From Deseret News archives:

Officials concede call was incorrect

Published: Friday, Dec. 21, 2007 1:02 a.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
SAN DIEGO — Sandwiched between the postgame interview sessions of Navy and Utah coaches and players after the Utes' 35-32 victory Thursday night, a Poinsettia Bowl official read a statement from the officiating crew about a blown call against Navy in the fourth quarter.

The play came on a Brian Johnson third-down pass to Jereme Brooks, where the Utah wide-out dove for the end zone and tried to push the ball past the sideline pylon at the goal line.

The ball appeared to leave his hand and hit the pylon, with the officials ruling the play wasn't a touchdown and that Utah retained possession for a fourth-down try from inside the 1-yard line.

In their written statement, the crew cited NCAA Football Rule Section F-1, Rule 8, Section 6, Article 1, Item 1, explaining "the ball was fumbled forward, hit the pylon. The pylon is out of bounds, also in the end zone. The mistake was — it should have been ruled a touchback."

In other words, the ball changes possession, with Navy taking over at its own 20, rather than Utah having a fourth-down try.

Even though Navy didn't get the ball after the would-be touchback, the Midshipmen still got the ball without a Utah score, since the Navy defense stuffed Darrell Mack's fourth-and-goal try from one foot out.

Story continues below
Trailing 28-25 with 3:40 left in the game at that point, Navy took over a foot outside of their own end zone. Three plays later, the Midshipmen were looking at fourth-and-two at their own 9, needing a first down to sustain the drive.

A quarterback keeper by Kaipo-Noa Kaheaku-Enhada around the left end was stopped well short of the marker by Ute defensive back Joe Dale, with Utah regaining possession on downs inside the Navy 10 and scoring four plays later.

Might Navy have had better success on the drive with a little more working room, starting on the 20 rather than just shy of the end zone? It certainly made a difference in play-calling, as well as a possible impact in time, distance and momentum.


E-mail: taylor@desnews.com

Recent comments

First off, I'm a Navy fan. I don't think that Utah's win was luck....

AHLH | Dec. 23, 2007 at 7:43 p.m.

Way to go UTEs, the cougars put one over the top and won the game....

Over the TOP, Again!!! | Dec. 22, 2007 at 2:25 p.m.

acutally, I hope the MWC ends up 5-0 in bowl games (BYU, Utah, TCU,...

re: floridian | Dec. 22, 2007 at 1:00 p.m.

previousnext

Latest comments

What Merry Christmas now represents to me "Merry Comsumption, Spending,...

Mistake vs. repeat affairs probed

So why don't our leaders address plural marriage to solve the problems with...

Few details on missing W.V. mom

This is way too FISHY. Something is very wrong here with this woman's...

Once again the NEA proves how out of touch with reality they are. They think...

Letters: Global warming a lie

How many conservanauts have actually seen the documentary, "An inconvienent...

Jazz fall apart late at L.A.

Utahan's cannot face the facts, they are just not that good. They live in a...

Pass timing is very critical for Wynn. He likes to throw the deep ball but I...

Phoenix temple inspires thanks

Yes, it does depend on who you are. If you are an active LDS, you would be...

Obama defends wars, accepts Nobel

I'm glad you are a member, then you know we are taught to be "SELF RELIANT",...

Letters: Reid sold his memory

The 1964 Civil Rights Act is more complexed than many admit. Both the...

Advertisements