ADVERTISEMENT

Pac-12 admits officiating error in Washington State-Oregon game

Suudy

Head Coach
Aug 1, 2005
1,044
402
83

From the article: "In the Oregon at Washington State game at 12:16 of the 2nd quarter, Washington State was in possession with 1st down at the 42-yard line. Washington State was called for an intentional grounding foul and the down indicator on the far side of the field changed immediately (too quickly) to 2nd down. "

This is *exactly* why as an official I tell my chain crew *never* change anything until I tell you to do so. Especially when there is a flag on the field.

Interesting, nothing to address Lanning's (misplaced) notions of bad calls for the targeting and RTP.
 
Oregon appealed the targeting call to the league office. It was denied 😁
 
I don't know why we ran 2 run plays on this either. Try and get the first, get more points on the board.

This play calling is a prime example of what I think we need to do better. We have too many talent gaps in certain positions, vs a team like Oregon, to go conservative with this type of attitude.
 
I don't know why we ran 2 run plays on this either. Try and get the first, get more points on the board.

This play calling is a prime example of what I think we need to do better. We have too many talent gaps in certain positions, vs a team like Oregon, to go conservative with this type of attitude.

I believe if they knew it was really 2nd down they would not have run. But instead, we had 2 third and longs Cool we got a do over, but…….
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coug90
I believe if they knew it was really 2nd down they would not have run. But instead, we had 2 third and longs Cool we got a do over, but…….
Could be correct in retrospect. It just felt they were fine with the punt after the intentional grounding call.
 
If they were going to go back two downs and give us the do-over, it should have also put time back on the clock.

Either way, I've never even heard of a game going back two downs to fix a mistake. It's usually a retroactive "yeah, we screwed up. Too bad."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coug90
I believe if they knew it was really 2nd down they would not have run. But instead, we had 2 third and longs Cool we got a do over, but…….
Yeah we were conceding possession to not make a fatal error on an almost impossible situation of 3rd and long. And we got to do it twice because of their F-up. Playbook would have been wide open on 2nd and long from that spot on the field. At that spot on the field we are probably in 4 down territory if we pick up day 13-14 on 2nd+3rd. Inexcusable F-up and almost more inexcusable result to include the third down play as our second down play.
Here’s a wild thought…what if we had faked the punt and made it? I just don’t see how any rule book would specify going backwards after they’d already played another down. Pure incompetence from the conference all around.
 
What - to me- was monumentally dumb, was when we got the "do over" and had it - AGAIN - @ 3rd and 16, why the he'll run the ball again? It seemed a ote of "no confidence" in Ward. If we were inside our own 20, fine, but we were around midfield. Take a shot down field of the first down, or at least a 4th and short/field goal. Dickert was clearly put there arguing for our side there hat a mistake was made. Why run the exact same 3rd and long play? Too passive. Taihtsat
 
  • Like
Reactions: 79COUG
ADVERTISEMENT