Big 12 Publicly Reprimands Rhoads
- Thread starter CyFan61
- Start date
I just issued my own statement to the Big 12:
"The ruling was that Paul Rhoads was in violation of the Big 12 Conference sportsmanship and ethical conduct rules. Because of that ruling, instant replay is allowed to review it, which it did. Had the ruling been that Rhoads had violated code because of forward progress, the decision would not be reviewable. The replay official considered five aspects of the coach’s comments: Timeframe following a heartbreaking loss, emotional consistency of within coach’s personality, team-motivation/support factors, the fact he’s kinda known to give fiery speeches and because, well, doggone it, the on-field fumble call was incorrect. The replay official correctly determined there was no indisputable video evidence to confirm Rhoads’ comments were in violation of sportsmanship and ethical conduct rules."
"The ruling was that Paul Rhoads was in violation of the Big 12 Conference sportsmanship and ethical conduct rules. Because of that ruling, instant replay is allowed to review it, which it did. Had the ruling been that Rhoads had violated code because of forward progress, the decision would not be reviewable. The replay official considered five aspects of the coach’s comments: Timeframe following a heartbreaking loss, emotional consistency of within coach’s personality, team-motivation/support factors, the fact he’s kinda known to give fiery speeches and because, well, doggone it, the on-field fumble call was incorrect. The replay official correctly determined there was no indisputable video evidence to confirm Rhoads’ comments were in violation of sportsmanship and ethical conduct rules."
Up Yourz Big 12.
Coach handled his emotions with dignity and you outta be thankful to have a HC of his integrity in your UTlittle***** League.
Last edited by a moderator:
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
So, CPR can be reprimanded for statements that clearly referred to the officials but very carefully never specifically did, but there isn't enough evidence to see that a football appeared in Jeremiah George's hands, and therefore would be a fumble?
Just looking for the places where inference is OK and where it isn't.
Just looking for the places where inference is OK and where it isn't.
People, this is nothing. They had to say something and we knew it was coming.
Most of the college football world is on our side and that's what matters.
Remember, any publicity is good publicity, and being on all the news programs and the Dan Patrick show is well worth the slap on the wrist. The Cyclone brand is that of integrity and honor, that is the message, and we won't lay down for anybody!
View attachment 22312
Most of the college football world is on our side and that's what matters.
Remember, any publicity is good publicity, and being on all the news programs and the Dan Patrick show is well worth the slap on the wrist. The Cyclone brand is that of integrity and honor, that is the message, and we won't lay down for anybody!
View attachment 22312
He was talking very openly about official rulings. That was one of the main subjects of the speech. So, although he didn't call out the officials directly, he did call out official rulings, which is against the rule.
When the official rulings are so obviously botched though...that rule is disgusting. It protects bad officiating so much with nothing in return for the team that just got screwed. That is why Rhoads went on Dan Patrick and said that the refs need to start revealing their reasoning...and I very much agree.
can we stop pretending this is good for us. it was good for us until today. now people will talk about the TN/GA game, coaches getting seizures, and blow outs. ISU talk is done and over.
The rule is so broad that it is impossible to say ANYTHING about what happened in the game outside how your team performed (provided that you own all the responsibility for any penalties).
The rule either needs to change, or refs need to start showing their work.
It will get more play in the future. But the football world doesn't revolve around ISU. Only our football world does.
He did make the comment about being the least penalized team in the league and that there were a lot of hankies flying around. That's a pretty direct comment. Still an awesome speech and totally worth it.
Oh and one more thing: **** you Big 12.
Oh and one more thing: **** you Big 12.
Exactly what I was thinking. If there the it was not indisputable that it was a fumble, but it IS indisputable that he is calling out the refs, then they are using a different definition of indisputable for the two issues.
