The Definitive Oklahoma Oregon Video Roundup

posted by Jeremy Chrysler on 9/18/2006 - -

For those of us who missed it, the Oklahoma - Oregon game provided a zany ending to say the least.

Former US Senator, Oklahoma Governor, Rhodes Scholar and OU President David Boren had this to say:

“It is truly sad and deeply disappointing that members of our football team should be deprived of the outcome of the game … because of an inexcusable breakdown in officiating”

Down by 13 with just a few minutes to go, Oregon scored a touchdown, then lined up for an onside kick. Though Oregon appeared to have violated the 10 yard rule, officials awarded Oregon with the recovery and the ball, and Oregon went on to score after yet another controversial interference call. Oregon wins.

Here’s a slow motion video of the on-side kick:


Making things worse, it looks like this edit that Oregon didn’t even recover the onside kick:


I didn’t watch it live, so I’ve got only the grainy flash video of YouTube, but the idea that Oregon got this ball is preposterous. Dan Fouts, hall of famer and OREGON GRAD, calls the call “ridiculous” on the broadcast:


You can watch 5:10 of insanity in this video, but you’ve got be hungry, because most of it is already above:


This will go down in the history of College Football as one of the all time blown sequences.


technorati tags:, , ,

7 Responses to “The Definitive Oklahoma Oregon Video Roundup”

  1. msilverman Says:
    September 18th, 2006 at 9:57 pm

    Thisis probably the worst bit of college officiating since the famous “5th down” game between Colorado and Missouri back in 1990.

  2. Quinn Says:
    September 19th, 2006 at 12:45 am

    As a college football fan, a blunder by the officials of this magnitude is very disheartening. The scale of the total officiating breakdown is almost unfathonable. The field referees missed Oregon touching the ball first, missed the fact that they touched it before it went ten yards and missed the fact that Oregon didn’t even recover the ball. The officials were pulling people off a pile while the Oklahoma player with the ball in his hand was trying to show the ref he had it. Then the replay officials watched all of this on video and still failed to make the correct call. This is one of the exact scenarios instant replay was supposed to prevent.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2593564

    The one game suspension given to the crew hardly seems like enough.

  3. Hoopinion Says:
    September 19th, 2006 at 9:34 am

    I think a one game suspension given to the on-field crew is appropriate. If we suspended every college officiating crew that blew a call, we’d be out of officials by approximately Week 2.

    The replay officials, on the other hand, should never be allowed to make any judgment that effects the outcome of a college football game ever again.

  4. Jeremy Chrysler Says:
    September 19th, 2006 at 9:47 am

    I wouldn’t be so sure Hoopinion, check out this article. It indicates that the replay official never got to see the angles we saw. If true, this brings to light some major failures in the replay system. What about the UT/KU Freeman Johns’ call? Who saw what replay there?

    Check out the story:

    “A source in the replay booth on Saturday said that Riese found himself
    crunched for time, pressured by television and the on-field referee for
    a rapid decision, and there was such a delay in getting the video feed
    to Riese that he never even got to properly review the play.

    The Pac-10’s coordinator of football officiating confirmed that Riese
    didn’t get all of the replays that ABC was providing.

    With all the cameras working the game that one half of the country was watching, Riese saw only a single frame of video, the source said. The angle was bad. But it appeared to show an Oklahoma player touching the ball with his helmet before it hit the Oregon player. (From other angles, clearly, it hits the Ducks player first.) With no other video immediately available, and television waiting, Riese did what he’s told to do when he’s out of time and has no conclusive evidence.

    He upheld the call on the field.”

  5. Quinn Says:
    September 19th, 2006 at 10:07 am

    If you watch the end of the last video Jeremy posted for us the official actualy says “there is conclusive video evidence that the ball was touched by a receiving team player, which makes the ball live.” This doesn’t exactly jive with the idea that the replay official was unsure and that there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call. There is a breakdown there that desperately needs to be fixed.

  6. 4th grade education Says:
    September 19th, 2006 at 7:49 pm

    As bad as the call might have been, the response by OU is much, much worse. The term, “OU are pigs” now has new meaning. As if a bad call had never happened before. “The game” (Cal-Stanford) would not even be remembered had the officials made the correct calls there.

    But, as we all know, no one likes Oklahoma.

  7. bobby Says:
    September 19th, 2006 at 9:07 pm

    “What about the UT/KU Freeman Johns’ call? Who saw what replay there?”

    -Don’t know if you were being sarcastic, but I think that game happened before the replay system was implemented. I think only the Big Ten used replay that season.

Leave a Reply

Comment Policy:Be polite.

You must be logged in to post a comment.