CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

....that there is one game every year where the officials gift wrap a win for a team when they are playing Ark. Last year it was Florida...this year it was Auburn. The officiating crew today was just terrible.

Two major blown calls gave Auburn 2 TD's....and both happened at key times in the game that shifted the momentum.

The first major blown call was the worst. The officials called fumble on the field....then they had a little pow-wow and came back and said TD. Then the booth reviewed and said there was not enough evidence to overturn the call. So many problems with this. First, fumble was called on the field (not TD)...so not enough evidence to overturn...but wait, after the pow-wow they changed the call (can they even do that?...well they did). Secondly, the video was quite clear....the ball came out of the Auburn players arms and fell straight down to the ground...it hit the ground almost a full yard short of the goal line (the video evidence was clear).

Then the second blown call. In real time, I thought it was clear that he was down. 99.9% of the time the ref will run out pointing at the ground. Then the booth review...they showed every angle....Broderick Greens knee and then butt hit the ground before the ball came out. It was clear. Then the ruling was a fumble. I could not believe what I was watching.

You take away both of those blown calls and Ark probably wins that game. You take away the second one and Ark has the ball, with time ticking down, a first down, and only down by 1 point (still in the ball game). That was a huge momentum swing.

The one game every year that this happens in is always against a team that is undefeated...etc....like they are trying to protect them. I always say I don't buy into the conspiracy theories...but with each passing year I come closer to changing my mind.

And I am not just complaining because Ark lost the game. I did not complain about the officials in the Bama game...because the refs let the teams play and Bama won fair and square. That's not what happened today. My wife works with an Auburn fan...I spoke to him after the game and he said he did not like how Auburn won this game. He too thought something was fishy about the two blown calls (he agreed they both were the wrong calls). He said he wished that Auburn would have earned the win on the field, and he could say that the refs did not help in the victory.

Oh well...what are you going to do. Petrino can complain but they will fine him or suspend him. The fans can complain to the SEC but nothing will happen. They may suspend the refs like they did last year after the Florida game but they are back out there (and not any better then before there suspensions). I don't know what the answer is.

Just watched the post game press conference with Petrino. He was asked about the blown calls....he said I can't talk about that (you could tell he wanted to sooooo bad...he was not happy). They asked him how the call affected the momentum of the game....he said I told you I can't talk about it....do you want my pockets to get lighter. Petrino told the reporters they would have to speak with the league office.

Last year after Florida he spoke up and I guess the league office shut him up.

Those were no doubt calls that affected the outcome, and I concur incorrect calls. When the official threw the bean bag out and there was no official signaling a touchdown, I was sure the call was a fumble and the video evidence did support that. Then when they said they ruled it a touchdown on the field, I pretty much knew what the outcome was going to be.

However, the lack of special teams really cost the Razorbacks again and Cam Newton is really good.

It is often said you have to win through bad calls. That is fine, for a couple of calls that result in you punting or being backed up, but more than one that directly results in points is asking a whole lot...especially against a quality opponent. I saw several calls that should not have made it through review yesterday.

And I'd like to see a rule change on fumbles and reviews. A fumble should give the benefit of the doubt to the possessing team not the call on the field...they are too hard to get right in live action and the video can be very tight way too often! If a defense gets shorted by not getting the call and the ball, to me, the damage is far less.

RazorHawk wrote:Those were no doubt calls that affected the outcome, and I concur incorrect calls. When the official threw the bean bag out and there was no official signaling a touchdown, I was sure the call was a fumble and the video evidence did support that. Then when they said they ruled it a touchdown on the field, I pretty much knew what the outcome was going to be.

However, the lack of special teams really cost the Razorbacks again and Cam Newton is really good.

Cam Newton is very good. He will get his yards against anyone. Ark's special teams let them down in that game. But you don't overcome calls like that against good opponents (14 points just handed to Auburn).

Now the SEC league office is lying about the calls (like we don't have video of what transpired).

They say that the head official signaled a TD (he did not) and the line judge signaled fumble (which he did). They say the head official had a better look at the play (are you kidding me...the line judge was right on top of the play). Go back and watch the replay...not one official signaled TD (NOT ONE OF THEM)...well, not until they had their little pow-wow. This stinks of paid officials or something....just makes me sick. And of course the league office is covering it up.

The league office refused to comment on the fumble (or no fumble that gave Auburn a TD)....I won't their explanation on this one too.

http://blogs.nwaonline.com/slophouse/20 ... ffy-calls/

Ark got screwed and the league isn't going to throw gas on that fire by admitting their crew blew it (twice).

strawman wrote:Ark got screwed and the league isn't going to throw gas on that fire by admitting their crew blew it (twice).

I think they found that their admission and actions last year did very little for their image...so they revert back to the"old school" method (ostrich method).

They showed that fumble in slo mo from several angles ina hi lite last nite....really, it looked different from each angle. Close, whether he was down or not. His rear was not actually on the ground from one angle but supported up in the air. I couldn't tell about the shoulder because it was occluded at the moment that you needed to see it.