Ever Seen a Play Reviewed, Called on the Field and then Reversed a couple minutes later?

[Patman]

Jackson's helmet made first contact with Leonard's helmet. Technically speaking it was correct to remove him. That said he was pulling up when it happened so it wasn't an obvious call and they should have been allowed to make that judgment call on the field.

Oh Stop, if that's the case then they need to be ejecting 10 players every game.

 

[topogigio]

I watched the play over and over, and as much as I hate the reversal of the call, it was correct. Jackson's helmet hit the QB in the facemask, Doesn't make a difference if he was "pulling up". That rule needs to be enforced. Mora asked his players to be "maniacal", a term he has used in many of his previous positions. Be careful what you ask for!

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

I watched the play over and over, and as much as I hate the reversal of the call, it was correct. Jackson's helmet hit the QB in the facemask, Doesn't make a difference if he was "pulling up". That rule needs to be enforced. Mora asked his players to be "maniacal", a term he has used in many of his previous positions. Be careful what you ask for!

I think he hit his shoulder

 

[CONN78SEJ]

Apparently being interviewed briefly between the halves, Mora basically flat out accused the ACC of cheating.

Replay decisions in games with ACC officials are made in ACC HQ in Charlotte. Apparently they decided no targeting, told the refs on the field, and then on their own called the refs back and told them they changed their mind. Absolutely unprecedented.

That’s not why we lost, but it was inexcusable. Not to get the wrong call, but to deliver the call to the on field officials and then decide you changed your mind.

The refs are puppets, someone or some group in Vegas definitely needed Duke to cover.

 

[businesslawyer]

The refs are puppets, someone or some group in Vegas definitely needed Duke to cover.

Someone needs to explain to me why human beings feel comfortable accusing people of criminal acts with no evidence to do so whatsoever. Because they are "freethinkers?" Is that just a synonym for not thinking that evidence matters?

 

[CONN78SEJ]

Apparently being interviewed briefly between the halves, Mora basically flat out accused the ACC of cheating.

Replay decisions in games with ACC officials are made in ACC HQ in Charlotte. Apparently they decided no targeting, told the refs on the field, and then on their own called the refs back and told them they changed their mind. Absolutely unprecedented.

That’s not why we lost, but it was inexcusable. Not to get the wrong call, but to deliver the call to the on field officials and then decide you changed your mind.

The move to take Mitchell out of the game wasn’t the only eye opener I saw. Dukes defense jumping offsides with no call by the line judge at the top of the screen was another one. Another one was in third quarter with around 6 min left in the quarter, the Duke player carrying the ball stepped OB around the 47 yard line and the sideline judge let him go towards another 1st down. Blantant

 

[LoyalFanCT]

The refs are puppets, someone or some group in Vegas definitely needed Duke to cover.

this is a ridiculous comment!

 

[Patman]

Someone needs to explain to me why human beings feel comfortable accusing people of criminal acts with no evidence to do so whatsoever. Because they are "freethinkers?" Is that just a synonym for not thinking that evidence matters?

People need a conspiracy to keep things going. I think things are usually driven by more subtle or not so subtle biases.

 

[giddyup]

Hey kids, you gotta tackle with your head up. It’s for safety issues. Oh but if the quarterback is the same height as you, tackle a different way.

Rule is an absolute travesty to the game. Unless there is top of head direct and primary contact, it’s utter foolishness.

 

[gsmooth]

The rule is an absolute joke and the auto-ejection needs to be put in the trash bin.

That is what I was saying in the game chat. If the officials think it's roughing the passer, which this wasn't, call that, but their is no way they should have the latitude to eject a player unless it's an obvious unsportsman like conduct which this clearly was not.

 

[UCan3]

I watched the play over and over, and as much as I hate the reversal of the call, it was correct. Jackson's helmet hit the QB in the facemask, Doesn't make a difference if he was "pulling up". That rule needs to be enforced. Mora asked his players to be "maniacal", a term he has used in many of his previous positions. Be careful what you ask for!

Even if you agree with the call, not sure how you can say the highly unusual reversal was also justified.



It was strange call, and even if you agree w end call, doesn’t justify the reversal IMO.

I don’t agree with your analysis but has wished that JMitchell had not make it such a close call and aimed just a hair lower as to not invite the call in the first place.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

Rule is an absolute travesty to the game. Unless there is top of head direct and primary contact, it’s utter foolishness.

Some teams now are teaching their backs and tight ends to lower their head before anticipated contact with the tackler to draw the targeting call.

 

[Kgun7]

We can debate the merits of the targeting call all day long. A lot of that is left to referee and officials interpretation. I can live with a referee's opinion, no matter how questionable it is. That judgement is well within their purview.

What is NOT subject to interpretation is a 2nd review of a call that was already reviewed and decided.

What is the protocol? Who is responsible to initiate a 2nd review? Who is in charge of deciding when a 2nd review is necessary? These are the answers that I need to hear. Because next week vs Utah State, I want to know which reviews are eligible for a 2nd review.

The precedent has been set, but the mechanism and the criteria is still unknown. Somebody from the Uconn AD needs to ask the tough questions and find out how a 2nd review was ever granted, and who initiated it.

 

[uconnfan68]

We can debate the merits of the targeting call all day long. A lot of that is left to referee and officials interpretation. I can live with a referee's opinion, no matter how questionable it is. That judgement is well within their purview.

What is NOT subject to interpretation is a 2nd review of a call that was already reviewed and decided.

What is the protocol? Who is responsible to initiate a 2nd review? Who is in charge of deciding when a 2nd review is necessary? These are the answers that I need to hear. Because next week vs Utah State, I want to know which reviews are eligible for a 2nd review.

The precedent has been set, but the mechanism and the criteria is still unknown. Somebody from the Uconn AD needs to ask the tough questions and find out how a 2nd review was ever granted, and who initiated it.

With our luck they’ll start retroactive calls.

 

[NEforceUConn]

I hope a major sports news outlet puts something out this week talking about this bizarre decision and the ACC explains their pov.

I also hope Taylor Swift stops by my house this week.

Maybe I should start a BY poll predicting which event is more probable. Nah.

 

[superjohn]

View attachment 91632
Looks like a textbook tackle form to me…

That's called all the time now. I hate it but that's how football is now.

 

[Scoe]

I would’ve gotten myself ejected maybe even arrested if I were the coach. After that ejection I call TO I tell my defense all 11 guys to go offsides and hit the qb on the first cadence, and we’re gonna get into an all out brawl. I look right at the refs and say look what you started there will be blood shed and guys are going to get hurt. You get a rabid crowd and you intimidate the refs, sure we might get our asses kicked but we need to stop letting officials being the gate keepers.

 

[billybud]

All fans see what they want to see. Every fan base in the country thinks the refs are out to get them.

There are horrible calls and non-calls affecting both teams in every game. It’s incompetence more so than corruption.

The patanoia runs deep in us fans....part of being partisan.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

All fans see what they want to see. Every fan base in the country thinks the refs are out to get them.

There are horrible calls and non-calls affecting both teams in every game. It’s incompetence more so than corruption.

The patanoia runs deep in us fans....part of being partisan.

How about all coaches? Would you give them the same criticism??? Jim Mora came right out and said the ACC refs cheated UConn on some calls.

???

 

[Kgun7]

All fans see what they want to see. Every fan base in the country thinks the refs are out to get them.

There are horrible calls and non-calls affecting both teams in every game. It’s incompetence more so than corruption.

The patanoia runs deep in us fans....part of being partisan.

Questioning a ref's judgement on a holding or pass interference call is subjective and up for debate.

Adding a 2nd review, to a play that was already reviewed and decided, is a complete abuse of the rules. That's not paranoia or fanaticism. That's a blatant attempt to influence the outcome of a game by violating the rules, as they are currently written.

Can we expect too see 2nd reviews going forward??? 3rd reviews??? The presedent has been set by the ACC officials that violating rules is within their jurisdiction.

 

[topogigio]

Even if you agree with the call, not sure how you can say the highly unusual reversal was also justified.



It was strange call, and even if you agree w end call, doesn’t justify the reversal IMO.

I don’t agree with your analysis but has wished that JMitchell had not make it such a close call and aimed just a hair lower as to not invite the call in the first place.

I meant that I agreed with the call, not the reversal. The reversal was absurd. I’m old school and still don’t believe in replays for anything. The official/umpire etc. makes the call on the field and that’s it! Live with the call and move on.

 

[SubbaBub]

I think that the refs sure might have...they have been free with targetting calls...they have been notorious about over protecting the players. They made that clear last year.

The UConn defender made contact with his helmet to the head and neck area...looking at the play, I could see the call...the rules call for calling when in question. The defender went from low to high in his tackle.

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting. When in question, it is a foul. ...

• A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground

QB in the pocket in the middle of an attempted pass isn't defenseless. Otherwise, virtually every sack is a penalty. The play in no way viokated any if the provisions of the targeting rule, as I proved above.

By this logic any wrap tackle is a penalty because it's impossible to tackle that way without making contact with the helmet.

It was a BS call, rightfully overturned, and corruptly reinstated. End of story.

 

[billybud]

A long read for those that are interested in research on official's bias...

https://www.fsb.miamioh.edu/fsb/rhett/football.pdf

 

[uconnfan68]

That's called all the time now. I hate it but that's how football is now.

He was pulling up. There was no intent. It was barely incidental.

 

[UCan3]

He was pulling up. There was no intent. It was barely incidental.

Yes, I think you’re getting to the heart of what happened. Jackson Mitchell didn’t even go into the player. He kind of just stood up and tackled him with incidental contact. I can see the call being made in real time but can’t believe it got overturned after the replay.