Extra point

[OrangePA]

If that’s the rule then the special teams coach should have coached them to always fall on the ball in the event of a block - oh wait, there is no special teams coach

Nobody coaches special teams?

 

[kcsu]

T

The coaches have no challenges in college

They can call a TO and ask the refs to review it but it’s up to the refs/main officiating office to review it.


With all of that being said, we absolutely need to have a ST coach.

We literally almost lost that game due to our special teams….whether it’s punting, extra pts, FGs, KOs we are really really struggling on ST and it needs to be addressed ASAP

Thank you. I knew that the rule had been changed. There are no challenges. Its completely up to the refs. Coaches can ask but not demand.

This needs to go back to the old/ challenge way.

 

[CapitalO]

There was a blatant block in the back on the return too.

Yes #11 shoved Johnathan in the back right in front of the official who was running with the play.

 

[MSOrange]

T

Thank you. I knew that the rule had been changed. There are no challenges. Its completely up to the refs. Coaches can ask but not demand.

This needs to go back to the old/ challenge way.

That's not exactly right.. You might want to review the link from the rulebook that I posted earlier in the thread. A coach can challenge as long as it's reviewable situation and they haven't already used a challenge that's shown not to be correct.

 

[PhatOrange]

Harris fumble against Rutgers was confirmed on replay BUT yet his knee was clearly down. Not sure what they saw on replay. (when compared to our catch that was overturned Saturday.)

 

[upperdeck]

T

Thank you. I knew that the rule had been changed. There are no challenges. Its completely up to the refs. Coaches can ask but not demand.

This needs to go back to the old/ challenge way.

I thought it was all 3 TOs could be used.. But my last copy of the rule book I looked at says they can ask for 1 using a TO and they get a 2nd if they are correct on the first..

 

[dollarbill44]

Good question. To find out, I was not going to scan through all 8 games on video but referenced the play-by-play section of Stats on SU Athletics website. Some of the notations on there were curious. Conceivably, some info could have been left out. But I hope the source is accurate. People can let me know if they remember differently or find otherwise.

According to the site, there were no official replay reviews in the Rutgers, Albany, Liberty, and Clemson games -- all at Syracuse. That seems surprising but this was the only "authoritative" source I could find. The one Dome game that had reviews was Wake Forest (2). All three road games had reviews: Ohio (1); Florida State (6); V-Tech (4). Three of the four ACC games had reviews (none during Clemson).

I think that site is missing data. There were several replay reviews in the Rutgers game and Clemson game.

 

[Dollar Dog]

I think that site is missing data. There were several replay reviews in the Rutgers game and Clemson game.

You are right. As soon as PhatOrange mentioned the Harris play against Rutgers, then I started thinking about Clemson, I realized the site is incomplete. What they included seems correct but not every reviewed play is recorded. It could be that whoever notated those home games did not bother to record replay stoppages but someone different notated other games and decided to record them.

This is very disappointing. I assume SU Athletics (billed as "the official athletics website for the Syracuse University Orange") is under SU's sports information department. They should be better than this. I really would rather not re-watch every game (especially the losses) so will try to find more complete info elsewhere, then finish the list. I think there is something to hoopsupstate's point that these calls are against us frustratingly and inordinately often.

 

[Cuse12]

This play infuriated me. The 2-point return was not valid, yet it ended up being the margin of SU deficit for much of the 4th quarter. No one seemed to question it either. The announcers completely missed the fact that McKinley Williams ever touched the football. Even in the game thread, maybe only a couple SU fans mentioned it. I thought the entire board would flip out over it.

Admittedly, I did not know exactly what happened live speed. But it was obvious on just the 1st replay. Kick was blocked. Williams recovered and tried to advance the ball. Williams was knocked to the ground. At that point the play was over...PERIOD. While he was flat on the ground, the ball squirted out a second later and VT ran it back. I thought every scoring play had to be reviewed. There is no way that play should have stood. Every detail I mentioned was conclusive.

I am not sure about every aspect of the blocked PAT rule. My understanding is that if it goes beyond the line of scrimmage and is recovered anywhere by the kicking team, the ball is immediately dead. If the defending team recovers it anywhere in bounds (but not the end zone), it can advance it back in an attempt for 2 points.

What I am not sure about is whether the kicking team can recover the ball behind the line of scrimmage and advance it to earn the extra point, should the player reach the end zone. I always thought that scenario does count for a point. For that reason, I think it was a good football play for Williams to try to advance the ball. Whether the ball was in front or behind the line is tough to say. Bottom line, none of this matters because that play was never a fumble. The refs blew it horrendously and very few (except the astute and eagle-eyed contributors of this thread) noticed.

WOW I just noticed on the replay he was DOWN. Honestly, the fact we won this game despite controversial call after controversial call going to VT every time is quite the accomplishment. This game was so important in so many facets its crazy!

 

[upperdeck]

one big issue with replay is that Officials are being taught when in doubt let the play go and we will correct in replay.. That leads to many plays where no camera angle really sees what happens and plays that probably should have been stopped dont get over turned.. Everything we see on that play says he was probably down. but did we ever get a side or endzone replay at all during the game? the play didnt even get reviewed but it had a probable fumble and a score and those are all supposed to be confirmed. Was the replay guy getting nachos?

it doesnt help the camera work is do bad in many of these games. we get terrible angles to use for review.. Spend a little money and have a dedicated HD camera shooting down each sideline and endzone that does not require a full time camera dude to control. one guy with PS5 controller could do at least 2 of those from his basement..

 

[JustPherU]

WOW I just noticed on the replay he was DOWN. Honestly, the fact we won this game despite controversial call after controversial call going to VT every time is quite the accomplishment. This game was so important in so many facets its crazy!

Didn’t matter if he was down or not, once the offensive team recovers the ball past the line of scrimmage the play should of been ruled dead. If anyone can find something different than that rule I would love to look at it.

 

[kcsu]

That's not exactly right.. You might want to review the link from the rulebook that I posted earlier in the thread. A coach can challenge as long as it's reviewable situation and they haven't already used a challenge that's shown not to be correct.

No. Its the refs call. A coach can request not demand as how i interpret it.

 

[SU68]

This is from the NCAA rulebook.

https://www.dfoa.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-NCAA-FB-Rulebook.pdf

The head coach of either team may request that the game be stopped and a play be reviewed by challenging the on-field ruling.

1. A head coach initiates this challenge by taking a team timeout before the ball is next legally put in play (Exception: Rule 12-3-6-d) and informing the referee that they are challenging the ruling of the previous play. If a head coach’s challenge is successful, they retain the challenge, which may be used only once more during the game. Thus, a coach may have a total of two challenges if and only if the initial challenge is successful.

2. After a review has been completed, if the on-field ruling is reversed, that team’s timeout will not be charged.

3. After a review has been completed, and the on-field ruling is not reversed, the charged team timeout counts as one of the three permitted that team for that half or the one permitted in that extra period.

What is the procedure if the challenging team has used all its timeouts?

 

[Dollar Dog]

one big issue with replay is that Officials are being taught when in doubt let the play go and we will correct in replay..

Another issue I have is the standard they use when executing replay. By official standard, the field call should ONLY be overturned if the replay is "conclusive". It seems that way too many times they try to employ a standard of "probable" or "more likely than not".

When there is a field call of a catch out-of-bounds, officials should not be spending 6 minutes, looking at 4 different angles trying to determine if they can see a single blade of grass between the tip of a receiver's white-shoed toe and the white sideline. Then if they think there is most likely 1/16th of an inch between the toe and the sideline (no matter it could be shadow, some dirt on the side of the shoe, or a video blur) they overturn the call and rule a catch. They are trying to use replay to call the perfect game. But that should not be the intention. It invites too much subjectivity.

A perfect example from the VT game is Blackshear's 30-yard pass play in the 2nd quarter (upheld) versus Queeley's 1st down conversion in the 4th quarter (overturned). Both plays involved whether a pass was cleanly secured or barely touched the ground before that. There was an equal amount of doubt on both. Yet they gave Blackshear the benefit of the doubt but overturned the same kind of call on Queeley based on evidence that was no clearer. Honestly, the Blackshear catch looked a tiny bit better to me. But they should not be splitting hairs. The Queeley replay was not 100% and the replay official knew that. Heck, even a VT fan would probably admit that. But replay official felt pretty darn sure and went with reversal.

If I was a replay official and could not make a call after 1 or 2 views and less than a minute, that would be a big red flag that the video by definition is not conclusive and I should be leaving the field call alone -- instead of trying to be some all-knowing sky-eye because it might look good on my performance review.

 

[Newhouser]

We were saving our time outs for the end of the half...

 

[MSOrange]

No. Its the refs call. A coach can request not demand as how i interpret it.

I couldn't disagree more. How does that even make sense that a ref can decide on a whim if he wants to review a play or not if the rulebook says it's a reviewable play and the team has a timeout?

 

[MSOrange]

What is the procedure if the challenging team has used all its timeouts?

They are out of luck and hope the upstairs booth decides to review it.