Worst officiating call of the day thread

Submitted by ppToilet on November 19th, 2011 at 8:54 PM

I am watching the USC / Oregon game and a ref called an incomplete pass (just a miscommunication between quarterback and receiver) as intentional grounding. Nuts, just nuts, I say.  To me, any ref that makes this boneheaded a call deserves to be fired on the spot.  And I don't even care for either team but it's just so terrible because every overthrown ball or miscommunication becomes intentional grounding.

But I pause because I haven't been watching all the games and maybe there was a worse one today. I thought I'd start this thread to help determine the winner of the Worst Call Of The DayTM and wonder if anyone saw a more heinous call.



November 19th, 2011 at 8:59 PM ^

According to the Nebraska fan next to me today, it would be a tie for every penalty against Nebraska today, and the 25 holding non-calls M committed


November 19th, 2011 at 9:16 PM ^

and I were discussing the same thing at the game today.

Hagerup was in full extension and his leg was hit. Sure, none of us realized that he is also an accomplished thespian, but I don't think the "running into the kicker" penalty still applies in that scenario. It's either roughing or no call.

But, yes, I do wear maize and blue colored glasses when it comes to these ones...


November 19th, 2011 at 9:29 PM ^

I was curious about this and did a quick google search and came up with the following:

If contact is made with the plant foot before, during and after the kick and before the kicker establishes himself as a runner, that will always be a roughing the kicker. Or at least should be called that way by the referee.

even though the contact wasn't significant, it seems like it would still apply.








November 19th, 2011 at 11:05 PM ^

It would make sense if there was a rule (or a guideline/standard) that treats the plant foot and the striking foot differently.  Taking out the plant foot seems more dangerous, as the kicker is more likely to land awkwardly when that happens.  That would really seem to be the only way to get roughing out of that little contact.

Blue Bunny Friday

November 19th, 2011 at 9:32 PM ^

A1 kicks the ball, after which B1, unable to stop his attempt to block the kick, runs into the kicker or holder. RULING: Penalty—Five yards from the previous spot. Roughing and 15 yards and first down if in question as to whether the foul is “running into’’ or “roughing.’

That's what I got from the rule book. It seems that there was some question on initial viewing.



November 19th, 2011 at 9:53 PM ^

No idea what 'cleaned out' his leg means but what I do know is that he barely touched Hagerup's foot.  It was such a little touch that Hagerup got up right away and didn't signal or look for a flag, he obviously thought it was clean.  I'll take it but I hate the call still (also a bad PI call earlier against Nebraska).


November 19th, 2011 at 10:22 PM ^

<br>Roughing or Running Into Kicker or Holder
<br>ARTICLE 16. a. When it is obvious that a scrimmage kick will be made, no
<br>opponent shall run into or rough the kicker or the holder of a place kick (A.R.
<br>9-1-16-I, III and VI).
<br>1. Roughing is a live-ball personal foul that endangers the kicker or holder.
<br>2. Running into the kicker or holder is a live-ball foul that occurs when the
<br>kicker or holder is displaced from his kicking or holding position but is
<br>not roughed (A.R. 9-1-16-II). Note: Running into the kicker carries a
<br>five-yard penalty.
<br>3. Incidental contact with a kicker or holder is not a foul.
<br>4. The kicker’s protection under this rule ends (a)when he has had a
<br>reasonable time to regain his balance(A.R. 9-1-16-IV); or (b)when he
<br>carries the ball outside the tackle box (Rule 2-34) before kicking.
<br>5. When a defensive player’s contact against the kicker or holder is caused
<br>by an opponent’s block (legal or illegal), there is no foul for running into
<br>or roughing.
<br>6. A player who makes contact with the kicker or holder after touching the
<br>kick is not charged with running into or roughing the kicker.
<br>7. When a player other than one who blocks a scrimmage kick runs into or
<br>roughs the kicker or holder, it is a foul.
<br>8. When in question whether the foul is running into or roughing, the foul
<br>is roughing.
<br>b. A kicker or holder simulating being roughed or run into by a defensive
<br>player commits an unsportsmanlike act (A.R. 9-1-16-V).
<br>PENALTY?15 yards from the previous spot [S27].
<br>c. The kicker of a free kick may not be blocked until he has advanced five
<br>yards beyond his restraining line or the kick has touched a player, an official
<br>or the ground.
<br>PENALTY?15 yards from the previous spot [S40].
<br>Roughing or Running Into Kicker or Holder?ARTICLE 16
<br>Approved Ruling 9-1-16
<br>I. A1 catches a long snap and plans to punt from behind his line of
<br>scrimmage but misses the ball, which falls to the ground. A1 is then
<br>contacted by B1. RULING: Team A fumble. No foul be B1. There is no
<br>kicker until the ball is kicked.
<br>II. A1 kicks the ball, after which B1, unable to stop his attempt to block the
<br>kick, runs into the kicker or holder. RULING: Penalty?Five yards from
<br>the previous spot. Roughing and 15 yards and first down if in question
<br>as to whether the foul is “running into’’ or “roughing.’’
<br>III. A1, from a nonscrimmage kick formation, makes a quick, unexpected
<br>kick so suddenly that B1 cannot avoid contact. RULING: This is not
<br>roughing or running into the kicker since the rule applies only when it is
<br>reasonably obvious that a kick will be made.
<br>IV. B1 runs into player A1, who has kicked the ball and has had a reasonable
<br>time to regain his balance. RULING: Not a foul by B1 unless ruled as
<br>running into or throwing himself against an opponent obviously out of
<br>the play (Rule 9-1-12).
<br>V. After B1 runs into the kicker, kicker A25 simulates being roughed.
<br>RULING: Offsetting fouls.
<br>VI. Kicker A1, in a scrimmage kick formation, moves laterally two or three
<br>steps to recover a faulty snap, or recovers a snap that went over his
<br>head and then kicks the ball. He is contacted by B2 in an unsuccessful
<br>attempt to block the kick. RULING: A1 does not automatically lose
<br>his protection in either case unless he carries the ball outside the tackle
<br>box. While in the tackle box A1 is entitled to protection as in any other
<br>kicking situation. When it becomes obvious that A1 intends to kick in a
<br>normal punting position, defensive players must avoid him after he kicks
<br>the ball.
<br>VII. Punter A22 is 15 yards behind the neutral zone when he catches the
<br>long snap, sprints to his right at an angle toward the line of scrimmage,
<br>and runs outside the tackle box. He then stops and punts the ball, and is
<br>immediately hit by a diving B89. RULING: Legal play, no foul by B89.
<br>A22 loses his roughing or running-into protection by carrying the ball
<br>outside the tackle box.


November 19th, 2011 at 9:23 PM ^

We had almost no pentalties called against us, and there were some critical 50/50 calls that went in our favor (including the Roughing the Kicker pentalty below).  If were are going to complain when we get horrible reffing against us, we also have to acknowledge when we get reffing breaks in our favor.

Space Coyote

November 19th, 2011 at 11:59 PM ^

I hate when fans complain about holding not being called on the other team.  Every team can claim this against the other team.  Like it or not but holding occurs a lot, if it were called as much as "it should" according to the other team, there would be a million penalties a game and it would ruin the game as we know it.  So only the legit obvious ones are called.  I, personally, did not see more than one or two that I thought "should" have been called on Nebraska, and I'm a Michigan fan, so the amount of calls were probably right.


November 19th, 2011 at 9:06 PM ^

Hey, after the absolute working over we took during the Iowa game, I don't have a problem saying I think the 15 yarder on Nebraska today should have been 5.

Only caveat there is if the wording in the book says something specific about hitting the plant foot while the guy is still in the kicking motion, in which case, rules are rules for a reason.


November 19th, 2011 at 9:36 PM ^

I thought the PI that Roundtree drew was just good coverage, and I thought Lewan had a few holds that sprung the edge. And yes I thought for sure that on the punt that should have been a five yarder

But at the end of the day we still won quite comfortably. At best all those penalties going the other way still give us a ten point lead, and that's being awfully liberal.


November 19th, 2011 at 9:18 PM ^

I saw the play too watching the Ducks and Trojans and just absolutely couldn't believe what I was witnessing. Clearly Woods ran a slant instead of an out and Barkley was used to throwing the timing route. He wasn't even being rushed or hurried at the time. I have no respect for Lane Kiffin whatsoever, but completely agreed with him when he ran over to the refs and began giving them an earful. Awful, just awful. And I too am rooting for USC. Love to see the Ducks lose - not a fan of them at all, plus, our boy Pharoah Brown is there...


November 19th, 2011 at 9:32 PM ^

Let's be real. Oregon is probably likely to get lots of calls tonight. By that I mean anything borderline. USC can't play post season and Oregon could represent the conference in the BCS title game.

That one sure seemed like evidence.


November 19th, 2011 at 9:33 PM ^

Refs just said TD for Oregon and the dude stepped out first then caught and juggle the ball. Wasn't even close and the ref said TD. Probably will be overturned here shortly.


November 19th, 2011 at 9:36 PM ^

Herbie made the comment early in the first quarter that Oregons defense was the "most improved" defense that he has seen this year.

Does this guy live under a rock?

Avant's Hands

November 19th, 2011 at 9:58 PM ^

I know it has been mentioned a few times, but since people are still commenting on it I thought I would say it again. Anytime you hit the plant foot on a punter when he is in the air you get the full 15 yards. Yes he barely touched it, but it was enough to knock Hagerup over. It is either no call or 15 yards. 5 yards was never on the table. By the letter of the law, that was a 15 yarder. If you want to argue that Hagerup could have landed on his feet and it should not have been a penalty that is one thing, but you can't suggest it should have been a 5 yard penalty.


November 19th, 2011 at 10:07 PM ^

Refs threw a flag today when a Michigan player jumped on Gallon when Gallon was trying to pick up a fumble. 

Philosoraptor asks "can one rough his own teammates? And if so, against whom is it enforced?" 


November 19th, 2011 at 10:17 PM ^

What was the deal with the backwards pass by Oregon being ruled an incomplete forward pass on the field with the whistle blowing the play dead but then the play was reviewed and overturned?

Didn't the same thing happen to UM against MSU and it was supposedly not reviewable?  Any one know why the two were handled differently (no review for UM vs. review for USC)?


November 19th, 2011 at 10:28 PM ^

Any time the refs spot the ball I shake my head. If they get that right 10 times a game it's a miracle. It's not unusual to see them miss by a yard and a half or more.

One ref correctly wound the clock near the end of the O$U/PSU game when another ran in and blew the whistle to tell him he was wrong. The conference wound up giving O$U an extra 10 seconds or so. It didn't matter, but it sure could have.

The Michigan hit on Gallon drawing a flag was just sad.

In general college reffing has feally become amateur hour ... which I suppose it actually is.


November 19th, 2011 at 10:50 PM ^

Notre Dame complains about officiating more than any fan base I have ever experienced.

Last year I was at the Michigan/ND game sitting near an older ND fan. The first time a call went against ND, he said, "Big Ten refs. Figures." I kindly pointed out that they were Big East refs, to which he responded, "Big East refs? Figures."