[BostonCard]

One last add, the Duck fans might have had a reasonable gripe about the PI call (or was it defensive holding), on the last timed play in regulation.  Not so much because it shouldn’t have been a penalty (it was), but because there were at least two other instances with as much or more contact that went uncalled.  Obviously it is frustrating when you think refs are going to let you ply through a lot of contact and then they don’t.  But we as Stanford fans could just as much gripe that the refs were letting the Ducks get away with a deliberate strategy of not allowing our receivers to get up for the ball, so my sympathy is limited.

On holding, it’s just a fact of life that a lot of holding isn’t seen and doesn’t get called.  I saw a pretty bad hold on the first Duck touchdown, and someone on the live thread noted that KBk was being held on the last Duck touchdown (I didn’t see the hold, but I believe it).  As much as I sigh, it is called so inconsistently that I think ultimately it’s just hard for refs to see it consistently.

Stanford fans can also gripe about some calls.  An early whistle declaring Peat’s forward progress stopped, even though he was still moving his legs and a second effort resulted in an apparent touchdown wound up costing us four points.  A bad spot on McKee’s sneak on fourth down wound up costing us a first down (the review said the play stands, which I think was right because there was no definitive evidence, though it really did look like McKee got to the line to gain, and most controversially, the fumble against Oregon that was overturned on video review, even though there was no clear video evidence to overturn it; here was a case where the Duck was probably down, but through a fair number of camera angles there was no clear view of when the ball came out and thus the call on the field should have stood).

So, on the balance, I don’t think the refs cost the Ducks the game.

BC

[BostonCard]

One last add, the Duck fans might have had a reasonable gripe about the PI call (or was it defensive holding), on the last timed play in regulation.  Not so much because it shouldn’t have been a penalty (it was), but because there were at least two other instances with as much or more contact that went uncalled.  Obviously it is frustrating when you think refs are going to let you ply through a lot of contact and then they don’t.  But we as Stanford fans could just as much gripe that the refs were letting the Ducks get away with a deliberate strategy of not allowing our receivers to get up for the ball, so my sympathy is limited.

On holding, it’s just a fact of life that a lot of holding isn’t seen and doesn’t get called.  I saw a pretty bad hold on the first Duck touchdown, and someone on the live thread noted that KBk was being held on the last Duck touchdown (I didn’t see the hold, but I believe it).  As much as I sigh, it is called so inconsistently that I think ultimately it’s just hard for refs to see it consistently.

Stanford fans can also gripe about some calls.  An early whistle declaring Peat’s forward progress stopped, even though he was still moving his legs and a second effort resulted in an apparent touchdown wound up costing us four points.  A bad spot on McKee’s sneak on fourth down wound up costing us a first down (the review said the play stands, which I think was right because there was no definitive evidence, though it really did look like McKee got to the line to gain, and most controversially, the fumble against Oregon that was overturned on video review, even though there was no clear video evidence to overturn it; here was a case where the Duck was probably down, but through a fair number of camera angles there was no clear view of when the ball came out and thus the call on the field should have stood).

So, on the balance, I don’t think the refs cost the Ducks the game.

BC