BYU employee about to become the subject of a witch hunt...

[Coach McGuirk]

Don't kid yourself. The ute fanbase is the same.

[OrangeUte]

seems like there are a bunch of unanswered questions about what feeds this guy gave to the officials and why he was there in the first place. seems like this information would be easily obtained, so hopefully the full story will emerge soon.

[PaloAltoCougar]

The rules have changed. And fumbles are always reviewable regardless of when a ref blows it dead. That's kind of the point of instant replay.

But assuming the whistle blew before anyone had gained possession of the loose ball (which I'm quite certain was the case here), would SDSU be given possession because the defender grabbed it after the whistle? That would seem to open the door for a lot of post-whistle shenanigans, horselplay and tomfoolery.

[creekster]

seems like there are a bunch of unanswered questions about what feeds this guy gave to the officials and why he was there in the first place. seems like this information would be easily obtained, so hopefully the full story will emerge soon.

Why do we hope this? Isn't this, at most, just a blown call that only possibly contributed to the final result of the game? It happens all the time. There is an appearance of impropriety, but the officials were all suspended, the appearance can be eliminated rather easily, and the season moves on. Why is this such a big deal?

[CJF]

But assuming the whistle blew before anyone had gained possession of the loose ball (which I'm quite certain was the case here), would SDSU be given possession because the defender grabbed it after the whistle? That would seem to open the door for a lot of post-whistle shenanigans, horselplay and tomfoolery.

Here's the rule:

Live ball ruled dead in possession of a ball carrier when the clear
recovery of a loose ball occurs in the immediate continuing action after
the loose ball.
1. If the ball is ruled dead and the replay official does not have
indisputable video evidence as to which team recovers, the dead-ball
ruling stands.
2. If the replay official rules that the ball was not dead, it belongs to
the recovering team at the spot of the recovery and any advance is
nullified.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Here's the rule:

Live ball ruled dead in possession of a ball carrier when the clear
recovery of a loose ball occurs in the immediate continuing action after
the loose ball.
1. If the ball is ruled dead and the replay official does not have
indisputable video evidence as to which team recovers, the dead-ball
ruling stands.
2. If the replay official rules that the ball was not dead, it belongs to
the recovering team at the spot of the recovery and any advance is
nullified.

Very interesting. ()

So from that I conclude that the replay official can, in effect, overrule the whistle. The play is over when s/he says it's over

[Jeff Lebowski]

For some reason I am having a deja vu feeling back to BYU-TCU in Provo in 2005. Why is that?

[doctorcoug]

but the officials were all suspended...

Why is this such a big deal?

I just wanted to edit a little bit of what you said to show why I think some feel the evidence is important.

There are many professions where a suspension follows you for life. To be wrongfully suspended would be a mistake and possibly have legal ramifications.

By the way, is it possible that they didn't overturn the play, as there was a face mask on the play that wasn't called? It can be argued that a face mask could have led to the fumble.

[creekster]

I just wanted to edit a little bit of what you said to show why I think some feel the evidence is important.

There are many professions where a suspension follows you for life. To be wrongfully suspended would be a mistake and possibly have legal ramifications.

By the way, is it possible that they didn't overturn the play, as there was a face mask on the play that wasn't called? It can be argued that a face mask could have led to the fumble.

If some here are asking for the evidence to ensure justice was done as to the officials, I suppose I could see you rpoint. But they are not. They are trying to figure out, AFAICT, just how horrible the conduct of this schmuck from BYU was. Well, it doesn't really matter, does it? He was dealt with by the league and they can make sure no school employees are int he booth. SO unless you are concerned about the guy's future, why is it a big deal?

Moreover, nothing about the follow up articles will cause the suspension to be lifted, and it wouldnt likely follow any of these guys around unless it's profile is raised by discussion and articles.

[CJF]

I just wanted to edit a little bit of what you said to show why I think some feel the evidence is important.

There are many professions where a suspension follows you for life. To be wrongfully suspended would be a mistake and possibly have legal ramifications.

By the way, is it possible that they didn't overturn the play, as there was a face mask on the play that wasn't called? It can be argued that a face mask could have led to the fumble.

If they didn't overturn because of the facemask they should lose their jobs. They only thing they should have been looking at is whether or not he fumbled before JJ's knee hit the ground and if SDSU clearly recovered the ball. Nothing else matters in the review.

[CJF]

For some reason I am having a deja vu feeling back to BYU-TCU in Provo in 2005. Why is that?

I think that is exactly why the replay official can now overturn a play like this. It cost BYU in 2005.

[Katy Lied]

The blown call was a make up call, nothing more or less. I've been at several Ute games this year where the utes got a favorable (and wrong) call to make up for a horribly unfair call against them earlier. Happens to every team.

Where the referees erred was in supposing that they could cover up this make up call. Because of Bunn's presence, it gave SDSU ammunition to pursue this further with the league. Once the Bunn can of worms was opened, it didn't matter than Bunn did NOT do what they charged, the whole incident was reviewed and light shed on the make up call.

You think this suspension is going to lead to no more make up calls? I think not.

[CJF]

The blown call was a make up call, nothing more or less. I've been at several Ute games this year where the utes got a favorable (and wrong) call to make up for a horribly unfair call against them earlier. Happens to every team.

Where the referees erred was in supposing that they could cover up this make up call. Because of Bunn's presence, it gave SDSU ammunition to pursue this further with the league. Once the Bunn can of worms was opened, it didn't matter than Bunn did NOT do what they charged, the whole incident was reviewed and light shed on the make up call.

You think this suspension is going to lead to no more make up calls? I think not.

What was the call it was making up for?

[Goatnapper'96]

I think that is exactly why the replay official can now overturn a play like this. It cost BYU in 2005.

BYU missing a PAT and not playing defense in the second half of that game cost BYU more.

[Portland Ute]

This is just one more example of why the MWC without Utah is too hostile of an environment for BYU. Utah has always backed BYU in the conference and their combined clout leveled the field. With Utah leaving, BYU could not have stayed in the conference. BYU would be the revenue driver but the other schools would continue to treat them like shit. I don't think independence was a good idea but I understand there weren't other options so I support it. If only BYU and the Pac-10 had been willing to play nice but I understand the dislike was mutual.

Poor, poor persecuted BYU.

KDog, come on. This sounds like Mormons saying they are being persecuted for Prop 8.

:stirthepot: