On the final play of the game, Arizona lined up with trips Right, or 3 WRs to the right side of the formation, 1 WR to the left. The inside WR to the right lined up on the LOS, as did the WR on the far outside right. This makes the inside WR ineligible as he is covered up by the outside WR and thus cannot run down field. There should have been a flag for ineligible man down field. Penalty. Game Over.

These things are a judgement call and sometimes they don't get called, but the outside WR is clearly on the line, the middle WR to the right is a full yard or two behind him, and the inside WR is even with the both the right tackle, and the WR split out wide left, and thus by definition, ON the LOS. If the OLine, and the WR split wide left are on the line of scrimmage in the judgement of the official (which they must be in order for it to be a legal formation) then the inside right WR is also on the LOS. :headbang:headbang:headbang

PAC 12 refs. oh well, it should never have come to that, but depressing nonetheless.

We lost a game to the Trojans at the Coliseum several years ago when we lined this way. An easy TD was called back. Anyone else remember it?

I don't remember if it was college or the NFL, but I remember watching a broadcast recently where they said that they were going to tighten up calling these V-style offensive lines. OT's like to set back as far as they can to get a better angle on edge rushers, and in that picture the OT's are almost two yards off the ball, which is where the confusion comes from. Both of the WR's in question are off the LOS in absolute terms, but on it if you judge by their relation to the OT's. The linesman at the top is judging by the actual LOS and the linesman at the bottom is judging by the OT. I do think that this is a problem, because spread teams use so many unbalanced formations these days that the defense has to be able to clearly tell which guys are on the LOS and which guys are off if they're going to adjust correctly, but a number of times I was worried that we were lined up in pretty much the same way so it might be like holding, where it happens all the time but they only call it when the team that's not supposed to win benefits (like when Shane Vereen scores a big TD for us against SC).

How do you come to the conclusion that the inside WR is lined up on the line? If you look at where the ball is or where the outside receiver is, the inside WR is at least 1 full yard behind either the ball or the outside WR. The only thing that make it look suspicious is the middle receiver being even further back.

oskipeak;842363578 said:

---

---

CALiforniALUM;842363628 said:

---

How do you come to the conclusion that the inside WR is lined up on the line? If you look at where the ball is or where the outside receiver is, the inside WR is at least 1 full yard behind either the ball or the outside WR. The only thing that make it look suspicious is the middle receiver being even further back.

---

What's interesting is that the TV crew had thought a flag had been thrown. There was no explanation as to what happened to the flag.

A flag was thrown. Their receiver was holding our DB in a straight jacket. The refs picked it up because no one ever makes PI calls on Hail Marys. Ridiculous.

BearBorn11;842363647 said:

---

A flag was thrown. Their receiver was holding our DB in a straight jacket. The refs picked it up because no one ever makes PI calls on Hail Marys. Ridiculous.

---

Successful Hail and the home team wins the game in the last four seconds after trailing the entire game
... then call a PI and take it away ... fear factor wins.

We Did Damm Good

BearBorn11;842363647 said:

---

A flag was thrown. Their receiver was holding our DB in a straight jacket. The refs picked it up because no one ever makes PI calls on Hail Marys. Ridiculous.

---

We noticed the picked up flag, too. If they had called a penalty against Arizona, that place would've rioted.

I was at that USC game and that call killed us.. I think Shane Vareen would have had the touchdown.. We just never get a break😒

CALiforniALUM;842363628 said:

---

How do you come to the conclusion that the inside WR is lined up on the line?

---

because he is even with both the right tackle (really all the OLinemen except the center) and the WR split wide left. is the WR split wide left on the line of scrimmage? yes. by rule he has to be or this would be an illegal formation. if he is on the LOS, the inside right WR is too.

It appears relatively clear to me on that on the last play either the right inside receiver was ineligible, and an ineligible receiver down field penalty should have been called as soon as the pass was thrown, or that Arizona should have been penalized for an illegal formation with not enough players on the line of scrimmage. It's one or the other, and either way, if the appropriate penality is called, the game is over, and Cal wins.

Can someone bring this to the attention of the PAC-12 office and at least get them to acknowledge that either way a penalty should have been called and that the officials screwed up and helped Cal lose the game?

Also, since this play clearly appeared to be a penalty by rule not involving any referee judgment as with pass interference, is this a play that Cal could have asked to be reviewed for either an ineligible receiver or an illegal formation?

Can't blame the officials for this loss. It's on the poor play of our defense, period.

oskipeak;842363734 said:

---

because he is even with both the right tackle (really all the OLinemen except the center) and the WR split wide left. is the WR split wide left on the line of scrimmage? yes. by rule he has to be or this would be an illegal formation. if he is on the LOS, the inside right WR is too.

---

That's correct. Either the slot receiver is ineligible or they only have 6 men on the line. Should have been flagged either way.

Golden One;842363973 said:

---

Can't blame the officials for this loss. It's on the poor play of our defense, period.

---

In almost any game that is decided on the last play one can likely point to many single plays that could have changed the outcome if they can gone differently, but one would hope that the officials, especially on the last play of the game, would not miss such an obvious penalty, as in this case it was a penalty either way, either ineligible receiver down field or illegal formation, and the game should have been over and Cal should have won. Period. Regardless of Cal's poor execution on defense, or special teams, or coaching.

Certainly, if a team is vastly superior to its opponent, then it will be difficult for officiating to affect which team wins and which team loses. However, Cal is not yet at that point where it superior enough to any PAC-12 opponent where officiating can't affect who wins and loses. Therefore, in just about every game that Cal plays this season the officials could affect the outcome.

My expectation is that the officials will at least get obvious rule infractions (especially ones that don't require judgment such as PI or Holding) called correctly, epecially on the last play (with 4 seconds remaining it's going to be the last play unless there is a defensive penalty) with the game is in the balance.

Is anyone trying to make the argument that there wasn't an infraction by Arizona that should have been called on the last play and that the game shouldn't have ended Cal 45 - 43?

Then again: How many times did Dozier save a touchdown by getting away with pass interference or holding?

Golden One;842363973 said:

---

Can't blame the officials for this loss. It's on the poor play of our defense, period.

---

Pointing out a missed call is not the same as saying that Cal played well enough in the game.

heartofthebear;842363998 said:

---

Then again: How many times did Dozier save a touchdown by getting away with pass interference or holding?

---

Of course, PI and Holding penalties are judgment calls and are quite often open to interpretation, whereas, illegal formation and ineligible receiver penalties are not. Those infractions either occurred or they did not, and there is no "judgment" involved with those infractions. One would hope at a minimum that the officials would get those relatively straight forward calls correct.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3725[/ATTACH]

really hard to miss the player behind Hill grabbing Walker around the waist and by the jersey and tossing him to the ground. This was the play that decided the game.

sycasey;842364003 said:

---

Pointing out a missed call is not the same as saying that Cal played well enough in the game.

---

Exactly.

Obviously, if Cal had played "well enough" to win, Cal would have won the game by definition.

What I think is frustrating to many is that Cal played "well enough" to have a chance to win on the last play, and if the relatively obvious infraction were called as it should have been, Cal would have won regardless of not playing as well as Cal could or should have played.

There could be several other close games for Cal this year because Cal is simply not good enough to blow out its opponents to where the officating won't matter, and I think many Cal fans would not like to see those close games be at least in part determined at the end due to poor officiating.

a gambler i meet at dounut shop pointed this out to me .. how they did not see that who knows but we shoud NOT have been in a place 4 that to matter point blank

needs to say he was quite happy 5 bills at 12 pts .. i got free donuts needless to say

BerkeleyBear;842363989 said:

---

Is anyone trying to make the argument that there wasn't an infraction by Arizona that should have been called on the last play and that the game shouldn't have ended Cal 45 - 43?

---

I think the actual question is: Is anyone other than a few poor sports on our side who are making us look bad arguing that the play should have been called back? Any non-Cal fan whatsoever? You guys sound like Stanford fans

OaktownBear;842364055 said:

---

I think the actual question is: Is anyone other than a few poor sports on our side who are making us look bad arguing that the play should have been called back? Any non-Cal fan whatsoever? You guys sound like Stanford fans

---

I agree. We made too many mistakes and they made great plays. They won. We lost. Period.

NYCGOBEARS;842364057 said:

---

I agree. We made too many mistakes and they made great plays. They won. We lost. Period.

---

Both teams did enough to win. Both did enough to lose. They won. We lost. That is all there is to it.

OaktownBear;842364055 said:

---

I think the actual question is: Is anyone other than a few poor sports on our side who are making us look bad arguing that the play should have been called back? Any non-Cal fan whatsoever? You guys sound like Stanford fans

---

Some believe that people need to be constantly vigalent about all aspects of the game, including the officiating, or the second law of thermodynamics will overwhelm the game. See, for example, Saturday, October 17, 1970, California Memorial Stadium, Berkeley, California.

You can't allow one receiver to run interference for another to the corner of the end zone, regardless of when it occurs. Caleyb Jones can be seen screening Lawler, and in the final instant, grabbing Walker with two hands and throwing him to the ground. He essentially takes two guys out of the play. the flag came out right away, immediately. They picked it up, but you can't have that going on for your last play. That's Australian Football rules BS. That's not legit. Can't allow that.

OaktownBear;842364055 said:

---

I think the actual question is: Is anyone other than a few poor sports on our side who are making us look bad arguing that the play should have been called back? Any non-Cal fan whatsoever? You guys sound like Stanford fans

---

+1. When was the last time someone threw a flag on a Hail Mary. The hold was iffy and the picture above captures a hold AFTER the ball has been caught. We could have easily prevented this and we didn't. Can't blame the refs for that and can't blame the refs for making not making a ticky-tack call on the final play of the game.

Holmoephobic;842364128 said:

---

+1. When was the last time someone threw a flag on a Hail Mary. The hold was iffy and the picture above captures a hold AFTER the ball has been caught. We could have easily prevented this and we didn't. Can't blame the refs for that and can't blame the refs for making not making a ticky-tack call on the final play of the game.

---

Yes, officials generally don't call infractions on contact in the endzone on a Hail Mary. However, the main point of this thread is not about anything that happened in the end zone. It's about the obvious penalty by rule, not judgment, committed by Arizona, which was not called, before any contact in the endzone occurred.

I don't think that people are blaming the officials for Cal's loss. People are simply correctly pointing out certain facts.

The fact is that if the officials had called the infraction that Arizona clearly committed on the last play, then Cal would have won. It is a fact that Arizona either had an ineligible receiver down field or an illegal formation, take your pick -- that is not in dispute, and it clearly was one or the other, as the evidence is plain for all to see. In fact, I don't believe I've seen anyone attempt to dispute the fact that Arizona did commit either one or the other of the two mentioned infractions on the last play.

The fact is that in a game like this every single play matters. Yes, if Cal had played better on certain plays, Cal would have won regardless of the lack of the penalty call on the last play. However, even with Cal's less than stellar play in the 4th quarter, if the officials had called Arizona's infraction on the last play, Cal would have won. I don't think that it is inappropriate to point out those facts.

Cal and Arizona appearred to be relatively equally matched, and it's understandably annoying to some that Arizona got away with an infraction that if called would have resulted in a Cal win.

that first az td jones pushed hands cb offense PI not called .. he has made living off that this season once last game they had and one the game before ..

just like the one he got finally called for by then too late mo was on az side


that was 7 pts ..

can some tell me what is the rule of catching a ball and throwing out of bounds like harris did ... on first onside kick ?
ref thought davis batted ball out on the muffed put but that would have been a push or batting if he touched it.. catching and throwing it out of bounds to avoid the hit seems smart if within the rules but i dont know the rules

no more punts for TD ... two muffs back to back games imo... harper can share responsibility with someone else imo

now when he catches it .. he gets up field but can not take that chance anymore im thinking

going4roses;842364147 said:

---

that first az td jones pushed hands cb offense PI not called .. he has made living off that this season once last game they had and one the game before ..

just like the one he got finally called for by then too late mo was on az side


that was 7 pts ..

can some tell me what is the rule of catching a ball and throwing out of bounds like harris did ... on first onside kick ?
ref thought davis batted ball out on the muffed put but that would have been a push or batting if he touched it.. catching and throwing it out of bounds to avoid the hit seems smart if within the rules but i dont know the rules

no more punts for TD ... two muffs back to back games imo... harper can share responsibility with someone else imo

now when he catches it .. he gets up field but can not take that chance anymore im thinking

---

You cannot intentionally throw the ball out of bounds. This is football 101. As I said elsewhere, if you could, every team in a 2 minute drill would throw the ball out of bounds to stop the clock when they are about to be tackled.

Both teams got breaks. By the standard you guys want to apply to that Hail Mary, Allensworth would have been called for PI as he had his hands on the receiver riding him for 10 yards.

Suck it up. Have some sportsmanship. Take the loss like men instead of freeze framing things and trying to argue that a receiver's feet were 6 inches too close to the line which, even if it were true, gave them no advantage whatsoever.

OaktownBear;842364188 said:

---

Suck it up. Have some sportsmanship. Take the loss like men instead of freeze framing things and trying to argue that a receiver's feet were 6 inches too close to the line which, even if it were true, gave them no advantage whatsoever.

---

Pointing out a missed call is not the same as saying that Cal played well enough in the game.

sycasey;842364193 said:

---

Pointing out a missed call is not the same as saying that Cal played well enough in the game.

---

Oaktown's a self-loathing Cal fan or something. Only seems to come out to chastise our program or fan base during the tough times. He's similar to that "1947" guy, only with reason.

brilliant post. During the broadcast it was noted their was a flag on the play and it was reviewed. It could have been called later but it wasn't

chazzed;842364198 said:

---

Oaktown's a self-loathing Cal fan or something. Only seems to come out to chastise our program or fan base during the tough times. He's similar to that “1947" guy, only with reason.

---

He wasn't always like that, but the Dykes Era has brought out a new side of OaktownBear. (Granted, much of this is justified after a 1-11 season, though I don't agree with the assertion that Dykes should have been fired after one year.)

sycasey;842364193 said:

---

Pointing out a missed call is not the same as saying that Cal played well enough in the game.

---

Agree! These are calls commonly made in games, 6 players on the LOS or an ineligible receiver. Since the game cannot end on a penalty, Arizona would have gotten another chance after the penalty is enforced. Hopefully, Cal would have been able to defend the next Hail Mary better. Oh well, let's take down the Buffaloes!

OaktownBear;842364188 said:

---

You cannot intentionally throw the ball out of bounds. This is football 101. As I said elsewhere, if you could, every team in a 2 minute drill would throw the ball out of bounds to stop the clock when they are about to be tackled.

Both teams got breaks. By the standard you guys want to apply to that Hail Mary, Allensworth would have been called for PI as he had his hands on the receiver riding him for 10 yards.

Suck it up. Have some sportsmanship. Take the loss like men instead of freeze framing things and trying to argue that a receiver's feet were 6 inches too close to the line which, even if it were true, gave them no advantage whatsoever.

---

psst ok MIA ... you can get off it at any point .. whatever it is or maybe ... when posting anything ( now that we lost) and quoting me trying your best to klown aka ... Truly Sad imo


we lose and you show up ..do yourself a really big favor and hit that block button player ham and i will do the same

the world will be a much better place !!!

i think its time you we have sit down cause you really act like you have problem with me (since you only quoted me once again ) i dont love sonny i love the players CAN YOU DIG IT ?

bad sportsmanship coming from you is at best a super weak move .. i put blame squarely on us for being in that situation have said it many times but does change the FACT of what happen ... MR " looking only in the light "

but you take me as the kind of person that has to make themselves feel important by putting down other people .. i did not hire sonny do not be mad me OK

signed block me so your life will be exactly how you want it ..

you telling your kids to suck it up would be a joke considering the source .. and then try to apply to me and what do you get absolutely NOTHING ..

did you really expect any agreement or understanding ?

man admits his faults .. have you ever in life does not look like it from my vantage point