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..
Th,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
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.
lol zoobs, only way they can win.
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.
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.
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.
So I guess what it all come down to is BYU is 1-5. Have a great weekend at TCU!
the expertIt'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
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
"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.
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.
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. . .
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.
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...
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.
@ hedgehogYour comments are flat out idiotic, Why don't you go do
something good in the world for once in your life.
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...
eagleI 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.
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!
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
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?Seriously.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.
@ 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.
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.
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.
"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.
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 xtra1360.com
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.
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.
At least with these accusations the team down south season has become more
interesting. Before it was a snooze fest.
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?
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.
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.
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?
Hey Drama QueenSpot 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
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.
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
Re: tawillinPerhaps 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.
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?
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.
RE: ArchieSpot 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!!!!
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?
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.
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!!!!
Utah95,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.
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.
I'm sure somehow at some point of the game Dick can tell us how we were cheated.
"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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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!
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
"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
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."
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.
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???
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
Having a BYU employee working on a MWC replay crew doing a BYU game is a
complete conflict of interest.
Dear Dick,Can you confirm if the replay was in HD?
KyleI 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.
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!
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).
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.
...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
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
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.
The SDSU reporters can continue the investigation as long as they want to
hedgehog. BYU has nothing to hide.
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.
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.LOL!
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.