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 5:05 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 5:08 PM ^
Very fair.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:37 PM ^
Seth, this is a great feature. I'd recommend less breadth and more depth. For example, this is a great chance to go into the nitty gritty details of targeting. The rules are insanely extensive and it is very likely none of us actually know what targeting is.
I say this because two weeks ago I was talking with my college ref buddy and he was quoting me the rulebook on a case that isn't targeting by rule, even though us laymen would all expect it to be.
The more we can bring in the actual NCAA rulebook, the better and smarter we become. Since this is Michigan (tm), we must be the smartest fan base and retain our rightful arrogance of all other ignorant fans.
October 20th, 2015 at 9:52 PM ^
this should become a regular feature. You might even ask writers from opposing team blogs (where they exist) to supply their own take on the same games.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:00 PM ^
I think this was a great post. But I skipped the 'targeting' play because I couldn't stand to watch it again. Because I don't want to get angry all over again. But I am angry all over again because now I'm thinking about it...
It shouldn't have been any kind of foul at all and instead they got a gifted first down and we lost one of our best defenders. And I also feel (can't prove it and might be wrong, but I don't care if I am because now I'm pissed) that MSU moved the ball much better right after that and then into the second half after he was kicked out.
This right there could have been the difference in the game. I thought that then and I think that now.
October 21st, 2015 at 11:17 AM ^
The targeting was pretty preposterous because it was based on judgement about intent after indirect contact leading to Bolden's facemask striking Cook's. The umpire throws the flag first and what he apparently read was that Bolden while being held and turned by an MSU lineman allows himself to make personal foul contact after Cook is on the ground. The only interpretation is that he believed that in spite of being pushed and turned into Cook's direction that Bolden meant to hit him in the facemask when he went down, contact that he reasoned could have been averted but which Bolden used as an opportunity to target him.
But even so, this is a double foul based on indirect contact and assuming that Bolden intended to go after Cook helmet first denies the contact that led him to Cook unless the oifficial believes that his landing helmet strike is avoidable. Replay is supposed to support or deny that contention made by the calling official. Replay allowed the personal foul and the ejection to stand, meaning there was nothing to validate overturning the charge, what is college football's most serious offense.
This is such a stupid call on its face because its about penalizing on assumption of guilt and then having the upstairs judge not confirm the ruling, but find nothing that would mitigate the action that led to it, such as being held and then turned toward Cook. Officials like to make calls about subtle behavior that may or may not seem intentional.
That is why, for example, that calls that seem obvious don't always get called because they enter the gray area of intent only from the standpoint of competition, not intentional unsportsmanlike conduct. So holding on the goal line is ignored, but reaching for a jersey isn't because it's intentional grabbing even if it doesn't impact the actual play.
Picking a defender by another receiver running into him or actually blocking is intentional and part of the play call, but may not get called depending on how the official judges the intent of the act committed. Officials spend most of the game deciding intent as the basis for calls except for obvious rule infractions.
So, this is why Willie Henry gets flagged for jumping on the pile while an MSU tightend continues a hold and throws Wormley out of bounds after the whistle in front of Jim Harbaugh and the Michigan bench as seen by head ref John O'Niel without a flag being thrown.
There was a huddle after the targeting call and three officials discussed the call before it was sent to replay. We know the results. But this indicated that they weren't actually sure about what they saw, and neither was the replay judge who simply passed on the call to support the calling officials.
October 21st, 2015 at 3:11 PM ^
I spent quite a bit of time searching the net for the exact wording of the rule(s) about targeting. I was looking to see if a second targeting call mandatorily ends a player's season, may end a player's season, or has no impact beyond missing the next half of play. Other than learning that in the post game conference the offical can impose "additional sanctions" on the player I was unable to answer that question. If anyone can shed light on this I would be very appreciative.
That said, I did find a reference that explained that the review of the targeting call is not allowed to evaluate intent, only to determine if the required contact was made. If the contact was made the call stands. As I said I was unable to find the exact wording so the site that provided that explanation may be incorrect. Again if anyone can shed light on this it would be very helpful.
October 21st, 2015 at 5:17 AM ^
I agree, this is great. I felt it during the game but couldn't articulate it and put a point value on it. My sense was the targeting was the worst call and had the most impact. You take out an emotional captain, defensive play caller, and the Michigan leading tackler in one fell swoop. Plus the yardage. As for targeting, and the rules, I tried to search myself. As best I can tell the basis for targeting to begin with is intent. With the push in the back, there is no intent. Worse yet, he barely fell on the QB, not even sure where they collided (possibly bumped facemask). Cook wasn't even shaken up on the play. I think the 18 points is on the low side, as you make some assumptions at the end. Without all the bad calls, we are not in that position at the end of the game.
I am really hoping that MSU gets caught flat in the Indiana game. This was an emotional game, physically demanding, and Indiana can put up some points. Whether they can defend Cook is another story. Cook was lights out in this game.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:50 PM ^
but thanks anyway for the analysis.
wonder if anything comes of this as it relates to those refs and the B10. sure should be some figurative heads rolling.
October 21st, 2015 at 12:31 AM ^
Don't get me wrong... It was a great play design and likely would've picked up a large chunk. Brian seems to feel like that play is on Ross. Me personally, I think it's fairly obvious watching the replay that it's on Hill. He is frozen in his track from confusion and by the time he's realized what's happened, it's too late. He then compounds things by spending 15-20 yards going for the strip. I think with Morgan, Bolden, Ross out there the play is dissected sooner thereby stopping the bleeding.
Our guys outplayed their guys for 59:50 in nearly every aspect and phase, save for Cook to Burbridge, and still I'd credit that mostly to Cook for dropping dimes under pressure all game long with little to know window allowed by Lewis. There are no moral victories and this will hurt forever... But somewhere deep down it's nice to know that this is year 1 with a limited grad transfer running the the offense and some limitations from the skill players. Yet they outplayed an MSU team that likely has the best QB in their history and is in the midst of one of their most successful eras. It seems like a relatively foregone conclusion that domination is eminent in the immediate future.
October 21st, 2015 at 3:23 AM ^
This was painful, yet necessary. My only suggestion would be to put some type of clearly labeled warning on the last video for those who, like me, never ever want to see that play again, ever.
I've carefully managed to avoid all replays of the final play since it happened. I turned the game off immediately before they could show a replay, and I avoided watching football or ESPN the rest of the weekend.
I don't even remember exactly what happened on the play -- I mostly just remember holding my head while yelling "No! No! No! No!" and standing there with a twisted look on my face like I had just gotten roundhoused in the junk.
Maybe one day, I'll be able to watch it without nearly vomitting, but right now -- too soon man, too soon.
October 20th, 2015 at 8:49 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 5:21 AM ^
I keep hearing that they put up so much more yardage. But that includes the extended drives that would have been shut down by our D-Fense with any normally balanced Ref. I can deal with missed calls, but on the reviewed calls they really need to get this right. The interception that should have occured was a huge call.
October 21st, 2015 at 10:56 AM ^
tried to avoid watching the punt...or The Punt That Never Was™
However - now that I've seen it again, I can't get over the ride that Lyons is taken on starting at about the 10 yard line trying to make the tackle. Holding is obvious, as his jersey is pulled, and he's twisted about while pursuing the ball. Another example of a missed call.
October 21st, 2015 at 6:53 PM ^
bolivar,
I've been talking about the holding too. It was actually from the 15 to the 4 that he was being obviously held.
Worse than just obviously held is that if you watch it you can see that Lyons was going to make a sure tackle with contact starting at the 13 and depending on which way the bodies fell he would've been down anywhere from the 13 to the 10, but no further!
He was trapped by the sideline and Lyon's approach and his own blockers.
There was no way to miss and no way to avoid the tackle other than what happened, number 24 I think it was, made a perpetual 11 yard long hold that was the only thing that prevented the game saving tackle! The ONLY thing!!!
October 21st, 2015 at 1:16 PM ^
This is by far the most embarrasssing thread in the history of this website.
This is not how Michigan fans behave. We lost a football game in a terribly excrutiating way. It was a well played game by both sides, get over it.
October 21st, 2015 at 6:54 PM ^
Don't let the facts get in the way Jimmy!
October 22nd, 2015 at 12:54 AM ^
I thought the analysis done here by Seth was incorrect as I had an excellent former football official look at it and we went through the plays together and replayed them many times.
Of 21 plays cited by Seth. We could only fine 4 that we agreed with Seth.
No 2 (12-men), 12(a) 'forward progess', 12(b) Shelton catch, 13. Reschke interference.
Three of these four plays favor MSU. Three of these plays the officials got right.
As far as the Bolden hit, the issue is with the rule, which is designed to protect QB's, WR's, and kickers. It was not a 'launch' type targeting so that's why some may be upset. Bolden was pulling away from the LT of MSU who had a hand on him, but clearly Reschke was providing the impetus to land on Cook to make sure he was down and he made contact with his facemask. With that said there are a lot of these close facemask calls. Someone sent me a clip of the MSU linebacker Bullough with a targeting hit on an Air Force player that the Spartans did not like. As we reviewed it, it was indeed a targeting call but very unintended.
As a Wolverine fan, I am disappointed that we resort to trying to blame the officials as calls didn't go the way either side wanted them to which leads to this annoyance. We are better than this.
I think what bothered me the most, after having nearly two punts blocked, is why we had the gunners out wide, which is a clear coaching mistake. I would also blame that on Harbaugh because even though Baxter sets formations, the head coach always has the final look and call and if he doesn't like what he sees he has to change it.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:06 PM ^
But also ugh.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:09 PM ^
Man, the content this week (except the recruiting info, I suppose) is going to be so depressing. I want to drink until I can't feel feelings anymore.
October 20th, 2015 at 6:09 PM ^
Looking forward to the Refs -435 in the UFR chart.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:09 PM ^
Thank you Seth. Now I will drink myself into oblivion and forget football exists for 1.5 weeks.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:14 PM ^
Michigan will go to a better bowl than Sparty even though we lost to them, just like they did in Hoke's first year when they went to the Sugar Bowl. Sparty will bitch and moan and we will get the last laugh. To not say that Sparty's win required an absolute perfect planetary alignment of BS officaiting and incredible good fortune would be akin to denying the existence of gravity.
This karma will sort out on both ends.
October 20th, 2015 at 11:02 PM ^
but we are owed so much good karma in our direction right now.
October 21st, 2015 at 12:15 AM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 8:48 AM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 5:15 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 5:16 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 5:16 PM ^
October 21st, 2015 at 9:19 AM ^
I think the refs sucked but my guess is that this exxagerates the point a fair amount. For one this is really only looking at Michigan gripes or really big plays. I'm sure there are a couple calls we aren't even thinking about that went our way that shouldn't have. I also think some of the percentages this gets called are pretty high. On the not real interception at real time speed the play looks a lot like the pass interference chesson got, it is going to get called interference 90% of the time in todays football, it just sucks to be a defender sometime. Same thing with the pick on Peppers, that rarely gets called which is why its effective.
The real issue with this analysis this though is the expected points value. Michigan couldn't score td's when starting their drive inside the msu 40 most of the time, the offense wasn't good enough to expect that many points to be scored, the refs were probably more like a 6 point swing but the real issues is that our offense sucked in this game.
October 21st, 2015 at 9:44 AM ^
The point swing is not just Michigan points scored. There were two Spartan TDs that were direct results of bad calls. The interception that was called back was a big swing and the TD run with awful holding. If MSU has 10-14 less points and Michigan gets another six you are right in the ballpark of what Seth said.
October 21st, 2015 at 1:30 PM ^
Holding doesn't get called all the time, and while it happened on a play they scored on they might have scored a td anyways.And yes while the interception was a big play I don't think its as bad of a call as Michigan fans see it. Lewis is trailing Burbridge, had his hand on him and wr went down, thats going to always be a call, its the risk you run by being a little grabby down the field, I thought it was PI live too and don't blame the refs for that one despite thinking they were terrible.
October 21st, 2015 at 11:21 PM ^
Yeah, that will "always" be a call unless the WR very obviously runs into the fucking umpire. That's why it was such a terrible call. Why didn't the ump enlighten his buddy who threw the flag a billion seconds late?
October 21st, 2015 at 11:19 AM ^
Imagine that you flip a coin 100 times and get 54 heads. Then you examine the 46 tails, note (correctly) that every single one of those flips was 50-50 to be heads, and figure that you "deserved" 54 + (46/2) = 77 heads in 100 flips.
You're ignoring the fact that you also "deserved" (54/2) tails on the flips you did not examine. When both sides of that "should have been" accounting are done, it works out to a 50-50 exact split for the expected outcome.
If you wanted to do this sort of analysis and end up anywhere close to reality, you'd at least have to pick a Sparty fan to do an equally detailed review of every play that they feel went against them.
Which is not to say that Michigan didn't have some (or even most) marginal calls go against them. It's to say that the 20-point total difference number is meaningless.
October 22nd, 2015 at 10:48 AM ^
I used MSU boards to find the plays they were complaining about, and asked another Sparty to mention anything that I'd missed. The selection of plays comes from our boards, their boards, coach reactions, and things I spotted going through every play.
I also thought I made that clear. I believe I've sufficiently accounted for selection bias.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:18 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 20th, 2015 at 5:52 PM ^
Just reupholster some couches with the apparel and Spartans will do the fires for you.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:20 PM ^
actually makes me feel better. We are not the team we will be, but we played better than it felt like we did. It sucks that we lost the way we did, but the future is still bright.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:22 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 6:09 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 10:43 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 11:05 PM ^
I also think there are some other good takeaways and look forward to a UFR. But no need to see the last play again; no need for a UFR there - it's already been reviewed. And reviewed. And reviewed. And reviewed further.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:24 PM ^
.... i watched that punt attempt since it was live. couldn't watch the whole thing, but just the snap. I can't believe that isn't called. Isn't that one refs only responsibility for the entire play? It's not even close. Oh well.. onward.
October 20th, 2015 at 6:06 PM ^
just like they wouldn't call pass interference on a hail mary, the Spartans are a full yard + beyond the line of scrimmage and the longsnapper is tumbling backwards before the clock ticks to 9 seconds.
Still - they didn't hit him before he snapped it, and if he had snapped it better the bull rush would not have mattered.
October 20th, 2015 at 5:27 PM ^
October 20th, 2015 at 11:12 PM ^
My sentiments exactly. I'm thinking karma owes us a really long winning streak over them, too. Something collossal. Along the lines of my great-grandchildren talking with my State fan brother's great-grandchildren and they have to talk about back in their great grandpappy's day in order to bring up the last time State beat us. And even then my great-grandkids can say "Yeah, but you and I both know you only caught us when we were down. And you also know we got jobbed in that last one. That's why we only moved down 3 places in the polls and you guys didn't move up."
October 20th, 2015 at 5:30 PM ^
The level of incompetence by this officiating and replay crew is just sickening. I realize they are human beings and prone to making mistakes but this level of consistant ineptitude is more than eye opening.
October 20th, 2015 at 10:14 PM ^
It's why I've been saying for years that if refs are this incompetant, they need to be fined just like players do (on a professional level, obviously).
October 20th, 2015 at 10:39 PM ^
but I would bet big money that most games feature tons of missed and quite a lot of bad calls by referees, pretty much across the board.
Comments