BYU football: Misinformation involving suspension of replay officials

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Igualmente Mesa, AZ
    Oct. 17, 2010 11:17 a.m.

    There were two blown call reviews last week at BYU. Remember when Bronco called for a review of the sideline fumble by SDSU and he held his arm outstretched signaling a BYU recovery. The replay officials refused to overturn that call as well.

    Last night, Air Force received the payback ripoff at SDSU, after scoring a 2-point conversion. The replay officials mistakenly thought the receiver's handtowel, that was hanging down as he stretched for the goalline, was his knee touching the ground.

    Twenty-five minutes prior to Saturday night’s game against Air Force, the San Diego State public-address announcer gave the crowd a warning. He said that the head replay official might make decisions in the game based on video that “may differ from that visible” to the crowd on the Qualcomm Stadium video board.

    After last week’s controversy at Brigham Young University, it may have been a disclaimer intended to keep the hometown crowd calm in case something seemed fishy again.

    Fallability continues..

  • Utah'95 FPO, AE
    Oct. 16, 2010 1:14 a.m.


    Go to youtube, and search byu sdsu fumble. The first site, entitiled "Highlights vs BYU 10/09/10" clearly shows the fumble. Watch the angle from the left of the ball-carrier.

    Have you not seen this angle before?

  • optimist Sun City, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 6:17 p.m.

    Let a 13th game be granted by the NCCA for both SDS and BYU.

    Let it be the last game of the season.

    Have it shown on ESPN.

    Let the winner of this game, show 2 wins and no losses.

    Let the loser of this team show 2 losses with no wins.

    Erase the score of the first game.

    Last game was played at SDS. Let the next game be played at BYU.

  • BillM75 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 5:53 p.m.

    lol zoobs, only way they can win.

  • blu4lyfer Ogden, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 5:25 p.m.

    I am concerned that the third person in the booth has not been mentioned yet, and their name is being kept out of the media. I am hoping this does not end bad them. This story seems to be gaining some national attention.

  • JCLJorgenson San Diego, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 5:10 p.m.

    So maybe they blew the whistle and the ball was dead before SDSU has possession? The video shows otherwise, but even if that was the case the play would not even be challengeable. They reviewed the play, however, and ultimately charged SDSU a timeout, which proves that was not a reason for the missed call.

    So how about a facemask caused the fumble and they saw that in the replay and decided to have the play stand? First off, a penalty cannot be reviewed or used in the Replay Booth. If you look at the play, you could argue there was some slight facemask, since his fingertips did brush up against the upper portion of the mask - the part that mounts to the helmet. But it was clearly incidental at most, there was no grab and yank going on. A few years back, that could possibly be considered a 5 yard penalty, but in 2008, NCAA got rid of the penalty for “incidental facemask.” The only penalty now is 15 yards and automatic first down for blatant yanking of the mask, which was clearly not the case here.

  • JCLJorgenson San Diego, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 5:08 p.m.

    I keep hearing the BYU employee and BYU alum don’t make the final call, the Replay Official does. That’s true, but does that mean they cannot influence the decision at all? According to the MWC, they are responsible for providing the video clips to the Replay Official and he reviews. What’s interesting is that when SDSU first questioned to blunder, the Replay Official initially stated that he never saw the angle that was provided on national TV. Later they announced that the same angle was “available” to the replay booth, three suspensions occurred, and they have been told to keep quiet. All SDSU is saying is that something isn’t right and a deeper investigation is in order. If this happened to you, wouldn’t you demand the same? Anyone with common sense knows it is a huge conflict of interest to put a BYU athletic department employee and a BYU alum in the replay booth. It appears the MWC permitted this, there is nothing illegal going on, they didn’t sneak in there. But, for the sake of the oponnent and for these two guys getting thrown under the bus, it should have never happened.

  • What To Do Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 4:44 p.m.

    So I guess what it all come down to is BYU is 1-5. Have a great weekend at TCU!

  • Riddles in the Dark Olympus Cove, Utah
    Oct. 15, 2010 3:47 p.m.

    the expert

    It's sounds reasonable until you look a the logistical differences between professional baseball and football.

    MLB almost certainly replayed a portion of the disputed game as part of a shortened double-header. The fans were already there to watch another game, so they got a bonus. No additional expense to anybody, and probably a little extra money for the home team from concessions.

    Football, college or pro, is an entirely different animal. The costs of replaying a portion of a game would be huge.

    I doubt the NCAA would even allow it because it would open a Pandora's Box for replaying every single game involving a disputed call by the officials.

  • the expert Provo, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 3:28 p.m.

    Eagle might be on to something:

    There is a precedent for games to replayed at the point of protest, at the professional level.

    Some may remember when George Brett of the KC Royals hit a homerun that put the Royals out in front. It came with two outs in the top of the 9th. Yanks manager Billy Martin protested that Brett used too much pine tar on his bat. The umps agreed, he was called out, game over as the Yanks prevailed. Brett went ballistic in one of the classic rants of all time.

    Royals protested call and MLB baseball ruled that the umpires ruled incorrectly. Some weeks later the game was replayed. It was resumed after Brett's homerun and the Yanks ended up losing. Billy Martin didn't even really try to win the game.

    But bottom line, even at the professional level, if the officials made an error it can be corrected.

    And on the cost, shouldn't be up to SDSU whether they want to replay the game? BYU would have no say on it as they were the beneficiary of blown call.

    P.S. Not sure if Yank fans had to pay twice...

  • Mt Rushmore Arlington, VA
    Oct. 15, 2010 3:27 p.m.

    "for what it's worth, one of the booth workers at Rice Eccles is a Utah grad..."

    So, is the MWC now going to go back a review every video review decision made by a crew that had someone with connections to either participating team working in the video replay booth?

    You know, other close calls that may not have been quite as clearcut as this one could have been influenced by someone with ties to the team that benefitted from a close call.

    This whole fiasco is becoming more ridiculous by the second, and yet the MWC remains mum.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 15, 2010 3:27 p.m.

    Where was the facemask call on DiLuigi?

    BluCoug--don't let hedgehog get to you. He was kicked out BYU for HC violations and has been bitter since. He has a justified inferiority complex.

  • idablu Idaho Falls, ID
    Oct. 15, 2010 3:01 p.m.

    I am concerned by the fact that MWC was wiling to "spill the beans" to the SDSU coach but is mum to anybody else. That, to me , is the real "conspiracy." If they are going to disclose information about the blown call to one coach, then the BYU coach has the same right to that information. , , , Unless, of course, the MWC has an interest in embarrassing BYU or tainting their win. The media should be demanding an answer to why the double standard. . .

  • jazzbball Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:58 p.m.

    for what it's worth, one of the booth workers at Rice Eccles is a Utah grad.

    Neither here nor there, but for any Utah fans giving BYU grief on this....better back off on that real quick.

    Jay Drew just tweeted it.

  • ute-chute Beverly Hills, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:55 p.m.

    I know that there are no Utah fans on this story... Why would they care...???

    But just go Utes!!!

    Beat Wyoming. They will be tough. My suggestion... On side kick. Let's keep it our secret...

  • Captain L Provo, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:52 p.m.

    To Eagle and BYUFam1 : Eagle first, I agree with your explanation of the rules but I also agree with BYUFam1. The reason is, I watched the game and when the fumble occurred, I too thought the official blew the whistle too soon when no one had possession. Whether or not the officials admit it or not, I think the official blew the play dead at the same time as the fumble was occurring and before either team had possession. The way it was handled was poor and errors weren't admitted that occurred. The official that blew the whistle too soon didn't admit it, the play shouldn't have been reviewed in the first place because the whistle was blown inavertantly (too soon). The problem was the official didn't admit to the inavertant whistle.

  • BluCoug Provo, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:45 p.m.

    @ hedgehog

    Your comments are flat out idiotic, Why don't you go do something good in the world for once in your life.

  • ute-chute Beverly Hills, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:45 p.m.

    If three officials were suspended, why didn't the MWC make an official announcement?

    Brady Hoke has said three MWC officials have been suspended. The MWC has not.

    So... What is the problem.

    I know of none, except Ute fans getting excited.

    Give it a rest. beat WYO, or you will take in a load of crap...

  • LonestarRunner Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:40 p.m.


    I admire your sense of fairness, but you're proposing a completely unrealistic solution.

    Just the cost of bringing SDSU back to Provo, bringing in officials, and preparing the stadium for the game would be cost prohibitive.

    Fans can't be asked to purchase a 2nd ticket for the game and broadcasters can't be asked to pay a 2nd broadcast fee.

    The conference would have to pick up the entire cost of replaying one quarter of football. There's no way either BYU or SDSU could be forced to pay a dime to help correct a mistake made by MWC officials.

    That's why games are NEVER replayed, no matter how egregious the mistake made by the officials.

    The only thing the MWC will ever do is issue an apology, reprimand the officials, and possibly change the policy regarding who can work in the replay booth.

    The results of the game will not be changed unless it can be proven that BYU deliberately conspired to influence the decision made by the replay official.

    Despite the conspiracy theories of a few disgruntled fans, there's not one shred of evidence that that happened.

  • Sloppy J St. Louis, MO
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:40 p.m.

    I see a number of hysterical comments bordering on conspiracy theory (" . . this appears to be the tip of the iceberg"; "how long has this been going on?" etc etc) from BYU haters. Note, I don't say "Ute fans," because real Ute fans (whom I believe exist) focus on their team rather than delighting in any problems and waxing philosophic on every minor "controversy" that pop up in the BYU world.

    How many controversial replay decisions have affected games in Provo since replay started? I don't recall any, but if I'm forgetting one or two it doesn't approach epidemic status by any objective view. Does anyone honestly believe that BYU officials are trying to gain an advantage by rigging the replay process? Seriously? I'd appreciate an honest response from any BYU anti-fan who can possibly string together a coherent argument without making multiple assumptions, shrieking about BYU's fictional all-consuming arrogance, or employing specious reasoning.

    You're seeing things that aren't there. Doesn't it get old getting all worked up over stuff like this? Wah! Wah!

  • BYUFAM1 Belvidere, IL
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:39 p.m.

    eagle I don't agree.

    When the whistle blew is truly part of the debate (but perhaps not where you think). And the officials will let a play go under review if they are uncertain of the whistles timing compared to the event (I believe in those situations they are allowed to waive off the loss of a time out per the rule that a blown whistle negates the ability to review - something that may need to be addressed with the officials).

    From what I understand in this case it wasn't really about the whistle stopping play before the fumble (I haven't seen one credible source state that the whistle blew before the fumble). It was about whether anyone else possessed the ball before the whistle blew.

    Suggesting a replaying of the games end is ridiculous this just doesn't happen in football in college/pros. You should know that.

  • LonestarRunner Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 2:04 p.m.

    It's been almost a week and still no decision from the MWC.

    If three officials were suspended, why didn't the MWC make an official announcement?

    If the MWC is still investigating, why didn't the MWC at least announce that they were investigating a replay review complaint from SDSU, instead of us having to learn about it from an anonmymous SDSU source?


    How long does it take in interview maybe a half dozen people, total, review three or four 30-second replays, determine who did what, and then render a decision as to what happened, who if anybody, was at fault, what the punishment is going to be, and what policy changes that MWC is going to implement (if any) to prevent this same thing from happening again?

    The MWC is going to look even more foolish if another replay incident happens tomorrow and the MWC has sat on their its for a week doing nothing.

  • eagle Provo, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:48 p.m.

    @ BYUFAM1:

    The whistle (or when it is blown) is a non-issue. That isn't reviewable. If the whistle was blown before the fumble than the officials would have told the SDSU coaches that. It would have stunk but nothing one can do.

    But they were reviewing whether there was an actual fumble, which to my eyes it was. Not only did SDSU lose the challenge but by losing the challenge they lost a timeout by rule. That's why the whistle is a non-issue because if the whistle was blown, perhaps even inadvertently, then there would be no challenge, no review and no timeout taken away from SDSU.

    I hope that makes sense...

    Again, I go back to my suggestion. Replay the end of the game from this point forward with SDSU in possession of the football. It is the fair thing to do and actually happens in sport once in a while when an official protest is upheld. Since the replay officials didn't receive valuable information (intentional or not), the game result is in doubt. Reverse the initial wrong decision and play the game from there and let the chips fall where they may.

  • eagle Provo, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:30 p.m.

    Just overturn the call and replay the game with SDSU having the ball trailing 21-14 with whatever time was left on the clock. Do it on the first Saturday in December, I believe both teams don't have a game. Then BYU won't have this issue hanging over them and they can win the game "fair and square" or whatever. SDSU can have its chance to prove that this play would have made a difference. Fans of both schools get extra football. It's a win-win-win situation and perhaps the only fair thing to do and the only thing that might legitimize the win for BYU, even among some of its own faithful.

  • BYUFAM1 Belvidere, IL
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:23 p.m.

    WestCoast1 | 8:06 a.m. Oct. 15, 2010
    Escondido, CA
    "...Let's review: BYU is down by 4 points..."

    When you can't even be factual why should we continue reading anything you write?

    BYU never trailed in the game.

    I believe the most clear reason on why the officials may have not considered it a turn over is because the whistle blew before the ball was possessed by anyone. Which means the ball goes to the last person that possessed it before the whistle blew (like a fumble going out of bounds). I believe they did show that it did not blow before the fumble as some have claimed and the fumble did occur before JJ was down.

    Inadvertant whistles are the hardest thing in the game to over come as there really isn't a recourse once it has occurred.

  • ida-coug Pocatello, ID
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:22 p.m.

    "I am a Utah grad.

    How many cougar fans would like me to be the video tech or 1 of the 2 review officials for the next Utah-BYU game?"

    As long as you aren't the head offical, who makes the decision I wouldn't care. But, I would be surprised that you would be able to leave your mom's basement long enough to take the job.

  • afro14 Sandy, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:19 p.m.

    Did anyone hear the San Diego sports radio commentator's on air freak out? That was hilarious!!! A little bit over the top, but I couldn't help but laugh when I heard Hans Olsen of 1280 the Zone describe what this guy said as very Max Hall-ish. If you haven't heard it, look it up at

  • Ragnar Danneskjold Bountiful, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:19 p.m.

    First of all, to those of you pointing out the facemask; as someone already mentioned, this is not a ruling that can be reviewed with instant replay. For a suspension later, maybe, but not on the field.
    Next, I agree with those of you saying that it doesn't really matter, because the record books will always show that BYU won, no matter how good or bad the call was (CU 5th down ring a bell?).

    To 'tawillin' and the countless other people that bring this up, it is sad that you are so proud to know so little about other teams. Reading articles about other teams does not make you obsessed or a "hater". I am a sports fan, and try to know about the entire landscape of the sports I like to watch. Reading an article about a team in your conference, your rival, and a team that has many alumni as coworkers is not shameful, especially when it is in the same paper you are already reading about your team. The real question is, why wouldn't you know more about other teams? If you are in fact a fan, you will know about many teams.

  • dakuwaqa Seattle, WA
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:03 p.m.

    This nonsense happens every year. It's not too far removed when one team was given 5 downs on a drive that won the game. Nothing was done there.

    I think this situation, while unfortunate, would not have an impact on the outcome of the game. Either way, the game is over and next year, BYU won't have to deal with the MWC or their replay booth officials.

    Since we'll be indy, we can hire Todd Christensen, he's about as anti-BYU as you can get.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 12:33 p.m.

    At least with these accusations the team down south season has become more interesting. Before it was a snooze fest.

  • bigvern22 Sandy, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 12:32 p.m.

    Once again, many Ute fans doing what they do best, being so obessed with BYU and not their own team. Unbelieveable. Wait, no. BELIEVEABLE! Even BYU in a down year gets more attention than an undefeated, Utah team. Why is that?

  • Captain L Provo, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:53 a.m.

    All of you BYU haters that are criticising, complaining and finding fault are imbeciles. None of the true facts are out and everything being said is just speculation. Until the facts are out, everyone needs to back off, cool their jets and quit being so negative.

  • Desert Coug Las Vegas, NV
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:48 a.m.

    I appreciate the comments of Hellooo. love the sarcasim. Good observation.

    I am sure the MWC commisioner is loving having to deal with the Y over yet another issue.

  • DaveKnowsWhatsUp Bloomington, IN
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:43 a.m.

    Re: FlyingUte,

    Nope, I'm with tawillin on this one. It's about the same with the Ute basketball team, and we all know how awesome they are. I might click on an interesting headline, but usually don't care a paragraph or two in. I definitely don't care enough to post multiple times on every single article that comes out about Utah.

    Re: tawillin, you're pointing out what many of us have always suspected, and this season in particular is demonstrating: most Ute fans really only live through BYU. I haven't taken the time to check recently, but many of these same "fans" can't resist mentioning BYU in their posts on Ute articles.

    Interesting phenomena, isn't it?

  • Buster Fruit Heights, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:42 a.m.

    Hey Drama Queen

    Spot on. How many of you BYU fans would pass judgement if you saw a friend or fellow classmate come walking out of a bar? Would your thoughts be Hmmm I bet he's just picking up a friend. Or what if you heard your roommate spent the night at a hotel with a member of the opposite sex??

    So now you want everyone else to suspend their judgement because they really don't know what went on??

    I'll bet this sounded really cool in your head, didn't it.

    What does this have to do with anything?

    Why does someone with Ute in their screen name even care?

    How would you feel if you saw someone you knew went to the Y coming out of the video booth wearing MWC credentials. Would you tell their Bishop?

    Your parinoia is totally laughable.

    It's a MWC issue. They have not even said they have suspended anyone, only Brady Hoke said that. And you Utah fans are impuning a mans reputation.

    Has hate of zoobs taken over your conscience.

    Give it a rest, and fax Kyle some onside kickoff plays.

  • Curtis Beverly Hills, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:41 a.m.

    As much as I would LOVE to believe that there was a conspiracy that resulted in the BooHoo's winning the game, there is just no way that this is possible. As stated in other posts, the guy would have to be able to decide which angles to show the replay official and which ones to withhold in a matter of seconds.

  • Jrifkin48 Fayetteville, NC
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:36 a.m.

    I am surprised anyone in San Diego is even talking about San Diego State on the radio. I see their home attendance on the TV and I am convinced they have maybe 23 fans!

  • FlyingUte Murray, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:25 a.m.

    Re: tawillin

    Perhaps the real reason that you can't finish reading an article about the UTES is that you can't handle greatness.

    I can see how reading week after week about BYU's lack of execution and how they need to execute better would bore me to death too.

  • tawillin Mc Kinney, TX
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:08 a.m.

    I had an interest thought today. Even though Utah is having a great year, congrats to all Ute fans, I have never once read an article, all the way through, about the Utes football team. I've tried but half way through I just don't care. I wonder what causes Ute fans, or BYU fans, to actually take time out of their day to read articles about their rivals? Any ideas?

  • UteMiguel Go Utes, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:05 a.m.

    I haven't seen any evidence that Bunn could have influenced the replay official's call. I'm interested to know whether Bunn had the ability to choose which angles to show the replay official. It sounds to me like he is a technician who would simply follow the replay official's instruction.

  • FlyingUte Murray, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:05 a.m.

    RE: Archie
    Spot on. How many of you BYU fans would pass judgement if you saw a friend or fellow classmate come walking out of a bar? Would your thoughts be Hmmm I bet he's just picking up a friend. Or what if you heard your roommate spent the night at a hotel with a member of the opposite sex?? So now you want everyone else to suspend their judgement because they really don't know what went on?? You don't know either but I'm guessing that there have been a ton of innocent students turned into the standards police so far this year! Avoid the appearance of evil or wrongdoing!!! BYU kept quiet over students who spewed hate and my guess is they and the leader of the band of brothers will be quiet as mice now. Don't speak it unless you can live it!! Honor-Spirit-Tradition. Give us all a break!!!!

  • Mid-Major Cougars San Diego, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:05 a.m.

    I am a Utah grad.

    How many cougar fans would like me to be the video tech or 1 of the 2 review officials for the next Utah-BYU game?

  • mountains101 Denver, CO
    Oct. 15, 2010 11:00 a.m.

    Hmm, now a 2nd BYU person said to be in the booth.... yes, BYU won the game, but BYU alumni have NO business being in that booth...

    But of course, it's college athletics.. there's nothing every shady, underhanded or just plain illegal going on here...

    And enough about "exposure"... I think everyone knows that BYU is a Mormon University in Utah... streaming water polo highlights to "internet cafes" isn't going to help.

  • Hellooo Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:56 a.m.

    It is obvious that the MWC conspired with BYU this season to win games by placing Y employees in the replay booth to fix the replay tapes in the Y's favor during Y games. They did this because they are so excited to have the Y leave the conference, and they want to send them off with a winning last season, and success in their new independent experience. Thanks MWC!!!!

  • Th Tooele, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:54 a.m.


    As everyone else watching the game, saw all the angles of the San Diego State fumble. I listen to all the sports talk shows here along the Wasatch Front. Former BYU players Hans Olsen and Jan Jorgenson have the same opinion as me. I know they probably have one of the four problems that I have as well.

    Maybe you could possibly explain to me how it was a definate fumble and the evidence you saw to make you feel that way. Was it Bronco running down the sideline doing his big first down signal for BYU? Just curious because it wasn't conclusive at all. It wouldn't have mattered who fumbled whether SDSU or BYU, it still would have been inconclusive.

    Could the BYU fumble have been a make-up call? Possibly. Make-up for what is not known since the suspected fumble will never be known.

  • Wisdom Claremont, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:30 a.m.

    Forget it!!!It is in the record book and cannot and will not be changed. Things happen that are missed and not called it is part of life.

  • 1984 for life Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:28 a.m.

    I'm sure somehow at some point of the game Dick can tell us how we were cheated.

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:17 a.m.

    "Bunn, who is employed by the Mountain West Conference as a video-replay expert during the league's basketball tournament and is the full-time video coordinator for BYU's athletic department"

    Employed by the MWC as the full-time video coordinator for BYU's athletic department? Not a BYU employee?

    If he is just "their" local guy (MWC), working full time for the MWC, as the story suggests, then Utah Fans should direct their comments to the MWC.

    We all aware that this injustice was directed at the Utes, because they were the ones injured (because we know that everytime a Cougar scores, a Ute angel dies), so I understand their outrage.

    We have always coached that you win in spite of the bad calls, because... get this... in sports... There are bad call. Every game. A bad spot, a dropped ball, a bad flag (Michigan, 2008).

    So let the MWC suspend, and if needs be fire them, and get their video crews straightened out, because the MWC will affect BYU and Utah for years to come.

    And if it reads different at the Trib, post over there.

  • UtahManDan Providence, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:15 a.m.

    My neighbors ran a 300ft length of coaxial cable to the church from a nearby home so that they could project the BYU/Utah game in the church gym. One of my neighbors invited me, the lone Utah fan/heathen in the neighborhood, to watch the game with them. I accepted the invitation so there I sat amongst 30-40 BYU fans. What I learned from that experience is that there isn’t anything that sets a BYU fan apart from fans in general. I don’t know why I expected anything different (they are just people like anyone else) but nonetheless I was a surprised at the lack of integrity they displayed over calls that were obviously bad, but that went BYU’s way. Not once would anyone in that room acknowledge that their team “got away with one”, but they would whine, whine, and whine some more when their team was “wronged”. So please, BYU fan, cut San Diego some slack. You would act no better if the tables were turned.

  • SyracuseCoug Syracuse, ut
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:14 a.m.

    Fox Mulder and Skulley are all over this one, I think a massive conspiracy theory is afoot.

    Get a life, the guy was doing his job and provided the video, if proved otherwise, then a suspension is warranted, otherwise leave it alone. The Mtn West hasn't made any official statements Ute trolls, so stop attackig this guy's integrity until the investigation is complete.

    It's the officials job to overturn the call, not Chads.

    It was a fumble, no arguement here, but how about the missed facemask call as JJ was going down?

  • royalblue Alpine, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:09 a.m.

    According to the SLTrib, a source that has intimate knowledge of what goes on in replay booths at MWC stadiums says head replay official Mike Angelis from Reno, Nevada, is entirely responsible for botching the DiLuigi fumble review.

    Chad Bunn wasn't even working as the "video coordinator" in the replay booth, as reported by the SD Union-Trib, but was working instead as the "replay communicator."

    The source also said that at least five or six other MWC schools use employees and/or graduates in the replay booth. The University of Utah does not use employees, but it does use locals who may be Utah graduates.

    It looks like using employees, graduates, and other locals with ties or loyalties to the host school is very common in video replay booths in the MWC.

    The MWC needs to be open and honest in announcing all results from its investigation and give a full explanation of any actions it takes or has taken against the officials involved and what the MWC is doing to prevent such an unfortunate situation from occurring again.

  • Y's Guy Harrisburg, PA
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:00 a.m.

    Here it is, bottom line:

    Replay official blew the call. Write/scream all you want, it won't change a thing. Long after the haters are tired of posting, the record will still show--BYU won.

  • Archie O\'Fallon, MO
    Oct. 15, 2010 10:00 a.m.

    SL Trib...

    "University of Utah associate athletics director/director of communications Liz Abel confirmed that for Utah home games the head replay official is flown in from out of state, while the other three replay staffers are locals who do not work for the university, but may have attended school there. At SDSU, school employees are not used to staff the replay booth..."

    However, The Salt Lake Tribune’s source said he knows of at least three MWC schools that use employees and/or graduates in the replay booth. Another source put that number at five or six. At any rate, calls went out from league offices to every school in the conference on Thursday morning inquiring about the makeup of their respective replay booths."

    Looks to me like Mr. TJ2407 | 8:51 a.m. elected to reference the "second source" in his post. Yeah, that looks better..."everyone is doing it."

    Well, everyone is not doing it and if there isn't a league policy today, there certainly will be soon. Still, that does not absolve BYU of it's responsibility to ensure direct employees aren't in a position to influence officiating.

  • cougarsare1 Las Vegas, NV
    Oct. 15, 2010 9:59 a.m.

    While I am not pleased that such a controversy has come out at a BYU game, I am glad that MWC officials are finally being outed for what they are. Complete incompetent fools.

    If that includes this Chad Bunn person, then that is unfortunate. But at the very least, it includes those on the field and the official responsible for making the final call on the replay.

  • DaveKnowsWhatsUp Bloomington, IN
    Oct. 15, 2010 9:55 a.m.

    My favorite part of all of this drabble is that BYU may have actually been the beneficiaries of a blown call.

    Can anybody really tell me the last time thi actually happened? I honestly can't remember something of this magnitude. This might almost make amends for the infamous TCU fumble at the goal line in overtime a few years back.

    Mistakes are made in sports, most of the time they are inconsequential, sometimes they matter more. If SDSU can't beat a team that has been horrible this year, that's on them, not one blown call.

  • scenic view Baltimore, MD
    Oct. 15, 2010 9:12 a.m.

    The MWC is solely responsible for officiating MWC games. It's not BYU's responsibility to set policy on who is or isn't allowed in the replay booth.

    Bunn is a BYU employee, but he was working for the MWC, which is responsible for assigning Bunn to work the BYU-SDSU game.

    If it is so clearly a conflict of interest to have a technician connected to one of the schools working the game, then the MWC needs explain why the conference doesn't have a policy prohibiting this. If the conference does have such a policy, then the conference needs to explain why the MWC assigned Bunn to work this game.

    Ultimately, it's the MWC, not BYU, who is responsible for every aspect of officiating MWC games.

    Conspiracy theories based on pure, biased speculation prove nothing.

    BYU is no more at fault than SDSU for the blown call.

    Sound, thoughtful rebuttals based on real facts appreciated.

  • JayDee West Jordan, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:57 a.m.

    I am always astounded that if a Y hater posts something false enough times, they eventually seem to believe it.

    According to THIS article (the one you are all supposedly posting about) there is no confirmation that anyone was suspended. Right?

    BYU officials and the MWC explain that the CONFERENCE is in charge of who the replay officials are. Right?

    Chad Bunn is a video technician, not the head replay official. Right?

    Almost every U poster insinuates conspiracy not evidenced by these facts. As far as we know them to this point.

    And, why in the world does a U fan care one bit about this story? Except for the obvious reason that you delight in BYU misfortune. If there isn't any (i.e. "a loss") you create it. Get a life!

  • Cali Coug Visalia, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:51 a.m.

    So no one is suspended, the investigation continues and yet we have SDSU and Yewet fans that already know everything. This behavior is called arrogrance.

  • TJ2407 Springville, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:51 a.m.

    Sltrip stated that 6 MWC schools have school employees in the booth. Utah has Utah alums in the replay booth. Not employeed by the school but with ties to the school. Most schools have alum or employees that are in the booth. They know what they are doing and I stand by what I said earlier. These people know their job is to provide the best service possible on replays. They are there because they are good with technology and video. They need to take a 3rd party stance. He has been doing it for years so all of a sudden he blows a call? I don't buy it. I agree that schools hire people to be in the replay booth. They know the programs and the machines used so there will be less mistakes. I looked up the infor before I posted and I still think that my original statements are accurate. Bunn was hired by BYU and it does not matter that he was an employee. He has been for years and this is the first controversy. Many schools have employees that in the replay booth. The head replay official is never a school employee though

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:41 a.m.

    The world is thrilled that 33 miners were saved from certain death; people throughout the world live and breathe and move with great expectations; and here in a tiny speck of the planet, because of a split second of activity in a sporting event, seemingly nothing else matters.

    This great "conspiracy" has been concocted, no doubt, by members of two universities and a conference to change the BCS. The plans for this were hatched in July at a secret meeting in Gum Stump, NC!!

    Why not read the Gettysburg Address or study the issues before this important election?

    Geez, get a life.

  • Brave Sir Robin San Diego, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:36 a.m.

    It's fun watching BYU fans, the BYU administration, and the BYU-loving local media scramble to put lipstick on this pig. What's that saying about avoiding the appearance of evil? And, where there's smoke there's fire?

    Spirit, integrity, honor, and tradition are apparently being replaced by justify, hedge, downplay, and cover up.

  • Utah'95 FPO, AE
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:35 a.m.

    Th says: "The SDSU fumble was about as inconclusive as any replay I've ever seen."

    That means one of four things:

    -Th doesn't know what constitutes a fumble.

    -Th's bias does not allow him to see things even close to objectively.

    -Th did not see all the video clips.

    -Th needs glasses.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:29 a.m.

    I did watch a clip of the fumble with the audio. It sounds like the whistle blew after the fumble and after Luigi was down. This makes it all the more baffling. I don't know anybody who saw this clip while the review was in progress who didn't believe it was a fumble.

    This was an important win for a fragile BYU team and its terribly unfair to have this bring a dark cloud over one of the bright spots of an otherwise dismal season.

    I have to compare the handling of this incident to something that happened earlier in the baseball season. An umpire wrongly called a player safe at first base costing a pitcher a perfect game. The umpire personally took responsibility for his actions. The pitcher forgave him publicly and it was one of the great sports stories of the year. So far the way the MWC has handled this has not been one of the great sports stories of the year.

  • scenic view Baltimore, MD
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:18 a.m.

    "The issue is that someone deliberately withheld another view of the "fumble" for the replay official to look at,..."

    Do you know this for a fact?

    Do you have an actual authoritative source who was there and saw this happen?

    If so, please cite the name of your source and how he/she knows that this happened.

    All we know at this point is that based on the video replays we've seen, DiLuigi did fumble the ball before his knee touched the ground.

    Why the replay official didn't rule that way is pure speculation.

    I do agree that the previous SDSU fumble, the facemask on DiLuigi, and any other questionable calls during the game are irrelevant because the replay official's only responsibility was to review that one aspect of the play, whether DiLuigi's knee touched the ground before the ball came lose.

    The MWC owes both teams a complete explanation of what happened.

  • WestCoast1 Escondido, CA
    Oct. 15, 2010 8:06 a.m.

    To BYU fans who are downplaying this, and even taking shots at the Utes, I'm going to quote a poster for the SL Tribune on this:

    "Look, even the most biased BYU fans have to agree that this was a sham. And, in spite of your collective efforts to downplay it, it was the turning point in the game.

    Let's review: BYU is down by 4 points. They are in the midst of an embarrassing 4 game losing streak. They MUST win this game to save face, especially considering the Utes' success thus far this year. DiLuigi gets tackled and fumbles PRIOR to his knees hitting the ground. It was obvious to even the most casual observer.

    But then, the review officials incredibly give the ball back to BYU. (It comes out later that a BYU employee has a significant role in the botched call.) BYU then goes on to score and wins by 3 points. It's beyond deflating for an SDSU team struggling to get their program onto the right course.

    I think it's obvious why the San Diego State coaching staff and fans are furious right now. I would be."

  • Timp South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:52 a.m.

    First off: BYU fans would be just as outraged if a clear cut fumble was not called. So jumping on SDSU fans is ridiculous.

    Second: The "whistle" thing is completee non-issue. The reviewable play was reviewed 100% based on whether the ball came out before the knee went down. Come on Harmon, have some integrity there.

    Third: That was absolutely an unexplainable decision by the replay booth.

    I only imagine they did not get the clear picture showing the fumble, which may have been the reason Mr. Bunns was suspended. Obviously that is speculation. I also strongly doubt that was intentional though. But there probably was some error that led to the suspension or at least I would imagine.

  • Archie O\'Fallon, MO
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:39 a.m.

    The issue is that a BYU employee (a person who accepts payment from BYU for services rendered) was in a position to influence the officiating on the field. That condition creates the "appearance" of impropriety and provides a basis for one to infer that BYU was cheating.

    Further, BYU should have policies in place to ensure the replay booth is staffed by unbiased third parties and BYU should monitor those personnel to ensure compliance. Without policies and proper monitoring, one could infer that BYU pays an individual (employee) to create and unfair advantage (cheat). Thus, the appearance of impropriety is the issue.

    "The fact that Bunn works for BYU means nothing" as TJ2407 | 5:20 a.m. Oct. 15, 2010 suggests is absolutely incorrect. Mr. Bunn should, at the very least, have enough common sense to recuse himself from technical video responsibilities for games at BYU.

    Additionally, TJ2707's assertion that "Most MWC schools have employees that work in the replay booth" is also incorrect. To date, we know that SDSU and the UofU do not have employees in the booth (see SL Tribune).

    So, how many BYU games have utilized Bunn's services???

  • Howard S. Taylorsville, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:37 a.m.

    Funny headline...

    "Misinformation involving suspension of replay officials"

    Well, DH is the leading purveyor of misinformation and spin about BYU football.

    So, I guess it makes sense.

  • Old Scarecrow Brigham City, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:35 a.m.

    What a joke -- Utah fans complaining about the "common themes" of BYU fan posts, Utah fans telling everybody to move on because it's all hopeless, Utah fans pouncing on a rumor from a biased source with no facts that can yet be verified. Too bad Utah fans have no other life than posting about BYU. Talk about "common themes" and narrow minds. I'm hoping the Utes win, the Cougars win, the Aggies Win, the Wildcats win, and the Ute flamers get a life.

  • Peter Lemon Providence, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:22 a.m.

    I won't pass judgement on this story as I don't have the information to do so. But it is curious to see how defensive BYU fans are in explaining away what appears to be a bad booth review. Missed facemask calls do not justify it nor any other blown calls/reviews that went the other way.

  • Th Tooele, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:19 a.m.

    First of all it was just a bad call. Instant replay is supposed to be there for the benefit of both teams so the correct calls are made.

    The SDSU fumble was about as inconclusive as any replay I've ever seen. The BYU fumble couldn't have been more clear. Facemask or no facemask, that wasn't what was being reviewed.

    Suspension or no suspension, whether the call was for SDSU, or for BYU, replay is useless if obvious calls are not called correctly. Its hard for an official to see everything in real time on the field. Everything happens so fast.

    As for Utah's strength of schedule, you can only play who's on your schedule. Whether Pitt is overrated, and Iowa State is a mediocre team it doesn't matter. Its not like Utah's been barely getting by. How can anyone rant on Utah's schedule when you lose to a 2-4 team?

    Have fun in Fort Worth, I know Patterson is going to.

  • manutd Milford, CT
    Oct. 15, 2010 7:09 a.m.

    i don't see how this chad guy could have tweeked the video replay in favor of byu. first he would need enough time to run through each video feed/angle which is probably three or four? then run through each feed and somehow only provide the biased angle. then convince the other 2 hooligans that there isn't another angle. then...

    too many factors, too little time in my opinion. plus he was selected by the mwc, not byu.

    those who suspect a conspiracy theory involving the byu administration and the knights templar are just haters looking for anything anti byu to attack.

  • TJ2407 Springville, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 5:20 a.m.

    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

  • Utefan Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 15, 2010 4:19 a.m.

    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.

  • Riddles in the Dark Olympus Cove, Utah
    Oct. 15, 2010 1:10 a.m.

    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.

  • wazzup Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 11:41 p.m.

    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

  • SpanishImmersed Mesa, AZ
    Oct. 14, 2010 11:06 p.m.

    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.

  • Ibleedcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 10:56 p.m.

    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.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 14, 2010 10:31 p.m.

    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

  • Old Navy Provo, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 10:29 p.m.

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

  • Mid-Major Cougars San Diego, CA
    Oct. 14, 2010 10:28 p.m.

    Dear Dick,

    Can you confirm if the replay was in HD?

  • Floyd Johnson Broken Arrow, OK
    Oct. 14, 2010 10:16 p.m.


    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.

  • Kyle loves BYU/Jazz Provo, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 9:10 p.m.

    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!

  • PAC man Anaheim, CA
    Oct. 14, 2010 8:45 p.m.

    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).

  • Creeper51 Bountiful, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 8:37 p.m.

    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.

  • SoCalUtahFan Utesville, CA
    Oct. 14, 2010 8:06 p.m.

    ...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.

  • SoCalUtahFan Utesville, CA
    Oct. 14, 2010 7:47 p.m.

    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

  • PAC man Anaheim, CA
    Oct. 14, 2010 7:40 p.m.

    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.

  • SportsFan Orem, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 7:10 p.m.

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

  • Utah Alum Orem, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 7:07 p.m.

    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.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    Oct. 14, 2010 7:03 p.m.

    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 does.


  • wer South Jordan, UT
    Oct. 14, 2010 6:47 p.m.

    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.