Comments about ‘BYU football: Misinformation involving suspension of replay officials’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Oct. 14 2010 6:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
South Jordan, UT

Naturally, the SDSU fans think they are justified in their negative response to the official ruling.

However, if they would examine the fumble by an Aztec player near the sideline on the way to a touchdown earlier in the game with the same scrutiny was they seem to possess concerning this play, they would see that the ball was, indeed, recovered by BYU and the Aztecs would not have scored.

It's a wash. Move on.

Ann Arbor, MI

Let's hope SD reporters continue to investigate this story as it appears to be just the tip of the iceberg.

How long has this misconduct been allowed? Was the BYU admin. behind this? How will this affect "exposure"?

Just when you thought it couldn't get worse...it does.


Utah Alum
Orem, UT

I don't know Chad personally, but I know several people who do and can vouch for Chad's character.

He's been involved in video production for over a decade and he's not boneheaded enough to risk his career and his reputation over a fumble.

I'm confident that when the full story comes out we'll see that Chad didn't do anything sinister.

Orem, UT

The SDSU reporters can continue the investigation as long as they want to hedgehog. BYU has nothing to hide.

PAC man
Anaheim, CA

Duff Tittle, BYU associate athletic director had this response: "Replay officiating systems, including who is assigned to work games, are arranged by the Mountain West Conference. You will need to direct all questions regarding instant replay to the MWC."

It appears that the MWC was solely responsible for Chad Bunn being assigned to work the video replay equipment for the BYU-SDSU game.

Chad didn't have any role in any decisions made by the replay official, however, other than operating the video replay equipment to show replays of disputed calls.

Utesville, CA

Bunn's main task (and probably only task) is the video feed/control to the review booth.

If he did nothing wrong, he should not be suspended.

If he did nothing wrong, and the officials made the wrong calls then only the review officials should be suspended.

So, obviously:

1) Bunn was suspended for the wrong video feed (or wrong angle)
2) The review officials were suspended for not following the game to realize the feed was wrong, or not demand/ask for different angle

Right now, MWC is just doing PR, damage control. MWC has been joke of the college world when this news broke out --how could league officials use a BYU employee in such an important position?

Rightfully, SDSU coach, will press on unless an official apology from BYU and/or MWC officials --without that mistake in the review booth, it would be a SDSU win.

In all fairness, the game is now not valid.

Eventually, if you "google" BYU videogate you will see it in wikipedia

Utesville, CA

...Video replay shown to the TV audience and media in the press box showed DiLuigi fumbled the ball before his knee touched down, which is considered a fumble. An issue in the controversy is whether officials on the field blew the whistle and ended the play before the fumble occurred...

--> weak defense in an attempt to steer away from the main issue:
1) the rule on the field is that Di Luigi was down before the ball came out --> the official on the field did not blow the whistle close enough for it to become questionable.
2) when the league reviewed the tape on Sun, they would not suspend the review officials if there is any doubts at all about the whistle blow.

...A separate issue, not under scrutiny in this controversy, is a no-call or penalty on SDSU tacklers on DiLuigi who appear to violate the rule against using the facemask to block or tackle an opponent...

Again, this is a missed call on the field --part of the game. Teams learn to live with these bad calls.
Another attempt to steer away from the main issue.

Nice try, DH.

Bountiful, UT

Actually when SDSU fumbled on the sideline the player was out of bounds when he touched the ball. The play is immediatly dead with SDSU keeping posession. So that touchdown is valid.

PAC man
Anaheim, CA

You're delusional SoCalUtahFan.

I'd love to see any of your biased suppositions and speculations hold up in a court of law where facts have to be proven with real evidence.

You don't even have evidence that anybody was suspended, let alone the factual reason(s) for the suspension(s).

Kyle loves BYU/Jazz
Provo, UT

I feel bad for Chad Bunn. No evidence he did anything but his job and people are saying all kinds of things about his integrity.

At this point the MWC just looks stupid as it often does. Most pathetic league ever. It's pretty obvious when you consider the basketball tournament is held on the home court of one school every year. Does any other conference do that? Glad no school in the state will be in the MWC next year and glad I will never need to watch the mtn again to see them play!

Floyd Johnson
Broken Arrow, OK


I am beyond excited. Almost every football game (including ESPN re-broadcasts), all conference basketball games, every single tournament game for other sports. All streamed over the internet, or essentially any subscription TV service. Available for BYU fans (and parents of athletes) everywhere; Utah, California, Florida, Hawaii, Brazil. No other team has that recruiting tool, "if you play for us your mom can watch your softball games at the internet cafe, at any other school she will see exactly zero."

It is unfortunate BYU could not obtain at least re-broadcast rights from the mtn. With broadcast rights, the MWC was probably the best option for BYU.

Chad Bunn is a stand up guy. There is zero chance he intentionally manipulated the call. Three guys in the booth, we have no explanation of what happened, or even a confirmation that an investigation has taken place. If Mr. Bunn intentionally manipulated the call, he would be suspended indfinitely. A clear mistake (our equipment froze and we decided we could not review it, wrong call was made to the field and we could not correct it before the next play) the replay team would be suspended for a game.

Mid-Major Cougars
San Diego, CA

Dear Dick,

Can you confirm if the replay was in HD?

Old Navy
Provo, UT

Having a BYU employee working on a MWC replay crew doing a BYU game is a complete conflict of interest.

Mcallen, TX

Can someone answer a question for me? Rumor has it that three refs were suspended for not calling a fumble on DiLuigi at the end of the third quarter and many Aztec fans feel cheated. Watching the replay, there was a face mask on DiLuigi as he was falling which was before the fumble. Look at the replay and it's very very clear. Does the fumble over ride the face mask infraction? If the refs were suspended, it should be for the Aztecs call as they're player fumbled before going out of bounds. Again watch the replay

Cottonwood Heights, UT

Who cares, both teams will finish the season with 3 to 6 wins and an outside chance at the New Mexico bowl. Move on already.

Mesa, AZ

Chad Bunn isn't a replay official, he's just the video technician supplying the replays to be looked at by the MWC Officials.

Both teams lost fumbles that the replay officials refused to award.

On the Aztec fumble the ball falls cleanly away from the player and stops inbounds as the player continues out of bounds. Kyle Van Noy recovers the ball inbounds. After the video review -- "nope, didn't happen" said the man in the booth.

On Diluigi's fumble, his helmet was being removed by an Aztec player, yet went unseen by the referees. Review shows the ball was out, as JJ turned his attention to survival. A fumble this time? 'nope again' says upstairs.

Both the Aztecs and Cougars scored touchdowns on both non-calls. So if anything, the referees were consistent.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

Explain how the Yewties are running their smack. They are undefeated, yes. The combined records for the teams they have beaten is 7-22. And they think their are world beaters? LOL

Riddles in the Dark
Olympus Cove, Utah

Occam's razor (lex parsimoniae) states that when competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selection of the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities while still sufficiently answering the question.

In other words, the most likely cause of the blown call is...

the replay official simply made a bad call.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

The issue is not whether or not the officials missed a call that went in SDSU's favor, thus making a "wash" of the article's missed call call. The issue is that someone deliberately withheld another view of the "fumble" for the replay official to look at, the call went to BYU, when the withheld view would clearly show the ball was out before the player's knee was down and the individual doing selecting the views for the official's review is an employee of Brigham Young University. Perhaps, upon investigation, it should be he WAS an employee of BYU.

Springville, UT

I just read reports on Sltrib and harktheherald and on here and they are all different. All I can say is that they should be disciplined IF they did something wrong and an investigation shows they did. If it shows that there was no mal intent then tell them to take a little bit longer to make sure they get it right next time. The fact that Bunn works for BYU means nothing. Most MWC schools have employees that work in the replay booth. The official in charge of making the call is flown in from out of state and has nothing to do with the school. Right now it is just hard to know what actually went on because 3 different papers are reporting 3 different things. Replays have been upheld in the past even though it was called incorrectly. I think that replay is very good for the game but it is far from perfect. And to the point that the facemask was not under review is because penalties called and not called are not reviewable. Rulings on the field such as a catch, fumble, field postition are reveiwable but not penalties

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments