Your questioning that they said it took the high angle review to call it an illegal fair catch. Since the players and officials are at ground level, that can not be called. You are exactly right.
"The Call", Revisited
- Thread starter Hawk_4shur
- Start date
Answering OP's questions (based on review of NCAA rulebook).
Link to official rulebook: https://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR23.pdf
Relevant excerpts:
- Did officials announce the review?
- They announced the play was under review, but did not specify what aspect(s) of the play was under review.
- Are the officials permitted to simply re-officiate the play?
- Yes, once under review, the officials can look at anything that is defined as a "reviewable play"
- I think it is debatable whether this ruling (invalid fair catch) is reviewable.
- Several people initially said the play was not reviewable because it was not a foul. While it is true that an invalid catch signal is not a foul, the officials did not rely on the "Reviewable Fouls" article. Instead, they relied on the "Kicks" article which states that the officials can review if the receiving team advanced the ball after a fair catch.
- Ambiguity. The article purporting to define a "fair catch" encompasses rules for both valid or invalid signals. The rules for reviewable plays clearly state that the officials may review whether the receiving team has advanced the ball after a "fair catch signal." I can see how you read those rules in tandem to then say that the officials can review advancing the ball after an invalid signal. However, there is actually no precise definition of "fair catch" - only definitions of "valid signal" and "invalid signal". Moreover, the rules outlining the consequences of a fair catch clearly state that a "catch after an invalid signal is not a fair catch." The reason for differentiating a fair catch from an invalid signal is that if a player gives an invalid signal, the defense is not penalized for tackling the returner. In other words, the returner only gets protection if they make a fair catch signal. Circling back to reviewable plays: the officials may review if the receiving team advanced the ball after a fair catch. It does not say anything about reviewing an invalid signal. Because the list of reviewable plays is exhaustive, failing to include reviewing an invalid signal as a reviewable play arguably means the play is not reviewable.
- At the end of the day, did the officials do the correct thing in all respects?
- No, in my opinion. While I do see a technical reading to defend what the officials did (i.e., Cooper arguably made an invalid signal and an invalid signal is arguably reviewable), I think they are ultimately wrong under either (1) a "common sense" interpretation, or (2) a "literal" interpretation.
- Common sense tells us that the reason the invalid signal rule is on the books is to prevent returners from deceiving the kicking team. Cooper did not intend to deceive, and the kicking team obviously was not deceived given they tried to tackle him immediately after he caught the ball.
- A literal interpretation tells us that Cooper literally did waive his arms, and the definition of invalid signal is very broad. I do not like this type of literal interpretation because it gets in the way of applying common sense. Yet, if you do want to apply this literal interpretation, you have to apply the same principles in determining whether the play was reviewable. The rules are someone sloppy in defining a fair catch, but the rulebook also clearly states that an invalid signal is not a fair catch. Thus, a literal read would say that an invalid signal is not a reviewable play. I think this would be a somewhat silly interpretation, because I think it's clear the drafters of the rule intended for an "invalid signal" to be under the general umbrella of fair catch, and it would not make sense to be able to review a fair catch but not an invalid signal. This all gets back to why I think a common sense interpretation is better.
- No, in my opinion. While I do see a technical reading to defend what the officials did (i.e., Cooper arguably made an invalid signal and an invalid signal is arguably reviewable), I think they are ultimately wrong under either (1) a "common sense" interpretation, or (2) a "literal" interpretation.
Link to official rulebook: https://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR23.pdf
Relevant excerpts:
- Fair catch and invalid signal (pages 34-35):
- Fair Catch
- ARTICLE 1.
- a. A fair catch of a scrimmage kick is a catch beyond the neutral zone by a Team B player who has made a valid signal during a scrimmage kick that is untouched beyond the neutral zone.
- b. A fair catch of a free kick is a catch by a Team B player who has made a valid signal during an untouched free kick.
- c. A valid or invalid fair catch signal deprives the receiving team of the opportunity to advance the ball. The ball is declared dead at the spot of the catch or recovery. If the catch precedes the signal, the ball is dead when the signal is first given.
- d. If the receiver shades their eyes from the sun without waving their hand(s),the ball is live and may be advanced.
- ARTICLE 1.
- Valid Signal
- ARTICLE 2.
- A valid signal is a signal given by a player of Team B who has obviously signaled their intention by extending one hand only clearly above their head and waving that hand from side to side of their body more than nonce.
- ARTICLE 2.
- Invalid Signal
- ARTICLE 3.
- An invalid signal is any waving signal by a player of Team B:
- a. That does not meet the requirements of Article 2 (above); or
- b. That is given after a scrimmage kick is caught beyond the neutral zone, strikes the ground or touches another player beyond the neutral zone (A.R.6-5-3-III-V); or
- c. That is given after a free kick is caught, strikes the ground or touches another player. [Exception: Rule 6-4-1-f]
- An invalid signal is any waving signal by a player of Team B:
- ARTICLE 3.
- Fair Catch
- Consequences of a fair catch or invalid signal (pages 76-77)
- Invalid Signals: Catch or Recovery
- ARTICLE 3.
- a. A catch after an invalid signal is not a fair catch, and the ball is dead where caught or recovered. (Exception: During a free kick, if a Team B receiver gives any waving signal that does not meet all of the requirements of a valid fair catch signal, and subsequently catches the ball behind the B-25 yard line the ball belongs to Team B at its own 25-yard line).
- b. If the signal follows a catch or recovery, the ball is dead when the signal is first given (A.R. 6-5-1-I).
- c. Invalid signals beyond the neutral zone apply only to Team B.
- d. An invalid signal beyond the neutral zone is possible only when the ball has crossed the neutral zone (Rule 2-16-7) (A.R. 6-5-3-I).
- ARTICLE 3.
- No Tackling
- ARTICLE 5.
- No player of the kicking team shall tackle or block an opponent who has completed a fair catch. Only the player making a fair catch signal has this protection (A.R. 6-5-5-I and III).
- ARTICLE 5.
- Invalid Signals: Catch or Recovery
- Reviewable plays (starting on page 117)
- Kicks
- ARTICLE 4.
- Reviewable plays involving kicks include:
- a. Touching of a kick.
- b. Player beyond the neutral zone when kicking the ball.
- c. Kicking team player advancing a ball after a potential muffed kick/fumble by the receiving team.
- d. Scrimmage kick crossing the neutral zone.
- e. Blocking by players of the kicking team before they are eligible to touch the ball on an on-side kick.
- f. A player touching or recovering a kick or loose ball who is or has been out of bounds during the kick.
- g. Receiving team advancing after a fair catch signal.
- Reviewable plays involving kicks include:
- ARTICLE 4.
- Kicks
They didn't say they were reviewing out-of-bounds. And even if they did, they are allowed to look at anything else reviewable (and even if you and I think the invalid shouldn't be reviewable, the guys in charge say it is - so that's what matters).
Every scoring play IS reviewed. The officials hold the scoring team from snapping the point after touchdown try until they receive confirmation from the booth, or in this case notification of further review.
Also, the slow-motion view of the play exaggerated the timespan of his left arm waving as well. His arm movement was easily under a second, and at field level view of oncoming defenders, barely noticeable in real-time as the play continued.
The most problematic thing in the convoluted rule pasted above is this:
- An invalid signal is ANY waving signal by ANY player of Team B
Already been addressed. In this same game, Minnesota tried to line up and do a quick snap and the play was stopped. Kirk has spoke about quick snaps before when questioned why he doesn’t try it more.
In the instant replay booth, there is an instant replay official, communicator, and a technician. The technician gets EVERY PLAY on the monitor for the for the instant replay official. The communicator alerts the IR official when the team breaks the huddle and a snap is imminent. The IR official will stop play if he believes there is something worth reviewing and he’s not reviewed the entire play. Like I said, it happened to Minn in this same game.
Another difference between the NFL/CFB that many fans don’t realize.
This is from the rule book on normal plays that are not stopped for further review:
The Process:
Normal Booth Process (No Game Stoppage):
The Instant Replay Official will review every potentially-reviewable play to either confirm the call on the field was correct or to look for evidence that the play may need to be reviewed. When this type of review occurs, there is no interruption or stoppage of the game.
Note: it’s too late to review the play when the next play begins.
- Each play and subsequent replay will appear on the monitor in front of the Technician. As the Technician marks the incoming video, each clip will appear as a small thumbnail picture on the computer touch screen in front of the Technician. At any time, the Replay Official can use the Shuttle Remote in front of him to "pull" plays to his monitor or ask the Technician to send a play by touching the thumbnail on the touchscreen and it will be sent to the Replay Official. That thumbnail will have a yellow shaded box around its letter designating the sequence that it came into the system. (A, B, C...) This will allow the Technician and Communicator to track which replays have been sent to the Replay Official and which have not. The Replay Official also has a display of the angles captured, the one being view (with a red border) and the ones already viewed.
- Replay Official will get the new play once the Technician marks it and announces, "new play up and the play #." The Technician can then send the play to the Replay Official by pressing the thumbnail of that play on his touch screen or the Replay Official will wait one second and then press the Play button on their Shuttle remote to retrieve the play. All replays/video will be viewed on an output monitor in front of the Replay Official, who can quickly get additional replays by choosing the A-H buttons on the Shuttle Remote. All replay video navigation, including Play/Pause, Slow-Motion, Frame-by-Frame, and Fast Forward/Rewind, will be done via a Shuttle remote device controlled by the Replay Official. The Technician also has the ability to zoom in on a specific portion of the video for the Replay Official when/if the is requested during a review.
- Communicator will notify the Replay Official when the team breaks the huddle or a snap is imminent.
- Replay Official will clear his own monitor when finished with the review by pressing the Standby button on the Shuttle remote and announce to the booth "All Clear".
Last edited:
This is from the rule book on plays that are stopped for further review:
Replay Review Process (Game Stoppage Review):
While most plays can be reviewed between the dead ball and the beginning of the next play, the Replay Official can stop play on the field by using the pager system:
a. Replay Official communicates via vibrating pager to field officials (R, U, SJ, U, HL, BJ and FJ) when stopping the game for a review. In the event of pager system failure, the Communicator shall immediately notify the Replay Sideline Assistant by headset or walkie-talkie. The Replay Sideline Assistant shall then notify the nearest official, who will stop play.
NCAA Division Football Instant Replay Coaches Manual
Page No. 7
1. "After further review, the ruling on the field is confirmed."
"After further review, the ruling on the field stands."
3. "After further review, the ruling is (description of video evidence e.g., "runner did not make the line to gain"), therefore (description of result of overturn/modification e.g.,
"the ball will be placed at the 39 yard-line, 3rd down").
Replay Review Process (Game Stoppage Review):
While most plays can be reviewed between the dead ball and the beginning of the next play, the Replay Official can stop play on the field by using the pager system:
a. Replay Official communicates via vibrating pager to field officials (R, U, SJ, U, HL, BJ and FJ) when stopping the game for a review. In the event of pager system failure, the Communicator shall immediately notify the Replay Sideline Assistant by headset or walkie-talkie. The Replay Sideline Assistant shall then notify the nearest official, who will stop play.
NCAA Division Football Instant Replay Coaches Manual
Page No. 7
- Referee announces via the stadium public address system, "The previous play is under further review." or "(Team) has requested a timeout for a challenge. The previous play is under further review."
- The Technician begins timing the replay. This is done by hitting the Start Review button on the DVSport system (the Communicator should help make sure the timer is started). Typically, replays should not exceed two-minutes.
- Referee proceeds to the sideline, where the Replay Sideline Assistant provides him with the headset and belt pack (for volume control) for communications to the replay booth. The Referee will have the option to obtain a headset from the sideline assistant with a DVSport yellow and white vest on from either 20 yard line on the press box side of the field.
- Technician notifies the television production truck by ring-down phone in the booth, connected directly to the truck, what is being reviewed and requests additional views from the truck. The Technician stays on the phone with the truck until the result of the review is announced on the field.
- Communicator notifies the Replay Official when additional views have been received.
- Replay Official completes review and informs Referee via headset of his decision.
- Referee public address announcement:
1. "After further review, the ruling on the field is confirmed."
"After further review, the ruling on the field stands."
3. "After further review, the ruling is (description of video evidence e.g., "runner did not make the line to gain"), therefore (description of result of overturn/modification e.g.,
"the ball will be placed at the 39 yard-line, 3rd down").
- The Technician will hit Stop Review and the time will stop and the Review information screen will
- The Technician will log replay report information (i.e., team, time on clock, play reviewed, call (confirmed, stands or reversed call). This will be done by using the touch screen on the DVSport instant replay system and e-mailed after the game.
That’s pretty safe to say from the rule book SECTION 1, ARTICLE 2:
SECTION 1. Purpose and Philosophy
Purpose
ARTICLE 1. Instant replay is a process whereby video review is used to confirm, reverse or let stand certain on-field decisions (Rule 12-3) made by game officials. Philosophy
ARTICLE 2. The instant replay process operates under the fundamental assumption that the ruling on the field is correct. The replay official may reverse a ruling if and only if the video evidence (Rule 12-6-1-c) convinces him beyond all doubt that the ruling was incorrect. Without such indisputable video evidence, the replay official must allow the ruling to stand.
Two fumble situations seemingly called wrong in the 2000 Michigan at Illinois game has lead us to this moment.
In my opinion, I would rather live with human error in real time - and accept the life lessons that go along with that, than whatever it is we are trying to do now with replay.
In my opinion, I would rather live with human error in real time - and accept the life lessons that go along with that, than whatever it is we are trying to do now with replay.
They did say that. And as I mentioned, I hope every scoring play is reviewed with a fine tooth comb to make sure it was executed 100% above the belt. Otherwise, again, it’s complete BS. The subjectivity of the entire thing is comedically inept.
It’s actually dependent on the point spread, the outcome of the play, and the direct Correlation between those and the betting profile of the review officials moms Ceasars Palace account.
Aside from it being completely judgmental call that no one on the field (players, officials, fans, commentators, etc.) thought it was A) a fair catch B) an invalid fair catch or C) a penalty, and it’s not a reviewable play. The rules committee has an exhaustive list of plays that are reviewable and no where is “invalid fair catch” included.
Very good….someone here UNDERSTANDS the spirit of their rules!
I never noticed the part that refers ONLY to the replay official has to been convinced. That makes no sense, when taken together with the next sentence that says it must be indisputable.
So, if ONE friggin' guy is convinced it doesn't matter if it's subjective and can overrule the officials on the field???
Tim O'Dey. Never forget and let's welcome him accordingly if he ever refs another game at Kinnick.
No way he does, right?
No way he does, right?
That guy had this little blunder not so many years ago (in 2016).
The on-field officials and replay crew who bungled the finish of Saturday’s Oklahoma State-Central Michigan game have each been suspended for two games.
The replay officials were from the Big 12 and the officiating crew was from the MAC. Both conferences announced Sunday that they were suspending their officials involved in the game.
The officials awarded CMU an untimed down after Oklahoma State committed intentional grounding on fourth down with no time left on the clock. The Chippewas took advantage of the extra play by scoring on a Hail Mary pass to win the game.
The head referee, MAC official Tim O’Dey, admitted after the game that his crew had erred in awarding the untimed down. Both conferences confirmed the error in a statement released after the game but said the result would not be altered.
So a person we do not see or directly hear from, sitting in some remote office someplace has the power to make a final decision about a rule that itself is subject to the whims of interpretation that can affect an outcome of a person's life. And then there's a replay official, too.
Keep in mind, active officials (on field/court or replay) are not involved in the rule making process at any level of any sport. The rules committees are made up of administrators and coaches who make rules with no real idea how to enforce them. Then officiating governance kicks in and as to figure it all out and interpret what the rules makers meant.So a person we do not see or directly hear from, sitting in some remote office someplace has the power to make a final decision about a rule that itself is subject to the whims of interpretation that can affect an outcome of a person's life. And then there's a replay official, too.
Those committees should invite officials into the process, tell them what they want to fix or change, and let the officials help write rules that are easier to enforce and understand.
It's over, done with! Let's start a thread about Ronnie Harmon throwing the Rose Bowl.
Maybe the replay official saw Cooper waving his left hand and wanted to take a second look.
Exactly, the way this rule is written, a ref or review booth official could literally call off any runback for any reason: real, imagined or nefarious in nature. It is a wild card for referees to determine the outcome of the game.
Imagine if we run the table including the B10 CCG, it will completely circle back to legitimate gripe and be a national conversation again.
The rule is trash, should not apply to bouncing balls. And the fair catch signal should be changed to a helmet tap. It will have to happen in the playoffs to an SEC team for the NCAA to fix this.
Just a complete lack of awareness and overstepping the intent of the rule. I’ll be livid if it costs Iowa a CFP birth.
I understood reviewing the play for possible out of bounds - on tv, with cooper spinning it looked remotely possible that he’d put a toe on the sideline. Broadcast crew had no idea until the very end they were looking at anything else.
Why not? Half the point of hurrying is to try and snap the ball before replay has a chance to review a particular angle that would show it needs a longer look.
The more the Hawks win, the more this terrible call will be revisited, which is a good thing.
They wouldn't allow "hurry up" if they were truly reviewing and scrutinizing every play.
99% of plays don’t need review. It would also effectively render impossible the up-tempo/hurry-up offense.
most plays you can typically tell pretty quickly whether a closer look is needed. Coaches know this, and if on the field they think a play was close, they will sometimes try to hurry-up and make a replay impossible.
There’s not a fan base in the country that doesn’t have a shortlist of infamous officiating calls. This one deservedly shouldn’t be forgotten anytime soon.
What the original post to which I replied said was "all plays are reviewed".
So, pray tell, what warranted the longer look on "The Call"?
Please don't embarrass yourself, TIA.
I watched live on tv - everyone watching, broadcasters included, were under the impression they were checking to make sure he’d stayed in bounds. This is what Kirk said he was told as well. Which fair enough. Given the broadcast angle, the guys standing around him when he caught the ball and his initial spin move, I didn’t object to that, better safe than sorry.
why they then looked at entire play, and somehow decided to invoke the invalid fair catch rule, when it wasn’t called on the field, no one at field level thought that, and then to make that ruling via replay, is the controversial call here.
Great explanation. Now where does it say an invalid fair catch is revieweable? Don't bother looking because it doesn't. The problem with letter of the law rulings like they are claiming on their ruling here is it isn't actually called out. Only fair catches are revieweable if they are advanced and since they do make a distinction by defining invalid fair catches in the rulebook by the letter if the law this wasn't a revieweable play. All that should have been checked is a binary did Cooper make a fair catch signal is not before returning the ball. He didn't so nothing else is reviewed. The after the fact an invalid fair catch falls under fair catch is a lie to cover their shit call by a shit official.
Get over it. If you need a call or don’t get a call to beat that awful Minny team at home. You deserve to lose.The DeJean punt return overrule. Look, I'm sorry to bring this up yet again, but it bugs me.
Does it bother me that the Hawks lost a game? Nope. Does it bother me that the game might have been stolen and DeJean robbed of an epic "for all-time" play? Yep.
So, here is my question. After everything I've seen and read, it haven't gotten a straight answer yet.
A. Did the officials announce the review? Usually it's "The ruling on the field is ......". I don't think they did - is that just because it was a scoring play? If he was tackled at the one-yard line, would they have had to "announce" the review?
B. Are the officials permitted to simply re-officiate the play? Or, do they have to have a reason to look at something in order to overrule it? Did the officials suspect he might have made an illegal fair catch signal? Or, just see it on the replay?
C. At the end of the day, did the officials do the correct thing in all respects? Was the overrule "indisputable"? Is it clear to all that it was an illegal fair catch signal?
Reminds me of the Iowa BB "phantom call" against Purdue when Lute lost his sh*t. Or similarly, when Ronnie "Goat" Harmon fumbled four times in the first half in the Rose Bowl.
These things bother me for a while.
Similar threads
