Black Shoe Diaries: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: ANIMATED BLOGPOLL: COMPARING PELTS? UNFAIR! Bar-right-arrows



spread the word

Videofication: Wisconsin

Back by popular demand...some video and screenshots of the Wisconsin game.  The episode in which we explore illegal picks, easy touchdowns and phantom reversals.

Act I: How the bend-but-don't-break broke.

In an otherwise great performance, the defense gave up a very uncharacteristic big play on what appeared to be a sell-out rush combined with bad coverage.  Upon further inspection, however, there was something a little fishy about the way a receiver running a five yard slant pattern was able to get six yards of separation from his cornerback.

The first thing to look at here are the two Wisconsin receivers, running toward each other about three yards in front of the LoS.  Notice that, to the right, Tony Davis is all over Travis Beckum.

Pick1_medium

 

Star-divide

Ah, the old "turn-around-tail-out" route, in which non-option from the left plants himself firmly in front of his teammate's cover man.

Pick2_medium

Davis, at this point, is pretty much knocked off his feet as the ball is being released.  Not really relevant to the story, but the defensive line is all over Evridge just a nano-second after he gets rid of the ball.

Pick3_medium

Alas, the Wisconsin receiver is in open space with little in the way of a safety valve in his way.  This was the risk Bradley took when he decided to send seven after the quarterback, and it was the appropriate call for Wisconsin.  The thing is, though, without that move over the middle this is probably a six to seven yard gain.

Pick4_medium

On 3rd and 3 it works, but considering the way the Badgers had been moving the ball up to that point, a score was highly unlikely even with a seven yard first down.  Now, these types of things happen all the time, and it wasn't as blatant as I've seen before, but it helps explain the one anomaly in Saturday night's almost perfect performance.

Here it is in full speed:

 

Act II: In which Williams takes a leisurely stroll though the middle of the field, and why he decided he might as well turn it into six.

Ladies and gentlemen, the real Derrick Williams.

 

Act III: In which instant replay does the opposite of what it was designed to do.

Mark Rubin made a great jump on the ball and appeared to bring it in for the interception.  The officials on the field thought so, anyway.

 

Instead, the instant replay official apparently spotted him some "indisputable evidence" and overturned the call.  From the first angle they show it does look a bit like the ball bounced off of something, but it's clear from the second angle that his arm was under the ball the whole time. 

They say over and over against that a call cannot be overturned unless there is, in so many words, no question that the call on the field was wrong.  Not only is there not even close to enough evidence from the video to conclude that, but if anything the angles in the replay confirm that it was in fact an interception.

I'm not really worried about this particular call, it would have been meaningless and it was almost worth it to see Rubin kind of laugh it off and start making sure everyone knew he did actually catch it.  I guess I'm just a little confused as to why this keeps happening.  If a replay official can't be sure of the call, he is supposed to let the one on the field stand; it doesn't seem like that is happening.  It's almost like the closer the call the more random the outcome of the review process.

0 recs | Comment 42 comments | Digg!

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Don't be so down on the replay official

they want to be a part of the game, too!

By the way, real nice commentary again, always like the screen caps and videos.

Some suggestions for future work:
On the screen caps, can you maybe add in a circle over the players of interest.

Also, any more analysis of play formation and execution like the last set would be very interesting to see, as well.

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 14, 2008 2:54 PM EDT   0 recs

This came up

in a previous thread about the horrendous reversals we saw all day Saturday, and some of them WERE very critical plays. OU especially got screwed; two phantom ‘late hits’ OB (one was even the D guy trying to hold the runner upright), and a ridiculous reversal.

I hope the NCAA addresses this. Soon.

'People are about as happy as they decide they want to be'

by Pete the Streak on Oct 14, 2008 5:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It seems

that a lot of these officials (particularly the replay officials) seem to think that they have to make a call, and don’t understand the “if there’s no incontrovertable evidence, then the call on the field stands” part of their job. A lot of times it looks like they’re making a call based on limited information, in which case they should just say “not enough evidence, call on the field stands”. That of course doesn’t explain the times when there is ample evidence for a call one way, and they say the complete opposite.

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 14, 2008 5:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Great work!!

by millzners on Oct 14, 2008 2:56 PM EDT   0 recs

What you really mean...

Is that Wisconsin used an “illegal” pic play to get their receiver free of Davis. I was screaming at the TV when it happened to no avail as Big 10 officiating never favors PSU! By the way …..for me to catch it in real time….it was pretty freakin blatant!

As for Rubin’s interception…..what if that type of crap happened when the game was on the line. I agree there is no question he caught the ball….but see that doesn’t matter….we are Penn State and we always get F’d by the Big 10!

I thought only safeties played 15 yards off the ball?

by pic15 on Oct 14, 2008 4:34 PM EDT   0 recs

along the lines of "we always get F'd by the Big 10 refs"

I don’t know how much I agree with that. It seems that there have been very few penalties called against us this year (maybe we’re just more disciplined?), and there have been some pretty big calls against the other teams. I’m not saying it won’t happen (eye’s the game in Columbus warily) but it doesn’t seem to have been that way so far.

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 14, 2008 4:40 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sweet

It’s gotta be gratifying to see a midsummer day’s prognostication come to reality through the course of a 7-0 autumn. Great call and welcome to town the Real DWill.

Btw, I can only imagine how technically difficult that film breakdown must be. I thought a lot about it when Mike posted a request for suggestions, and realized they’re some tough requirements:
- Get the film off tivo or other dvr and onto pc in some workable format (wmv, mpeg, avi)
- Download a decent film editor that’ll grab out a frame at a time into jpg or gif still photo and which can be used to cut different motion clips as well
- Get all that edited shite posted somewhere (since it can’t live on SBN) and then link it
- Then add in your observations

Tough, tough tekspecs. And you’ve done it Kevin. Can’t even imagine how much time it takes. But thanks heaps.

pax et amor

by jtothep on Oct 14, 2008 4:39 PM EDT   0 recs

Agreed

This is fantastic stuff to put together in just two or three days. I’m hoping Kevin saves all these game films so he can go more in depth in the off season.

by BSD on Oct 14, 2008 4:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I hope he saves all the game films

so I can send him some blank DVDs and get copies of them all when the season ends.

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 14, 2008 4:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Seconded

I’ll pay for shipping.

by ReadingRambler on Oct 14, 2008 5:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

All in favor,

say “Aye”.

Chorus: “Aye!”.

Motion approved. Kevin to get back to us after MNC win, with shipping and pricing details.

(smacks button): THAT was easy!

'People are about as happy as they decide they want to be'

by Pete the Streak on Oct 14, 2008 8:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I've been looking into this

I’m trying to get them up as torrents, but that is going to take some research. Keep in mind I don’t have all of the games as I’ve been screwed by the BTN site (giving me the wrong channels) as well as ESPN, who seems to give DC totally random and often non-psu coverage. Going forward we won’t have very many problems, though. I’ll keep this in mind.

And thanks for the suggestions, these can take a lot of time so I want to make sure the things I’m using the effort on are worthwhile.

by Kevin HD on Oct 14, 2008 9:29 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Thank you again

Your tireless work is appreciated by all. I know I am voting for the next monster Maybin or Mauti like hit we see just because :D

If you can smile when things go wrong, you have someone in mind to blame.

by TheMightyErik on Oct 15, 2008 2:03 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

By the way...

I dont think DWill ever left. I think he was always there. Notice his two “down” years were when morelli was behind center and running the ball up the gut was the name of the game.

When Joe finally decides to use DWill the way he supposed to (end arounds, short passes over the middle, screens & letting him return punts/kicks) then everyone sees the great athlete he is.

in my mind, he was always this good…it was just the offensive scheme that was hurting his image.

by Stately NOVA Lion on Oct 14, 2008 4:59 PM EDT   0 recs

well

there were quite a few times during the 2006 season especially that he reminded me of Eddie Drummond: lightning fast, but no hands.

DWill would be wide open on some plays, streaking down the sidelines, and M*r*ll* would actually get him the ball in stride, but it would just go through his hands.

Now maybe that was due to lack of practice with balls actually being accurately thrown to him or some other way we could blame it on M*r*ll*…

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 14, 2008 5:55 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Don't forget about the poor dude's arm

He did miss half a season with that broken arm. I swear his first was his best until this year

If you can smile when things go wrong, you have someone in mind to blame.

by TheMightyErik on Oct 15, 2008 2:05 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I love the video on the DWill punt return

Man, I love that view, cause if you pause it at 32 sec. you could see the wave coming down on him, and he bursts to his left so all he needs to do is squeeze between 2 defenders instead of trying to juke out 11. But, that burst of speed was unreal

by WPIALkid22 on Oct 14, 2008 5:13 PM EDT   0 recs

Kevin

By the way, thanks for putting these up again. I needed a good distraction today

by WPIALkid22 on Oct 14, 2008 5:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The commentator says it all on the D-Will return

When he’s at the 50 – “Look out”

ten yards later at the 40 – “See-ya”

I bleed Blue and White.

by Horse N Buggy on Oct 14, 2008 5:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

maybe the Wisconsin players were slowing up

cuz they knew they couldn’t catch him, so why waste the energy, but man he looks twice as fast as anyone else on the field there

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 14, 2008 5:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I knew I wasn't the only one

that noticed that horrible pick right away. It makes you feel good though that the big gain wasn’t the result of poor coverage or a mismatch. Thanks for the great analysis as usual.

by fogast on Oct 14, 2008 5:19 PM EDT   0 recs

The Pick

I missed the pick. but can anyone cite the exact rule it violates? All’s fair in love and war, but not football, no?

PSU, Class of 83: yep, a National Championship year

For those of you who were not there in 1982 when Pitt played Penn State, it seemed as though Marino always had to fight against the student section when trying to score. The chants of “Marino Sucks!”, while in retrospect were perhaps unsportsmanlike, at the time were incredibly funny, heartwarming, inspiring, and “game-winningly” helpful. Go Lions. I have looked forward to every Penn state game since I was 5 (1966), but this year I have not anticipated each and every game more than since the 1982/83 season.

by Pentimental on Oct 14, 2008 6:31 PM EDT   0 recs

Glad you asked

I actually looked this up today.

Rule 7 Section 3 Article 8 Paragraph XVI says

XVI. A80, a tight end, moves across the formation on a pass pattern at a
depth of 25 yards where he contacts B1, a safety, before or after the
ball has been thrown. A88, a wide receiver positioned on the opposite
side from the tight end at the snap, crosses behind the contact of A80
and B1 and catches the legal forward pass. RULING: Team A foul,
offensive pass interference. Penalty—15 yards from the previous
spot.

I think that pretty accurately describes what happened. Offensive pass interference should have been called.

by BSD on Oct 14, 2008 9:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Further clarification
Illegal Contact and Pass Interference

ARTICLE 8. a. During a down in which a legal forward pass crosses the neutral
zone, illegal contact by Team A and Team B players is prohibited from the time
the ball is snapped until it is touched by any player or an official (A.R. 7-3-8-II
and III).

b. Offensive pass interference by a Team A player beyond the neutral zone
during a legal forward pass play in which a forward pass crosses the
neutral zone is contact that interferes with a Team B eligible player. It is
the responsibility of the offensive player to avoid the opponents.
It is not
offensive pass interference (A.R. 7-3-8-VI, VII, XIII, XVIII and XIX):

1. When, after the snap, a Team A ineligible player immediately charges
and contacts an opponent at a point not more than one yard beyond the
neutral zone and does not continue the contact more than three yards
beyond the neutral zone.

2. When two or more eligible players are making a simultaneous and bona
fide attempt to reach, catch or bat the pass. Eligible players of either
team have equal rights to the ball (A.R. 7-3-8-XII).

3. When the pass is in flight and two or more eligible players are in the area
where they might receive or intercept the pass and an offensive player in
that area impedes an opponent, and the pass is not catchable.

by BSD on Oct 14, 2008 9:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Fan Reaction

By the way, the BAdger fan’s reaction immediately after the DWill return was priceless. Hopefully Maisey Blew looks the same on Saturday.

PSU, Class of 83: yep, a National Championship year

by Pentimental on Oct 14, 2008 6:33 PM EDT   0 recs

Did anyone see the sad, dopey looking girl in the red beret they kept showing? It seemed like they found her after every td we scored, and she kept looking more depressed (and ridiculous, as she was wearing a beret).

Every time they showed her, RUTS and I started cracking up laughing. It could have been the booze talking, but I thought she was hilarious.

by Tailgate Shogun on Oct 15, 2008 7:21 AM EDT   0 recs

I was cracking up too.

I kept thinking she was going, “Ooo goshers… I missed a cheese wheel for this?”

by Cairo on Oct 15, 2008 9:43 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Get Rid of Replay

And invest the money into training the officials better.

Replay is a crutch and the refereeing gets worse every year it remains.

by CDRS on Oct 15, 2008 8:12 AM EDT   0 recs

Seriously

I’m sure the officials review the tape after every game. I wonder if the replay guy got beat up or if the guy on the field got a low grade for being overturned. And does this kind of stuff get into an official’s head while he’s playing the game? Is he thinking “I better call that incomplete just because I’m not sure and I don’t want to get overturned” or is he thinking “Screw it. I’ll just go with what the side judge says and let the replay guy figure it out.”

by BSD on Oct 15, 2008 9:34 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

That's Exactly What I'm On About . . .

Before, the referees knew they had the final call. That makes it pretty important to get into the right position.

Now, hey, it’s up to the booth in many instances. “They’ll clean up this mess.”

And what really scares me is that every time a play is missed (e.g. the blatant facemask on Reggie Bush during the Saints-Vikings game a couple of weeks ago), there’s calls to use replay in more situations. Which is exactly why I was against replay in the first place.

Replay gets away from the beauty of football. It’s about gamemanship, sportsmanship, guts and teamwork.

Replay puts far too much emphasis on the officials or the lawyers on the field, if you will.

I watch sports to forget about lawyers, personally.

by CDRS on Oct 15, 2008 11:30 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Baseball

I’ve been hearing people say the home plate umping should be done by that strike-zone graphic thingy (yes, that’s its official name) to call balls and strikes. What’s next, having computers and lasers and robots make all the field decisions. And after that, maybe Penn State will even start playing some white LBs. Sheesh.

by NJ lion on Oct 15, 2008 11:53 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Look at tennis

They have made line judges completely irrelevant with the cyclops contraption. We already have a yellow line showing us where the first down marker is. How long until we install a computer chip in the ball and use GPS to determine for sure if the ball carrier got the six inches he needs for a TD or first down? How long until fields are equiped with sensors to tell you the reciever’s big toe landed on the chalk stripe and the catch was incomplete? Or that the ball touched the ground before the defender hauled it in?

by BSD on Oct 15, 2008 12:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

OMG

a day when the play on the field determines the outcome of the game? Blasphemy!!! We need blind refs on the field, it is tradition!

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 15, 2008 12:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm Sorry

You’re right, refereeing has vastly improved since the introduction of replay and there are no more disputed calls. Problem solved.

Oh, except that refereeing has deteriorated since replay was introduced and there are more disputed calls than ever, it seems.

I still remember the 2005 playoffs when Troy Polamalu intercepted Peyton Manning’s pass and the play was called correctly on the field, then wrongly overturned, which almost took a playoff victory away from the Steelers. Or the infamous tuck rule, that invalidated a correct call that would have rightly given the Raiders a playoff win in 2001.

So remind me again exactly what it was that replay was supposed to do? Besides unnecessarily lengthening the game?

by CDRS on Oct 15, 2008 1:27 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

And

giving the referees more creative ways to screw up.

by CDRS on Oct 15, 2008 1:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

bad referees are bad referees

and will always be bad referees. Perhaps replay is “bad” because it puts one more referee in the mix to mess something up, and it probably does put the refs on the field in a position to think “well I have a safety blanket, I don’t have to necessarily make this call correct,” but the only times the latter should happen would be times when the official on the field was unsure of what happened in the first place.

This is a possible reason there are more “disputed calls” and “more calls for replay” now, because the on-field refs are given the opportunity to basicaly say, “hey, I have no idea what happened, let’s send this upstairs and get a closer look”, whereas before they basically had to think to themselves, “well, I have no clear idea what happened, but I NEED to make a call, and be confident about it, so I’ll just flip a coin and figure it out that way, and pretend that I saw everything perfectly”

The way replay should work is that the on field refs call the plays as they see it, but when they are unsure of what they saw (especially in a potentially game changing situation), call the boys upstairs for a closer look. Then the boys upstairs should make the call based on the video evidence. Also keep the traditional use where when the replay official upstairs sees something wrong with the call on the field they initiate a review, in which case the replay official should only overturn the call if he himself is 100% sure that he is correct (which should also apply to coach’s challenges).

Unfortunately as it stands right now that isn’t how it works, and you get replay officials making judgement calls themselves, which is against their instructions. Don’t blame the system, blame the crappy refs. The solution isn’t to junk the system and put the game solely back into the hands of those crappy refs, but instead to properly train and educate the refs on how to do their job properly.

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 15, 2008 2:07 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Over a season . . .

Given the human element and competent, unbiased referees, the bad calls should even out.

I also think philosophically, the entire replay thing gets away from what football and sports in general at the college level is supposed to be about.

It’s not supposed to be all about winning or getting everything right. Sports is supposed to teach us that sometimes life is going to deal you a crappy hand, but you pick yourself up and move on.

Instead, this obsession with getting every call exactly right every time, only feeds into the sort of inhuman, zero defects, Type-A mentality that is what I like to get away from when I watch sports.

by CDRS on Oct 15, 2008 2:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

lol

(this is just to have a little fun with your post)

if college sports is supposed to teach us that sometimes life is going to deal you a crappy hand, then perhaps they could start cutting scholarships to players and kicking them off the team because the program needs to “downsize”. They could “layoff” entire “departments” (positions) and promote guys like Anthony Morelli to head coach.

Then when the team starts losing, they could give Morelli a huge bonus (inept CEOs getting big bonuses to "retire") and kick all the players out of their housing (foreclosure).

I mean honestly, if that’s why you watch sports then I can see why you don’t care for replay. Me, I watch sports to see great athletes compete on (hopefully) and even level, and for their play and abilities to determine the winner on the field. I personally have had enough lessons in the “life dealing you a crappy hand” and I use sports to escape that, and when refereeing mistakes (especially game altering ones, but especially game altering ones that are ridiculously wrong) take away from that I get a wee bit upset.

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 15, 2008 2:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm still pro replay

especially after the 2002 season. I just wish that they were more effective at it. You propose investing more money in training the officials better, well why not also invest in training the replay officials better. You can’t tell me the Big 10 doesn’t have enough funds to spend on a few weekend retreats where officials have to go through reffing bootcamp.

I just can’t stand when games hinge on whether or not supposedly (but often not the case) unbiased people wearing striped shirts either A) see the call or B) make the right decision if they do see the call

by The JuggerNitt on Oct 15, 2008 12:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I also like how this post

continuously reinforces that TEXAS TECH needed to go to overtime to beat Nebraska at home. Could the Red Raiders 98th ranked pass defense be a problem in the future?

by Cairo on Oct 15, 2008 10:00 AM EDT   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Penn St. Nittany Lions.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Donkey_small
Pasadena travel / ticket plans (updated)!!!

Recent FanPosts

Footballc3_small
Pitt Revisited
Lioneye_edited_small
TiVo Alert
Small
New BCS Spreadsheet - 12/1 (Posted 12/3)
Clark_bar_label_small
Playoff Possibilities Continued...
Lioneye_edited_small
Charlie Weis Firing Pool
Lion_small
Vidal Hazelton Transfering
Syracuse_small
Living in the USC world
Small
I will be at the Rose Bowl
Bateman_small
Heaven
Psu_logo_small
If this is too political than kill it.

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Managers

Lioneye_edited_small BSD

Editors

Image_small Run Up The Score

Reporter_small Kevin HD

ad

Site Meter