the
controversy over the sooners @ oregon game has gotten ridiculous.
There is no provision under NCAA or conference rules for a game result to be reversed or changed as a result of officiating errors, nor do I believe there should be
- Kevin Weiberg, Big 12 Commissioner
i agree with the statement. what i don't agree with is the categorization of the incidents as "officiating errors." that's what they started out as, yes, but once they were reviewed and upheld, i see them as much closer to cheating.
oklahoma also did not request that the loss be converted to a win. the request was simply to wipe the game from the record. considering, at the very least, the calls on the on-side kick, i do not consider this an outrageous request.
i respect the Pac-10 for its response to the situation. all things considered, i believe that the response was probably the most diplomatic from any party involved. it's a shame that it happened, and an injustice that the sooners will have to pay for the mistakes of (few) others.
and yes, i know that i am biased. even so, i don't think what i'm addressing here has anything to do with my affinity for the sooners.
it comes down to the instant replay (or whatever your conference calls its comparable mechanism). the point of the instant replay is that games are hard to call on the ground, in real time, and humans make mistakes in those situations. the replay officials check the work of those on the ground. multiple angles and slow-motion capabilities make them better-equipped to make the right call (by which i mean call what actually happened, not the call in favor of my team). if the replay officials ignore the video evidence, what is their function?
they're not "officiating errors." they're acts that add up to cheating. some of these players will never get another chance.
dismissed by a commissioner.
***
UPDATE:
i just read pat forde's
the dash, and it makes me even angrier. the entire thing is very anti-oklahoma... but this one paragraph...
Then again, maybe Boren is simply following presidential precedent at Oklahoma. It was OU prez George Cross who once explained to the state legislature a need for more funding because, "I would like to build a university which the football team can be proud of."
what's wrong with that? isn't he pretty much saying... "we're known for our football. i want the academics to be commensurate"?
i wasn't there, so i can only infer from words on a screen... but i really doubt the intent was what forde implies it to be...
