have been hard for human refs to see in real time. Since complaining is inevitable, let's get it right.
- Right now I feel like a truck ran over my dog and then half of the people in my life came over to gloat as if they were driving this truck. This is part of my healing process.
And you're going to show we got hosed?
Can't promise it. That was my certainly biased hypothesis in the stadium, but I'm not going to be able to find every incremental hold and would-be pass interference. I want to tackle the things people were talking about.
How?
Clip the plays people bitched about, watch the hell out of them, gauge the relative expectations we should have for the officials on those plays, and use the Markov Drive Analysis tool to calculate a rough expected points swing.
Markov?
This tool is based on NFL drives but it serves for what we're doing here. It gives you a basic expected points for every down, distance, and field position. For example if you have 1st and goal on your opponent's one yard line, the expected points is 6.32. A 4th and 10 on your 40 is about zero.
If I've left out any plays (including and especially those where something went Michigan's way) let me know and if I deem it worthy I'll add it to the post.
I'd rather not be part of this.
Then don't hit...
[The jump]
1. Can You Tackle a Tackle?
The situation: 1st and 10 at the MSU 2 (0.95 EP)
What occurred? Hurst shot into his gap at the snap. The right guard is blocking down, got an arm around Hurst's shoulder, and kinda jumped on him.
The call: No call.
Was it legit? Yes.
The result: 1st and 10 MSU on the MSU 16.
Should have been: n/a
Refspectation: 60% This will be a % of how often I'd expect the refs to make this call correctly.
I led off with this because Harbaugh was screaming about it, and from the first angle you can see why he thought he had a gripe. From the second angle, that's just a good block, and a good no-call by the refs. It's also not in the end zone, FWIW.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
2. Substitution Infraction
The situation: 3rd and 5 on the MSU 21. (0.91 EP)
What occurred? See above.
The call: Substitution infraction on Michigan (5 yards).
Was it legit? Yes.
The result: 1st and 10 MSU on the MSU 26. (1.67 EP)
Should have been: n/a
Refspectation: Someone on the board suggested this was a tacky call because the rules give you 3 seconds from the break of the huddle, but count the guys above with 10 seconds on the play clock. Lining up with 12 guys is an immediate flag if the refs spot it. This was 100% legit.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
3. Picked a Peppers
The situation: Same drive still, 2nd and 10 on MSU 38. (1.66 EP)
What occurred? Burbridge with a pretty obvious offensive PI.
The call: No call.
Was it legit? Nope.
The result: 1st and 10 MSU on Mich 43 (2.89 EP)
Should have been: 2nd and 20 on MSU 28 (0.98 EP)
Refspectation: 60%. Announcers called it a "man beater" but a rub route and a pick are different things. You're supposed to get the defense to run into each other; if you actually hit the guy covering your buddy, that's an easy offensive pass interference. That said, it's something that's routinely missed by refs. Out of the context of this game it's a groan that this sort of stuff isn't flagged enough.
Markov expected points swing: 1.91
----------------------------
4. Holding on Number 86
The situation: Still that drive, 3rd and 17 on MSU 49 (0.87 EP)
What occurred? Aaron Burbridge ran into the field umpire and Jourdan Lewis tripped on that mess. Pass goes to RJ Shelton and Peppers deflects to Dymonte Thomas, who intercepts and returns it to the MSU 36.
The call: Holding on "86" (they meant Lewis; the scorer put it on Peppers)
Was it legit? No.
The result: 1st and 10 MSU on M41 (3.13 EP)
Should have been: 1st and 10 Michigan on MSU 36. (-3.39 EP)
Refspectation: 80%. Most of the bad. It is either a totally phantom call in an extremely high-leverage situation, or an extremely ticky tack call. Lewis does have a hand on the receiver (hardly unusual for him) and the way they went could understandably have looked like a tackle to the back judge (the ref they tripped over should have overruled him). I had a back and forth with a State fan on this until we both realized what looks in the grainy film like an arm around the receiver's waist is a handwarmer.
No he doesn't have 12 foot arms
The guy went down because he fell into the ref, and the ref he went into didn't throw the flag. By the way a reader in one of the threads suggested even a holding penalty is just 10 yards, but since 2009 it comes with an automatic 1st down.
Markov expected points swing: 6.520 (!!!)
----------------------------
5. The Replay Booth's Goal Line Stand, Preview
The situation: 2nd and goal on MSU 2 (5.65 EP)
What occurred? Houma had a 2nd effort spin to barely get over the goal line. It's ruled a touchdown and upheld.
The call: Upheld
Was it legit? Yes.
The result: Touchdown (7.00 EP)
Should have been: n/a
Refspectation: 60%. I included this one because the Spartanweb was claiming Michigan was gifted two TDs on the goal line, this being the first. This is a legit TD. Tough call, right to review, but they got it right. If it wasn't ruled a TD on the field it would have been 60/40 to overturn, so congrats to the ref who saw it live.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
6. Lyles Chucks Our Worm
The situation: 4th and 7 on MSU 34 (immediately after M stops a 3rd and 2) (0.01 EP)
What occurred? Missed personal foul. MSU ran a jet sweep and Michigan blows it up on the edge for a loss. After the play MSU TE Jamal Lyles throws Wormley into the Michigan bench.
The call: No call
Was it legit? No.
The result: 4th and 7 on MSU 34 (0.01 EP)
Should have been: 4th and 22 on MSU 19 (-0.08 EP)
Refspectation: 90% Pretty bad since it occurred right in front of the head linesman and M's coaches. Rivalry games get chippy but given the history of this matchup and the egregious nature of the foul (long after the whistle, etc.) it was dismaying that this was let go. Harbaugh lets the referee know it. Difference in field position is small.
Markov expected points swing: 0.09 EP. FWIW after the punt Michigan got the ball on the 18; if they got it on the 33 it's a 0.360 EP differential. Anyway still a small deal.
----------------------------
7. Targeting on Bolden
The situation: 3rd and 4 on Michigan's 40 after Connor Cook slid down on a 5-yard gain.
What occurred? Morgan is about to tackle Cook when the QB slides (until they call this everyone thinks it's on Morgan). LT Conklin was blocking (er…holding) Bolden and threw him down atop Cook after the whistle.
The call: Targeting on Bolden(!)
Was it legit? No.
The result: 1st and 10 on Michigan 24, Bolden thrown out of the game. (4.10 EP)
Should have been: 3rd and 4 on Michigan 40. (2.17 EP)
Refspectation: 100% The worst. Bolden to Gedeon may not be a huge difference but even Ohio State fans were going "Wow that is bad." The Big Ten should not have this review official anymore, period.
Markov expected points swing: 1.93 EP, plus no Bolden.
----------------------------
8. The Bear Hug TD
The situation: 1st and 10 on the M 11, second play after the above.
What occurred? MSU runs outside power, RJS is held like whoa, L.J. Scott takes that hole to the end zone.
The call: No call
Was it legit? No.
The result: Touchdown (7.00 EP)
Should have been: 1st and 20 on Michigan 21. (3.92 EP)
Refspectation: 85% Holding happens often inside but this one was right on the play in clear view of the back judge and referee. There's yanking on the shoulders, and then there's total bear hugs and this is a case example of the latter—Jenkins-Stone tries to fight playside and can't because the guy has his jersey too. This stuff gets called 85% of the time and that would be 95% if Wisconsin didn't exist.
Markov expected points swing: 3.08 EP, but that's low since MSU can't kick field goals.
----------------------------
9. Reschke is Early Part I
The situation: M ball, 2nd and 5 on MSU 20 (4.22 EP)
What occurred? Rudock is under pressure and tries to complete an outlet for basically no gain to Karan Higdon. MSU LB is right on this and leaps over Higdon's back, maaaaybe a tidge early, and breaks it up.
The call: No call
Was it legit? Yes.
The result: 3rd and 5 on MSU 20 (3.69 EP)
Should have been: n/a
Refspectation: 75% Live the salty audience was expecting a pass interference, and if they threw one it'd be hard to argue it. But this is a pass into good coverage near the line of scrimmage so the refs were absolutely correct to let it go.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
10. Reschke is Early Part II
The situation: Very next play. M ball, 3rd and 5 on MSU 20 (3.69 EP)
What occurred? Quick underneath to Butt on the outside, Reschke jumps underneath and arrives a second early.
The call: No call
Was it legit? No.
The result: 4th and 5 on MSU 20 (2.58 EP)
Should have been: 1st and 10 on MSU 15 (4.61 EP)
Refspectation: 75% Bang bang play that is easier to call on review than live. Still, given the game so far and the close call right before this one I think it's reasonable to expect the refs to call this, say, 75% of the time. Understandable that they didn't, but also frustrating.
Markov expected points swing: 2.03 EP
----------------------------
[I got requests for the McGarrett Kings scoop catch and the MSU push-off OPI at the end of the 2nd half. The officials got both obviously correct. Also the Chesson false start if you were wondering. I'm not reviewing those obviously good calls, but give the refs mental credit for making them.]
----------------------------
11. Kerridge Measured
The situation: 3rd and 1 on the Michigan 33 (1.51 EP)
What occurred? After a lot of push on heavy dive the officials blow the whistle and spot it where they saw it.
The call: Ball placed just short
Was it legit? Yes.
The result: 4th and inches on Michigan 33 (0.17 EP)
Should have been: n/a
How bad was it? Watch the play. Now here's the spot.
You can't ask for better. This was fine.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
Not reviewing these but I screengrabbed in case you doubt the first two goal line reviews.
Knee is down here.
Ball is down here. Don't know why the line judge wasted everyone's time by calling a TD he didn't see. Ironically this is the play right before that one guy flicks off ESPN.
----------------------------
12. A Glacier Technically Makes Forward Progress
The situation: 3rd and inches from the 1 yard line. (5.25 EP)
What occurred? Houma's initially stuffed, no whistle yet. Smith starts shoving, AJ Williams is still carving a path, and the pile is lurching forward at the rate of an inch every 5 seconds. Finally Houma gets through and they signal a TD.
The call: No whistle (forward progress).
Was it legit? Probably not?
The result: Touchdown (7.00 EP)
Should have been: 4th and inches. (3.53)
Refspectation: 80% They could have blown the whistle on the initial stop; it was a break for Michigan that they didn't. After a second the pile is going forward so the officials are right to keep it going for 10 seconds. I think Michigan got a break here that it wasn't whistled immediately.
Markov expected points swing: –3.47
----------------------------
Not reviewing this either but this…
…is a catch. Bad call on the field, correctly overturned.
----------------------------
13. Don't Pick It Up
The situation: 2nd and 10 from the MSU 32 (3.11 EP)
What occurred? Michigan lined up Chesson in the backfield and had him run a circle route. Bad matchup for Reschke, who gives a little too much arm to reroute then gets his leg tangled in Chesson's legs. Flags come flying.
The call: Pass interference.
Was it legit? Yes.
The result: 1st and 10 on the MSU 19. (4.35 EP)
Should have been: n/a
Refspectation: 75% This is one of those things that looks worse on the first review; live you can see Chesson lost his balance from the shove, which is PI.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
14. Doesn't Holding Imply Contact?
The situation: 1st and goal from the 10 (4.79)
What occurred? Calhoun sheds Mason Cole inside, Braden gets an arm out to impede, barely, while Rudock gets it out to Darboh on the 5. Braden flagged.
The call: Holding.
Was it legit? No.
The result: 1st and goal on the MSU 20. (3.92 EP)
Should have been: 2nd and goal from the 5. (4.98 EP)
Refspectation: 75% You're not allowed to tackle a guy, but you're allowed to put a hand on him, right? Is there something about being outside of his frame? Let me know if I've interpreted the rule wrong. For now I'm going with my gut that this is BS.
Markov expected points swing: 1.06 EP
----------------------------
15. Willie Henryflop
The situation: 3rd and 2 from the Michigan 44 (2.13 EP)
What occurred? Michigan has the stop and Willie Henry is coming from the backside to finish it off since the whistle hasn't blown and the runner isn't down. Whistle goes as soon as he's airborne.
The call: Unnecessary roughness.
Was it legit? Absolutely not.
The result: 1st and 10 from the Michigan 32 (3.63 EP)
Should have been: 4th and 4 from the Michigan 46. (0.16 EP)
Refspectation: 65% Henry doesn't need to jump on this (even if he lands on his teammates' backs) but the whistle clearly didn't blow until he did. In some situations this is just a bad call. To call this in this situation was atrocious.
Markov expected points swing: 3.47 EP
----------------------------
16. Jake Butt Overruled
The situation: 3rd and 9 from MSU 44 (1.66 EP)
What occurred? Rudock whistles a low ball to Butt at the first down marker, and Butt digs it out. Referee right on top of the play calls it a catch but then the sideline judge runs in and calls it no catch (huh?)
The call: Incomplete, inconclusive evidence to overturn.
Was it legit? Noooooo.
The result: 4th and 9 from the MSU 44 (0.10 EP)
Should have been: Probably 1st and 10 on the MSU 35 (3.39 EP), but may need a measurement. FWIW if it's 4th and inches it's 2.26 EP.
Refspectation: 75% The review seems about 99.9% conclusive that he did catch it, and what is the sideline guy doing overturning something the guy right on top of it was all over? What's the point of review? This is another really bad one, especially given:
Markov expected points swing: 3.29 EP
----------------------------
17. We Want a Safety
The situation: 2nd and 10 from MSU 3 (0.69 EP)
What occurred? The replay above only shows a bit of it but I've heard now from enough people who were standing in that end zone to believe what my eyes and Harbaugh's eyes saw, and that was Wormley got past Conklin, who grabbed Wormley's jersey and took him down.
The call: No call.
Was it legit? No.
The result: 3rd and 3 from the MSU 6 (0.86 EP)
Should have been: A safety. Advanced Football Analytics, who are responsible for the Markov thing, call a safety 3.6 points (2 points plus the value of getting the ball at the 40, which is 1.60 EP)
Refspectation: 40% This is what I mean about some of our gripes being things that normally you just let go, even if they're legit, because holding, most of which occurred after the ball is released, is probably called in less than a third of situations like this. But they called a far less egregious one on Braden, and like I said, we all saw it because for a second it looked like Wormley was gonna get at least a hit in. Plus, like, by this point Michigan is so very due, and a safety would be a huge emotional swing in the game. Consider this one me at my bitchiest.
Markov expected points swing: 4.46 EP but I'm not going to count this in the total.
----------------------------
18. No Fair He Beat Our Cheat!
The situation: 3rd and 3 on the MSU 6 (following play) (0.86 EP)
What occurred? State is trying to block Jourdan Lewis off of Burbridge using Josiah Price. Lewis is going down but trying to stay in Burbridge's hip pocket as long as he can. Burbridge is using his arm to make sure Lewis falls, which is why his arm isn't there when the ball comes.
The call: No call.
Was it legit? No. Should have been offensive PI.
The result: 4th and 3 from the MSU 6 (-1.56 EP)
Should have been: M would have declined, so n/a.
Refspectation: 50%. I clipped this ironically because Spartans thought this was the worst call to go against State. Then I saw the OPI the refs missed.
I want to give credit to the refs for this anyway. It's hard to see stuff at the snap when it happens as quickly as Burbridge and Lewis happen, and while the Price block was obvious on replay it probably wasn't live. A lot of times you see the defense pick up a flag on these because the refs just see the receiver tangled up. Very good job to not get suckered.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
19. Block in the Side
The situation: Punt from the MSU 6 (following play)
What occurred? Wayne Lyons got a legal block. Flag correctly picked up.
Markov expected points swing: n/a
----------------------------
20. Rudock Facemask
The situation: 3rd and 4 and on the Michigan 27 (1.12 EP)
What occurred? The ball batted off of Darboh and back to Rudock. He's swarmed and Chris Frey unnecessarily rips him down by the facemask.
The call: No call.
Was it legit? No. But you can't tell from that video.
The result: 4th and 4 from the Mich 27 (-1.40)
Should have been: 1st and 10 from the Mich 42 (2.27 EP)
Refspectation: 80% The fans got treated to a different angle than they showed on TV, and that's why we booed. Jake Butt also got this angle and turned around expecting the center judge, who is pointing at Rudock's head and also had that angle, would have thrown a flag. Since the camera didn't catch it going to have to trust us that it was about as awful a facemask as you're likely to see. Frey is trying to rip Jake's head off. I don't know why the official missed it since he's right there but refs do miss facemasks pretty often. Frustrating, especially since Frey has a history.
Markov expected points swing: 3.67 EP but that doesn't count the effect of clock runoff.
----------------------------
Quick aside:
Yes, Henry moved first.
----------------------------
21. Worst Thing Ever
The situation: Michigan punting from the MSU 47 with 10 seconds left.
What occurred? You already know. That one guy maaaaaybe lined up in the neutral zone.
But I would never expect that to be called. Don't complain about where that guy's lined up, please.
What could be called is the fact that he bowled over Sypniewski before a second had elapsed:
When a team is in scrimmage kick formation, a defensive player may not initiate contact with the snapper until one second has elapsed after the snap (A.R. 9-1-14-I-III).
UPDATE: via TennBlue in the comments:
Immediately below the rule you quoted, on page 184, is Approved Ruling 9-1-14. Part III says:
Actual referees that have looked at the play have also concluded it was not a foul.
The call: No call.
Was it legit? No. [Edit: Yes.] But like…
The result: Worst thing ever.
Should have been: 15-yard penalty, automatic 1st down, Michigan kneels it out.
Refspectation: 60% Michigan had no business making that relevant, but the thing about the Worst Thing Ever is it makes all the things that weren't relevant suddenly relevant again.
Markov expected points swing: 10.63 if we're just going by Markov. Technically it was the game. Not counting it in the total either. [Edit: fortunately.]
----------------------------
Chart.
This isn't UFR.
Am I a bolded non-person?
Yes.
Chart!
| Play | EP swing | Expectation that call is made | EP x Expectation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Picked a Peppers | 1.91 | 60% | 1.146 |
| Holding on 86 | 6.52 | 80% | 5.216 |
| Lyle's chuck | 0.09 | 90% | 0.081 |
| Targeting on Bolden | 1.93 | 100% | 1.930 |
| RJS bear hugged | 3.08 | 85% | 2.618 |
| Reschke early | 2.03 | 75% | 1.523 |
| Glacial Progress | -3.47 | 80% | -2.776 |
| Braden's arm | 1.06 | 75% | 0.795 |
| Henryflop | 3.47 | 65% | 2.256 |
| Butt Catch | 3.29 | 75% | 2.468 |
| Facemask | 3.67 | 80% | 2.936 |
Removing the safety and the last play because they're such distortions, and saying they should have whistled Houma's forward progress rather than let him inch forward for 10 seconds, this game was distorted by 23.58 points. Accounting for my feels on the difficulty of refereeing, it's still an 18-point swing in expected points by bad officiating.
Feel better?
No, I feel worse. And tired. And sick. I should have done a Lewis-Burbridge matchup instead.
Let that be a lesson.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:25 PM ^
You just locked yourself into a weekly ref UFR Seth - make it so.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:38 PM ^
No fucking chance. UFR does a good enough job catching that with refs-2 and whatnot. This article was brutal to write and I did it for the reasons stated above, which again are to fix the errors floating around and document one of the most unholy officiating screwjobs to ever not involve a racist host nation.
October 20th, 2015 at 7:55 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 10:48 PM ^
I understand your feelings and respect them
October 20th, 2015 at 7:30 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 7:30 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 7:35 PM ^
if done by a Sparty homer. Your number is so high the only reasonable assumption is that there's a methodology problem somewhere. My suspicion is that that problem is "pissed about the loss and not really being objective".
October 20th, 2015 at 7:47 PM ^
Or perhaps all of that rational analysis that I checked against a Sparty homer (and I mean a HUGELY BIASED Sparty homer) actually merely documents one of the most lopsided referee screw jobs in the history of sports?
The hypothesis that we walked out of that stadium with was backed up by evidence, and you're saying there's a methodology problem?
Perhaps you're underestimating a typical hose-job. Like I bet you the distribution on this lumps the majority of games between +/- 7 points, i..e more than the spread in most college football games. Referee incompetence that isn't balanced is a natural part of sports. This one live felt like a spectacular outlier, and the numbers represent that. There are huge calls--things that turned a stalled drive into chances for points--that either resulted in points or had those points wiped out by spectacular things (like Michigan holding on some fourth downs). By that context I was suprised the numbers were so LOW.
Frankly I'm not interested in a Sparty attempt because I don't know any Sparty who'd put this much effort into being correct and not biased. I would very honestly love it if you found me one.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:19 PM ^
This may be the most hyperbolic statement ever written in the history of humankind.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:14 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 9:38 AM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 12:36 PM ^
I agree that hoops reffing is really difficult, but that Kings-Lakers game is the worst reffed game of all time. The Lakers shot 27 FTs in the 4th quarter. That projects to 108 over the course of a whole game. That's just ridiculous.
October 21st, 2015 at 8:18 AM ^
The gripe is legit. This was about as bad as Lakers-Kings, which later had some allegations that the game was fixed. (Not that the leaker had a stellar reputation, but even Lakers fans didn't like that game, because they felt the Lakers didn't need the help.)
As I said elsewhere, the officiating goes beyond down & distance. Bolden was ejected for being thrown (and it was UPHELD FFS). That has a lingering effect on play. There's a reason why Michigan gave up a TD shortly after Bolden's ejection and it wasn't because he's a star player (he's decent, not a difference-maker). The ejection shell-shocked the defense. Both are physical, grabby defenses, but Sparty was allowed to be as aggressive as they wanted whereas Michigan had flags on the brain. This didn't come down to a botched punt. If not for the refs this game would've been a 30-point blowout.
This is one of those rare cases where I want an actual investigation into the officiating. Not "did they get the calls right" but "were the refs ethically compromised". This isn't the refs were inconsistent but not biased, or other games where they had to make tough calls and were fallible. I know refs have a tough job and will anger someone no matter what they do, but the ejection (especially in context of the review, the NU reversal and the Minnesota decapitation last season) is evidence the refs acted out of malice and that's an unacceptable breach of trust.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:27 PM ^
You're essentially excerpting some relatively small percentage and saying, "Yeah, this really is everything that mattered". Also I'm not sure where your %called numbers are coming from: that could distort the results pretty badly one way or another and it sounds like they're pretty subjective. And finally, piling up those EVs without regard to time seems implausible.
Part of its comparison to my own feelings, where I didn't feel during the game that the reffing was or ended up particularly biased: sloppy, and I didn't like the way the "targeting" play was called, but that was the only thing that stood out to me.
And finally, complaining about the refs seems like a lame way to try to get over a gut-punch of a loss, anyway. Especially when we've got a clear colossal screw-up all of our own without trying to find anything else to blame it on.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:39 PM ^
I believe he explained why he did this and why he chose those plays.
October 21st, 2015 at 12:40 PM ^
It adds to the appearance of subjectivity when the explanation of selection is based on "the things I saw and thought I saw" (so, Seth's using his feelings/judgment) and "the things people were talking about.... the plays people bitched about" (implied: "people" means "Michigan fans"). Either one or both together mean we can expect a "Michigan bias" in the selection of plays reviewed even if his analysis of the plays is 100% correct (which I'd be prepared to grant, at least for the sake of argument).
And thus even if Seth's "Sparty homer" check (and which is it, is that a reliable check or should we never take Spartan fans seriously?) agreed with his judgment, the selections still questionable.
And even if the selection were fine, and even if the analysis is 100% correct, the EV is being abused by simply summing these abstracted numbers. It could just be a too-simplistic model (as Seth mentions at the end when he discusses why the last play shouldn't be included), but the caveats, I feel, aren't big enough.
October 21st, 2015 at 10:21 AM ^
but if a sparty put in this much effort into a post justifying the butthurt of a close loss to us , he'd be mocked mercislessly for being a typical spartan diaper baby.
I get it rage needs to work its way through. but, "the refs dun screwed us" is just a bad look.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:10 PM ^
Looks to me like Frey subtly knees Rudock, which I would give the benefit of the doubt to as being momentum, until he gets up and then kicks Jake in the facemask. The clip is stopped right as this is happening, and he tries to disguise it by "jumping" in celebration, but sure looks bush league to me.
October 21st, 2015 at 2:51 AM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 8:20 PM ^
Thanks Seth. Validates my "This is a fucking joke!" repeatedly with regards to the calls on the field. After a while I thought perhaps it was my angle from Section 9 was fooling my eyes.
It became an exercise in asking myself "What in the hell did Mark Hollis say to the crew before the ballgame? What's the narrative?"
October 20th, 2015 at 8:27 PM ^
I haven't seen this posted elsewhere, but are you allowed to hold on a punt block runback? It sure looked like Lyons was held around the 10 yard line on the runback as he was trying to tackle Watts-Jackson.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:27 PM ^
You left out how, if indeed James Ross was the one who biffed it on the 75 yard fullback pass, the bolden ejection cost us 7 more points. If it was Hill...then nevermind.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:03 PM ^
Because Bolden is great in coverage. Yep.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:38 PM ^
While watching the broadcast I noticed the refs spent a good deal time (post whistle) chastizing our players for talking and being chippy. I specifically recall seeing them go after Lewis on a couple of plays in a row prior to the interception being overturned. I also noticed them throughout the game running into the frame in the the background talking to Michigan players after the whistle. No such effort was expended toward MSU players who traditionally have been the antagonists. I think the refs walked onto the field with an agenda to keep Michigan in check (Bolden is another example) and that it played a role in how they called the game.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:09 PM ^
I thought they easily could have flagged LJ Scott for taunting after he scored Sparty's first TD, that should have been negated by a hold and that was setup by the most terrible targeting call in the history of the rule. Goddamn, these refs sucked.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:57 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 8:59 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 8:25 AM ^
Bolden is not key. It's not like he was likely to make a difference in terms of play. Not that he's bad, but Gedeon isn't much of a drop-off.
The problem is that if you're ejected for being thrown, the players can say all they want about moving past it in the pressers, but that inhibits your play. The refs got their message across: we are coming after you. It's not like they completely lost their aggressiveness, but they couldn't afford any more ejections, so they were out of it for a good while, giving up two cheap TDs to Sparty.
It could've been anyone; the effect would've been the same. If the refs go THAT far, anyone who isn't an idiot knows they're being fucked with, that prevents you from playing the way you want to play. And in a rivalry game, that's crippling.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:14 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 9:14 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 9:53 AM ^
This goes beyond incompetence. I've seen incompetence, especially before the days of replay. Sometimes it bites the other guy, sometimes you get bit. It sucks, but refs have a tough job, and I rarely accuse them of bias.
But Bolden's ejection was held up on review. It wasn't a pile of bodies viewed from a bad angle in realtime. To me, that's evidence of tampering.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:31 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 9:38 PM ^
for the hard work, but I feel like a few of these are a pretty big stretch. Maybe 10 point swing total.
The two worst calls were Bolden and the "hold" on "86", one was a really big play that could have given Michigan huge momentum, the other probably caused some defensive issues as the game went along. Otherwise, everything else feels like nitpicking.
Also, if you're going to address the last play and State maybe being in the neutral zone and definitely trucking the center, you need to address the fact Michigan is simply blocking that play incorrectly.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:48 PM ^
Send your analysis to the Big Ten officiating committee. They need to see stuff like this. If the mistakes are this one-sided, there is indeed something amiss.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:05 PM ^
Referees have bosses, too. They get graded out just like the players after every game.They learn from their mistakes and gradually get better.
I think what it boils down to is that there are simply not enough good college referees. The ones we have are the best there is, like it or not. There's no way to magic up a bunch of outstanding referees out of thin air.
Part of the problem is the increased media coverage college football gets. The refs may be better than they've ever been, but now there are 50 cameras at every game have put them under a microscope, picking up every little thing. Stuff no one used to notice is now front page news.
I don't think there really is a solution. It's just the way it is, and probably always will be.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:06 PM ^
Or maybe another ref or two on the field.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 9:56 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 9:59 PM ^
1) When I read the Texas Tinhat Conspiracy Screed, I quickly dismissed it because their Case In Point #2 was a downfiled hold that they swore -- SWORE -- was not a hold. It was a hold. Moral, focus on the obvious f-ups, not the marginal ones.
Which one's are obivous and which are marginal? I'd make the divide here:
Obvious:
- Picked a Peppers
- Targeting on Bolden
- Lyle chucks Wormley
- Self-pass Facemask
- RJS gets Bearhugged
Marginal
- Holding on Braden (his arm is extended, he appears to slow the rusher down)
- Reschke early (it is a PI, but I take issue with your call likelihood; I'd put it at 15%)
- Butt catch (although the point about who made the call on the field boots it at least intoin between)
- Henry flop (just bad judgment, literally unnecessary no matter when the whistle was blown)
- Hold on Wormley for safety (already excluded)
- Anything on The Play That Shall Not Be Named
In Between
- Holding on 86 (there is contact)
With more conservative qualifying criteria, you still get a 8.96 swing on those 5 calls. Sparty has got nothing excpet maybe the long Houma push. And all of that is before the PTSNBN even rears its ugly head..
2) To really insulate against charges of bias, this exercise needs to be done by a neutral observer. A college football fan who likes/hates both sides equally. Perhaps the CFB Blogosphere could provide this third party service to one another. Bloggers from both sides would submit a roll of plays to blogger representing another team. The third party judges, and wittily reflects on the pain and misery (or unde glory) due to the stripies in that game.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:11 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 10:29 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 21st, 2015 at 10:34 AM ^
Haven't enough refs been paid this week?
October 20th, 2015 at 10:36 PM ^
Officiating is probably the part of the game we all know the least about, and getting some background into what they're keying on and why they call what they do would add a lot.
I can understand them not wanting to call out their collegues for bad calls (they have to work with them, after all), but I, for one, would appreciate whatever insights they would be willing to share about their end of the game.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:31 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 12:11 PM ^
I know a guy who referees American football in England and has done a lot of rules and officiating commentary on other message boards. I don't know if he'd be interested in an occasional guest column here, but I can ask him and have him contact you directly if there is mutual interest.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:39 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 11:59 PM ^
Yeah, the entire play got all the more unbelieveable as it continued to unfold. It was a nightmare except I was awake.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:06 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 11:10 PM ^
But the refs felt terrible at the time and in retrospect were pretty god-awful. This is a small part of what makes you realize how stupid it is that we care as much about this as we do.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:32 PM ^
Comments