OT: Refs sucking it up

Submitted by Ultimate Quizmaster on September 19th, 2009 at 5:03 PM

I think the Domers have a legit argument this game. The refs called two bogus late hit calls on the D. And then they tok away an obvious Floyd TD.

Comments

SailingNomad

September 19th, 2009 at 5:07 PM ^

the first late hit was legit, but that TD/not actually a TD because the refs are on shrooms call was really bad. Like worse than the phantom Cissoko PI bad.

Worst part is that now the domers will have even more reason to complain about Big 10 refs.

kvnryn

September 19th, 2009 at 5:14 PM ^

I don't know, State's DB had his arm in there on Floyd's TD and actually ripped the ball out once they hit the ground (NBC refused to let the replay run past the point where Floyd's back hit the ground and the commentators never mentioned the fact that Floyd didn't have the ball when the play was over). At least with that call, I knew the ref's rationale. The was no explanation for Cissoko call.

Topher

September 19th, 2009 at 5:36 PM ^

"If it is payback, that's just about as unprofessional as you can get."

I wondered about this when Charlie started complaining - the rationale for calling out refs in public is to make a fake consensus that the refs robbed you, that they will be concerned about a reputation, and try to give you a better shake next time. But it could easily backfire - when a fat guy tells the press you are incompetent, are you more or less likely to show said fat guy that _you_ are the boss of the game and have power over him?

In any case, I don't think these refs have it in for Charlie - I think they just commit a lot of penalties and are playing sloppy, the refs are weak to begin with and are unlikely to give you a benefit of the doubt call on a play like that when you can't show you can execute with precision. Or (also likely) they just plain suck.