GT at uGA Post Game

[stinger78]

The suspension of the refs after the Sanks fumble is less of SEC being biased and more of them doing the right thing.

Let’s be real. Sanks was down, that was a terrible call. Terrible. Any conference should’ve and would’ve suspended those refs. Yes, Donnan was an idiot for not kicking the FG, but we still got very very very lucky.

Some folks see Friday’s no call on the targeting/fumble as payback for the Sanks incident. (Although in my opinion that already happened with JT’s fumble in 2014)

Are you aware of Referee Ford’s explanation for the Sanks call?

 

[Ramble1885]

Are you aware of Referee Ford’s explanation for the Sanks call?

I am not. But the replay clearly shows the ground causing the ball to pop loose.

 

[MtnWasp]

I wonder if the perception of biased officiating "omissions" has anything to do with the fact that Haynes King had 24 rushing attempts and Carson Beck had 7?

There is certainly a general officiating bias about protecting the QB while he is in the pocket versus treating the QB like a running back when he is running the ball. Receivers and QB's in the pocket get official protection because they are "helpless." But RBs and to a certain extent TEs get little protection from officials.

Therefore, a team that is running the ball a lot will naturally get "roughed-up" more than one using the QB-WR passing attack. That is just the rules of the game.

When a QB runs, all defenses try to whack them. That is how FSU beat GT during the Joe Hamilton years. They would just beat the snot out of little Joe. This is why most NFL teams are gunshy about dual threat QBs.

 

[stinger78]

I am not. But the replay clearly shows the ground causing the ball to pop loose.

The SECheat had just passed a new rule that year stating that if no one sees the ball come loose to call it as if it were a fumble. The official with the call was screened and didn’t see it so they ruled it a fumble. The SECheat suspended them anyway. That crew was their top crew and they called it exactly as the SECheat rules stated.

No one disputes that it was a bad call.

 

[Ramble1885]

The SECheat had just passed a new rule that year stating that if no one sees the ball come loose to call it as if it were a fumble. The official with the call was screened and didn’t see it so they ruled it a fumble. The SECheat suspended them anyway. That crew was their top crew and they called it exactly as the SECheat rules stated.

No one disputes that it was a bad call.

Wow, I did not know that.

 

[Ramble1885]

Wow, I did not know that.

also a GREAT espn article on that game that came out last week.

Georgia-Georgia Tech 1999: One of the most memorable rivalry games of all time

Revisiting Georgia Tech's wild win over Georgia 25 years ago.

www.espn.com

 

[stinger78]

Wow, I did not know that.

Yep. Strange how facts can change a perception of an event. Ha!

It was pre-review days, so there was no other recourse.

 

[Ramble1885]

Yep. Strange how facts can change a perception of an event. Ha!

It was pre-review days, so there was no other recourse.

In Kim King's book he did say that the ref didn't see it. But I did not know about the SEC rule at the time.

 

[stinger78]

In Kim King's book he did say that the ref didn't see it. But I did not know about the SEC rule at the time.

That was the irony or ironies in that whole saga.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

This. I've already gone on record saying I don't believe this was a giant "conspiracy," as others have alluded to or stated outright. That sort of reasoning is just a justification for emotions that are too close to the surface.

However, your post (and @Ramble1885 's earlier post) made me remember the aftermath of the infamous Jasper Sanks game in the late 90's. After that play was ruled a fumble and Georgia lost the game, the SEC investigated the officials from that game. And the SEC ruled that those refs had made a big mistake. As a result, they fined the refs. What's more, those specific refs were scheduled to officiate the SEC Championship game the following week. After the SEC decided they had made the wrong call, they were removed from the SECCG, which cost them a substantial bonus as well as reputation in the industry.

I should also point out that in non-conference games, I've never heard of the SEC proactively reviewing a non-conference game where an SEC referee made a bad call that cost the other team the game. (It may have happened, but I haven't heard of it.)

So the SEC sent a clear message after that game. As an official who works for the SEC, and who relies on the SEC to schedule you for the bigger games and growing their pay each year, you're definitely aware: if you make a controversial call that costs an SEC team an out-of-conference game, you're done. Your livelihood is on the line.

So I would not at all be surprised if an SEC referee saw something questionable, but decided to keep the flag in their pocket because it was a gray area, and the game was too close. They subconsciously know not to risk those things.

This is also why I'd like to see non-conference games officiated by a crew from outside either of the playing teams' conference. They can and will still make bad calls. But at least there's not an obvious potential conflict of interest.

I remember well. Dooley was demanding an investigation as soon as the game was over. Even wanted the Ga legislature involved. Dooley may have been a total @$$ as a human being but he set the tone for how the SEC would operate.

I’m proud that our coaches and players never use bad calls as an excuse but it does mean we continue to play by different rules.

 

[TampaBuzz]

Again, that’s a flag, not a non-call. But to answer, some things are unavoidable and have to be called. That was pretty obvious. Plus, certain calls are made by certain officials and not others. Maybe not all were biased, or paid.

Well, that is certainly not true. I only had few gripes about the officiating. 1. The hit on King...and my gripe is that it was not reviewed for targeting. I don't know if it was or wasn't targeting (it is one of those nebulous things). Watching the play and how King fell backwards and down to the ground with hands to the side, I thought he had been knocked out. Again, I don't know if it would have been found to be targeting, but it should have been reviewed and an explanation provided for the conclusion. 2. The uncalled egregious and blatant takedown of Height on the pass play after the King fumble. Lineman grabs him by the collar and drags him to the ground in open space right in front of the Ref with no call resulting in a 15 completion instead of a 10 yard penalty. 3. Why was the potentially tipped ball not reviewed/called on the PI call that everyone is complaining about? I get you can't review the penalty call (ticky tacky as they appear), but you can certainly review a tipped ball. So in the last 5:30 of regulation time; one egregious penalty against UGA that was not called, and two plays that were controversial and should have been subject to some kind of video review.

However, these things did not change the fact that GT should have won the game anyway. Our first three drives all got inside the UGA 25 (maybe 30?), but yielded only three (3!) points. If we score 17 (or even 9) on those 1st three drives, do we win? I bet every one of us was muttering to ourselves right about then about how we can't win if we leave points on the field. Bottom line is we didn't make the plays we needed to make to win the game. If we had done our jobs better early in the game, it would not have mattered what the refs did later in the game. I salute the effort and fight, and am proud to be a yellow jacket.

 

[stinger78]

Well, that is certainly not true. I only had few gripes about the officiating. 1. The hit on King...and my gripe is that it was not reviewed for targeting. I don't know if it was or wasn't targeting (it is one of those nebulous things). Watching the play and how King fell backwards and down to the ground with hands to the side, I thought he had been knocked out. Again, I don't know if it would have been found to be targeting, but it should have been reviewed and an explanation provided for the conclusion. 2. The uncalled egregious and blatant takedown of Height on the pass play after the King fumble. Lineman grabs him by the collar and drags him to the ground in open space right in front of the Ref with no call resulting in a 15 completion instead of a 10 yard penalty. 3. Why was the potentially tipped ball not reviewed/called on the PI call that everyone is complaining about? I get you can't review the penalty call (ticky tacky as they appear), but you can certainly review a tipped ball. So in the last 5:30 of regulation time; one egregious penalty against UGA that was not called, and two plays that were controversial and should have been subject to some kind of video review.

However, these things did not change the fact that GT should have won the game anyway. Our first three drives all got inside the UGA 25 (maybe 30?), but yielded only three (3!) points. If we score 17 (or even 9) on those 1st three drives, do we win? I bet every one of us was muttering to ourselves right about then about how we can't win if we leave points on the field. Bottom line is we didn't make the plays we needed to make to win the game. If we had done our jobs better early in the game, it would not have mattered what the refs did later in the game. I salute the effort and fight, and am proud to be a yellow jacket.

We out performed the average on UGAg in virtually every category. The issue was not our lack of performance. It was directly the non-calls and non-reviews… IMPO.

 

[cpf2001]

If there was any “penance” to be paid for Sanks it was all done after 2006 anyway.

 

[stinger78]

If there was any “penance” to be paid for Sanks it was all done after 2006 anyway.

2006 was one of the worst in a pantheon of UGAg game rip-offs.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Well, that is certainly not true. I only had few gripes about the officiating. 1. The hit on King...and my gripe is that it was not reviewed for targeting. I don't know if it was or wasn't targeting (it is one of those nebulous things). Watching the play and how King fell backwards and down to the ground with hands to the side, I thought he had been knocked out. Again, I don't know if it would have been found to be targeting, but it should have been reviewed and an explanation provided for the conclusion. 2. The uncalled egregious and blatant takedown of Height on the pass play after the King fumble. Lineman grabs him by the collar and drags him to the ground in open space right in front of the Ref with no call resulting in a 15 completion instead of a 10 yard penalty. 3. Why was the potentially tipped ball not reviewed/called on the PI call that everyone is complaining about? I get you can't review the penalty call (ticky tacky as they appear), but you can certainly review a tipped ball. So in the last 5:30 of regulation time; one egregious penalty against UGA that was not called, and two plays that were controversial and should have been subject to some kind of video review.

However, these things did not change the fact that GT should have won the game anyway. Our first three drives all got inside the UGA 25 (maybe 30?), but yielded only three (3!) points. If we score 17 (or even 9) on those 1st three drives, do we win? I bet every one of us was muttering to ourselves right about then about how we can't win if we leave points on the field. Bottom line is we didn't make the plays we needed to make to win the game. If we had done our jobs better early in the game, it would not have mattered what the refs did later in the game. I salute the effort and fight, and am proud to be a yellow jacket.

Though I don’t disagree with you in principle, nobody this year has played a perfect game against uga. Even Ole Miss and Alabama. So, yes, I wish we had put more points on the board but to blame Tech for that puts up a higher bar for us than anyone else. Thirty some odd times in a row teams playing against Georgia’s home field advantage faired much worse than Tech.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

If there was any “penance” to be paid for Sanks it was all done after 2006 anyway.

Also touted around the state, and replayed endlessly on video before SEC games, of Georgia’s courageous and victorious winning spirit.

 

[RonJohn]

Well, that is certainly not true. I only had few gripes about the officiating. 1. The hit on King...and my gripe is that it was not reviewed for targeting. I don't know if it was or wasn't targeting (it is one of those nebulous things). Watching the play and how King fell backwards and down to the ground with hands to the side, I thought he had been knocked out. Again, I don't know if it would have been found to be targeting, but it should have been reviewed and an explanation provided for the conclusion. 2. The uncalled egregious and blatant takedown of Height on the pass play after the King fumble. Lineman grabs him by the collar and drags him to the ground in open space right in front of the Ref with no call resulting in a 15 completion instead of a 10 yard penalty. 3. Why was the potentially tipped ball not reviewed/called on the PI call that everyone is complaining about? I get you can't review the penalty call (ticky tacky as they appear), but you can certainly review a tipped ball. So in the last 5:30 of regulation time; one egregious penalty against UGA that was not called, and two plays that were controversial and should have been subject to some kind of video review.

However, these things did not change the fact that GT should have won the game anyway. Our first three drives all got inside the UGA 25 (maybe 30?), but yielded only three (3!) points. If we score 17 (or even 9) on those 1st three drives, do we win? I bet every one of us was muttering to ourselves right about then about how we can't win if we leave points on the field. Bottom line is we didn't make the plays we needed to make to win the game. If we had done our jobs better early in the game, it would not have mattered what the refs did later in the game. I salute the effort and fight, and am proud to be a yellow jacket.

height wasn't grabbed by the collar. The olineman grabbed him by his facemask. There were two 15 years personal fouls that could have been called on that play in addition to the 10 yard holding foul. It wasn't even in a spot that was hidden. It was in the open between the o line and the QB. There is no way that the officials didn't see it.

 

[roadkill]

If we had done our jobs better early in the game, it would not have mattered what the refs did later in the game.

This is pure conjecture. We don't know the lengths that the refs or CKS would have gone to to ensure their victory regardless of the first-half score.

 

[ThatGuy]

I am not. But the replay clearly shows the ground causing the ball to pop loose.

The replay that wasn't available at the time. This was before that era.

Edit - nevermind, just read the back and forth between you and @stinger78 above. Looks like y'all got it straightened out.)

 

[ThatGuy]

Well, that is certainly not true. I only had few gripes about the officiating. 1. The hit on King...and my gripe is that it was not reviewed for targeting. I don't know if it was or wasn't targeting (it is one of those nebulous things). Watching the play and how King fell backwards and down to the ground with hands to the side, I thought he had been knocked out. Again, I don't know if it would have been found to be targeting, but it should have been reviewed and an explanation provided for the conclusion. 2. The uncalled egregious and blatant takedown of Height on the pass play after the King fumble. Lineman grabs him by the collar and drags him to the ground in open space right in front of the Ref with no call resulting in a 15 completion instead of a 10 yard penalty. 3. Why was the potentially tipped ball not reviewed/called on the PI call that everyone is complaining about? I get you can't review the penalty call (ticky tacky as they appear), but you can certainly review a tipped ball. So in the last 5:30 of regulation time; one egregious penalty against UGA that was not called, and two plays that were controversial and should have been subject to some kind of video review.

However, these things did not change the fact that GT should have won the game anyway. Our first three drives all got inside the UGA 25 (maybe 30?), but yielded only three (3!) points. If we score 17 (or even 9) on those 1st three drives, do we win? I bet every one of us was muttering to ourselves right about then about how we can't win if we leave points on the field. Bottom line is we didn't make the plays we needed to make to win the game. If we had done our jobs better early in the game, it would not have mattered what the refs did later in the game. I salute the effort and fight, and am proud to be a yellow jacket.

This reminds me of something CPJ once said. Although I can't remember the exact quote, he mentioned something like "when you win, you have to win convincingly so the refs have no way to give it back to UGA."

We obviously were up 17-0 at halftime, then let it all slip away in the 2nd half. Perhaps some of it was the refs. Perhaps some of it was injuries. Perhaps some of it was going to prevent defense too early (or at all). Perhaps some of it was not closing the deal and putting more points on the board in the first half. Regardless, while we played one helluva game, if we had done some things differently it wouldn't have been so close that we couldn't close it out.

Still positive that we'll play even better next year. This was not a one-off opportunity.