Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Opinions on that INT

clonedude said:
What is even more amazing in this is that both guys' foot land at the exact same instant.

But everyone needs to watch the video below and go to the 4:07:14 and freeze it. This is when the ball comes in first contact, and it's Marchie's hand over the ball with OSU guy's hand on top of Marchie's. Now look at 4:07:16, almost when it goes to 4:07:17, the OSU's guys left hand comes off for the first time while Marchie's hand stays on. Then at about the 4:07:20 mark the OSU player's left hand comes off a 2nd time while Marchie's stays on it still.

Then I think you can also make the case that at the 4:07:23 mark that the OSU guy's hand is not on the ball once again. And then finally during the 4:07:27 mark Marchie clearly gets total control of the ball while still inbounds. The OSU player never gets total control of the ball until they are way out of bounds.

Click to expand...


Oh man after looking at that again, it's actually pretty obviously a TD by Murdoch. Ouch. I was one of the people originally saying it looked more like an interception, too. I think I was just too angry at the time and didn't actually watch the replays as they aired live.

It's a damn shame. The refs will issue their standard apology to ISU and the rest of the world will go on and forget (again).
 
jdoggivjc said:
On the bright side, now that ISU has been eliminated from championship consideration, we should be the beneficiaries of Big 12 corruption the next 2 weeks - considering ISU is OU's only loss, they now have to make that loss look as good as possible, amirite?
Click to expand...

TCU might be in for it this week or next.
 
GTO said:
What is the ETA on the apology letter?
Click to expand...

I dont expect one to come publicly, mainly because of the way Matt Campbell handled this in his presser. Im sure behind the scenes there are e-mails being exchanged with explanations.
 
Doc said:
I'd be fine with just an explanation of how they confirmed the on-field call. I don't need an apology or anything.
Click to expand...
Right, I’d rather they be able to provide evidence it was the right call. Sadly, they don’t have any and we were ******.
 
Don't send ISU an apology letter. That makes us look petty.

Bad call in a tough situation that they were never going to overturn after replay. Sucks, but it is what it is.

I'm not one to usually criticize refs because I have reffed a lot in the past, but the non-PI/defensive holding calls that they were all over us for were way worse. If we should be complaining about something it's that. If you call something that happens on every fade ball (jostling), then call it when it happens on the other end of the field. That almost seemed deliberate.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: quasistellar
KKramer said:
Don't send ISU an apology letter. That makes us look petty.

Bad call in a tough situation that they were never going to overturn after replay. Sucks, but it is what it is.

I'm not one to usually criticize refs because I have reffed a lot in the past, but the non-PI/defensive holding calls that they were all over us for were way worse. If we should be complaining about something it's that. If you call something that happens on every fade ball (jostling), then call it when it happens on the other end of the field. That almost seemed deliberate.
Click to expand...
It makes US look petty? Lol
 
I can understand it was a bang-bang play. You can see the line judge's initial reaction was having no worldly clue what to call. Tough call to make.

It was always going to replay, which is where my issue lies. The default is dual possession goes to the offense. So I would sure think when you have no idea what to call, which was apparent, you would go to the default rule, which would have made all the difference in this situation.
 
I was sure right away whatever the call was on the field was going to be upheld. It was too close to overturn either way. If it had been called a TD or an incomplete pass it would have been upheld. It was a por throw but I put it on the OC if that was Noland's primary read. Murdock made a terrific effort, but that wasn't the optimal call to make there. If it has to be a throw in the end zone there were certainly better options.

Like others have said, what bothers me more is the previous play when they tried to go to Lazard. After back to back defensive holding calls on the Cyclones earlier, I don't know how a flag didn't get thrown there.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: wxman1
I think the play was close either way. What I was surprised by was that the call was CONFIRMED, rather than STANDS AS CALLED. The call wouldn't have changed, but I am surprised that they saw clear evidence one way or another.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: VeloClone
Clonefan32 said:
I can understand it was a bang-bang play. You can see the line judge's initial reaction was having no worldly clue what to call. Tough call to make.

It was always going to replay, which is where my issue lies. The default is dual possession goes to the offense. So I would sure think when you have no idea what to call, which was apparent, you would go to the default rule, which would have made all the difference in this situation.
Click to expand...

I knew as soon as the two refs were looking at each other dumbfounded we were screwed. Then two more came over and it was confirmed. Someday we will get calls like this to go our way...just hope I am alive for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spanky, Clonefan32 and heitclone
spierceisu said:
I think the play was close either way. What I was surprised by was that the call was CONFIRMED, rather than STANDS AS CALLED. The call wouldn't have changed, but I am surprised that they saw clear evidence one way or another.
Click to expand...

I am not conspiracy guy but I wonder if they decided to do it that way regardless of what they saw because they knew they were deciding the outcome of the game and wanted to try and take away as much ambiguity as they could
 
spierceisu said:
I think the play was close either way. What I was surprised by was that the call was CONFIRMED, rather than STANDS AS CALLED. The call wouldn't have changed, but I am surprised that they saw clear evidence one way or another.
Click to expand...

That was pretty much a big middle finger to Campbell and the crowd in my opinion . . . :confused:
 
Cyliam said:
View attachment 51706

How can anyone say this is anything other than an interception?
Click to expand...

C'mon now. You could easily pull a half dozen other stills from the whole sequence that would each support a different conclusion. It was anything but a slam dunk decision, and I don't blame the folks who still think it was a TD or an incompletion. It was that close. Whatever was called on the field was going to stand because the replays didn't show anything conclusive one way or the other. Unfortunately the Cyclones just came up on the wrong end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom