The Mystery Fumble - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The Mystery Fumble (/thread-6298.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The Mystery Fumble (/thread-6298.html)
The Mystery Fumble - Hank 91 - 12-08-2013
I know that it doesn't matter, and I know that the turnover streak doesn't even really matter in the grand scheme of things, but that third quarter fumble-that-wasn't still bothers me. Here's what I wrote about it:
Quote:There was an odd sequence during this possession that must be mentioned. On first down at the Stanford 33, ASU tailback Deantre Lewis fumbled, and there was an immediate scramble for the ball. After the officials untangled the bodies, the referee emerged from the pile and made an emphatic signal in Stanford's direction. The defense raced off the field in triumph, but a few seconds later -- probably thirty seconds after the initial signal -- the officials changed their minds and gave the ball back to the Sun Devils. ESPN commentator Brad Nessler speculated that perhaps the official had just pointed in the wrong direction, but this makes no sense. If he had thought ASU had retained possession, he wouldn't have pointed in either direction, he simply would've held up two fingers to indicate second down. The replay offered no clarity, as the last shot we saw was Mauro lying on top of the ball. It didn't really matter, except that it was the closest the Stanford defense would get to a turnover; their school-record streak is now over.
Did it look any different to those who were there in the stadium?
The only thing I can think is that maybe the official lost track of who actually had the ball to begin with AND pointed the wrong direction. That's the only explanation that makes sense.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - CompSci87 - 12-08-2013
I wasn't there and didn't see any more on TV than you did. However, what would make sense to me (if it happened) is that after the signal was given, the officials huddled up and one of them insisted that he had a clear view showing that the runner was down before the ball came out, so it didn't matter who came up with it when they unpiled.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - CompSci87 - 12-09-2013
(12-08-2013, 11:26 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:I wasn't there and didn't see any more on TV than you did. However, what would make sense to me (if it happened) is that after the signal was given, the officials huddled up and one of them insisted that he had a clear view showing that the runner was down before the ball came out, so it didn't matter who came up with it when they unpiled.
Hmm, from the replay, the ball really looks out before the runner is close to down. So I don't get it.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - 82 Card - 12-09-2013
In the replay shown on TV at the time, it looked to me like Mauro was laying on the ball. When he lifted his body, the ASU guy reached under him and put his hand on the ball. If the ball is trapped between the body and the ground, that may not constitute control.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - Fifteen - 12-09-2013
I'm a little confused about how this ends our streak. Aren't we counting turnovers on downs as part of the streak? If not, then it should have ended after we played Oregon State...
Re: The Mystery Fumble - 82 Card - 12-09-2013
(12-09-2013, 01:09 AM)Fifteen link Wrote:I'm a little confused about how this ends our streak. Aren't we counting turnovers on downs as part of the streak? If not, then it should have ended after we played Oregon State...
Turning over the ball on downs does not count. OSU fumbled twice, one of which was recovered by Stanford.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - Bruce Wang - 12-09-2013
(12-08-2013, 10:17 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:That's the only explanation that makes sense.
GlassesRef.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - Renaissance Man - 12-09-2013
Jay Stricherz, who made the emphatic call on the fumble is influenced more by a loud home crowd than any official in memory (although I think Hochuli Jr. is a reasonably close second. I am sure he was shocked when his running first down signal (he learned the move from NFL receivers) did not elicit the joyous crescendo of cheers that he had anticipated, and realized that he had not pointed the intended direction. It was mentioned on the broadcast that this would be his final game--honestly, at least a decade late.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - Farm93 - 12-09-2013
At the stadium life was good at that point. No real worries that Stanford would win the game, so it was not that big of a deal either way.
In the stadium, it was hard to appreciate there was a fumble. It seemed like the play was almost over. However, it became clear a fumble scrum was taking place. The referee then jumped out of the scrum, stood near Skov, and POINTED in Stanford's direction. This was big because he did not signal the down which would have been normal if it was ASU's ball. So he made two mistakes wrong direction AND failing to note the down since the offense recovered. The alternative is that he actually believed Stanford recovered, but that after that call ASU found a way to grab the ball. I will assume that it was just a double ref error because..
Skov ran off the field, but few others did. That seemed odd at the time. And maybe 5 seconds later the direction was reversed. It was not that big a deal since it was not clear there was really a fumble and less clear that Stanford had actually recovered the ball. So it was hard from the stands to be too outraged over the sloppy resolution.
My DVR review of the game clarified a lot for me. The refs in the pile appeared to be saying it was ASU's ball. The referee bounced out of the scrum and pointed Stanford's way. Since Skov was not in the scrum at that point he happily ran off the field. However, all of the other players that were closer to the ball were less excited because they likely knew that the initial declaration by the referee was an error that would quickly be corrected once the refs huddled for a second or two.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - DC - 12-09-2013
I saw Mauro lying on the ball for a long time and never saw that ASU player who apparently reached in and grabbed it.
Re: The Mystery Fumble - Farm93 - 12-09-2013
Lots of questionable takeaway calls in the game.
Montgomery "fumbled" the ball on the 28-14 kickoff, but recovered the ball. It wasn't necessary to review, but it was clear that Montgomery was done before the fumble.
Wilkerson fumbled the ball in the redzone. It was later reversed to say he was down at the 9, but it looked like he had only manage to pin the ball against his shoulder pad. It was far from under control, but whatever. The fumble would have been better for Stanford since the ball would have been at the one.
This ASU fumble was not explained. It was not explained why it was initially ruled Stanford ball, or why it became ASUs ball. It is a shame the takeaway streak ended with that game and that call. In the end I think Stanford fans in the stands were all happy with the 38-14 win that allowed Coach Shaw to lift the Pac-12 trophy again and enabled all of us to have January 1 2014 plans.
It was not the best officiated game, but Stanford played well enough that the game was not out in the hands of the officials.Â