"Third Party" overruled all officials in Pac-12 game

Submitted by Monocle Smile on October 11th, 2018 at 12:38 AM

According to this document, some Pac-12 suit phoned in to overrule the officials both on the field and in the booth on the matter of a targeting foul in the Washington State vs. USC game on September 21.

This discovery is, to put it mildly...troubling. What other implications could this have? Why does this guy's opinion matter in the slightest? Is this merely clickbait and not the mess it appears to be?

carolina blue

October 11th, 2018 at 7:24 AM ^

Either the replay guy gets a cut, or he has no integrity. If I’m in the replay booth and some dude calls up, even if he’s my boss, I’m telling him where to stick it. Fire me and I would simply expose it. 

Khaleke The Freak

October 11th, 2018 at 8:01 AM ^

The Big10 is the only Power 5 conference without a replay command center...sad, but not surprised with Delaney running the show.

1VaBlue1

October 11th, 2018 at 8:09 AM ^

Listen to Bill Carollo talk about B1G officiating sometime, you'll find out exactly why he doesn't believe the B1G needs a command center.  The B1G has the best officials, the best official training, the best review and grading process.  The B1G is the best, you know? 

No doubt that the money saved from a command center went straight into league office suit pockets...

Besides, with a command center full of trained refs, the controlled outcome of a single game becomes that much more difficult.  (#UM-OSU 2016'd)

1VaBlue1

October 11th, 2018 at 8:18 AM ^

Damn!!!  I got sucked in with clickbait!! 

The lack of a command center seemed odd to me, so I googled for one.  And yes, the B1G does have a command center for officiating reviews for every game.  Nonetheless, hearing Carallo talk about officiating, and you would think the B1G doesn't need one.

Gah!!  I should have fact-checked before I reactionarily posted... 

(#Alternative Fact - The B1G doesn't have a command center?)

 

Edit:  I included the link to the story where I saw the reference to the command center.

oriental andrew

October 11th, 2018 at 10:27 AM ^

The "command center" to which you're referring watches in-game and reviews game calls after the fact. I have found no evidence so far that they send all reviews of plays and penalties (i.e., targeting) to the command center for adjudication.

EDIT: Per this article about the Pac12 command center, they follow the in-stadium booth reviews real-time. They can provide feedback in real-time to the booth, but do not sequentially review (i.e., booth first, then send to CC). They also cannot initiate reviews from the CC. 

Also, per this article, the NFL, NHL, NBA, SEC, and ACC, all have centralized video reviews. Another source shows that the CFL also does this. This article indicates that the Big XII and Pac12 are following a similar model of centralized real-time review and consultation with the in-stadium replay booth. 

The Big Ten... does not, as far as I can find.

Mr Miggle

October 11th, 2018 at 8:12 AM ^

This story hardly makes that sound like a bad thing. Quite the opposite.

What's the point of having replay officials if they're waiting for a phone call instructing them what to do? It's apparent that once that's their role, they are subject to outside influences. I'll take officials Delany and company can't talk to during a game, thank you.

oriental andrew

October 11th, 2018 at 10:43 AM ^

As I mentioned in my getting-lengthier post above, the Big Ten command center appears to be following along in-game and tracking all penalties or calls, but does not actually seem to provide input/feedback/adjudication real-time on replays. This is in contrast to the other conferences, as well as the NFL, CFL, NBA, and NHL. 

Larry Appleton

October 11th, 2018 at 8:17 AM ^

I know it’s thin, but I’m adding this to the evidence pile that the NFL really did interfere with the Lions-Cowboys playoff fame.

Don

October 11th, 2018 at 8:25 AM ^

In theory, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with somebody in a "command center" with expertise and experience in refereeing to be able to at least offer opinions, if not overrule field officials if warranted.

However, when it's a "general counsel and senior vice president of business affairs" who's influencing officiating, that's a gigantic red flag that makes it very easy to conclude that business decisions are more important than competence in officiating in the PAC-12.

Arb lover

October 11th, 2018 at 8:54 AM ^

I think what's most interesting about this is that while USC was the odds favorite, it had already lost two games, presumably taking it out of consideration for any playoff spot.

Washington State, however, was 3-0 and had a fairly easy road ahead of it, possibly until the end of the season showdown with Washington. If the league wanted to show favoratism, it had a reason to do so in supporting Washington State. I'm glad they still lost (by 3), the call was one of the most clear targeting calls all year.

 

Alton

October 11th, 2018 at 4:30 PM ^

Make no mistake:  this is a huge, huge deal.

An untrained person is over-ruling the call made by the trained person in the booth and backed up by the trained person in the Conference review center.  I actually don't see how any official with any integrity, especially a replay official, would be willing to take a single assignment for the Pac 12 conference again.  My resignation would be on the commissioner's desk today.

If I were an AD in the rest of the NCAA, I would refuse to play any non-conference game (including a bowl game) with Pac 12 officials.  If I were an AD in the Pac 12, I would call for an independent review of officiating and also for the immediate firing of this Senior Vice President who over-ruled the replay officials' call.