Greg Sankey on SEC officiating

[IndyBison]

I sure wish we still had the hard data on Alabama's opponents' holding calls vs. (1) those same opponents when playing a team not named Alabama, and (2) Alabama's holding calls vs. its opponents in our games.

It wasn't close. For my fellow statistics geeks, it was several standard deviations from the mean.

There was no reasonable explanation other than (1) Alabama was held to a different (stricter) standard than our opponents, and (2) our opponents are held to a more lenient standard against us than they are against other teams.

IndyBison: I say this in all sincerity....I'm not sure how closely you've followed Alabama football over the years. But this is a sensitive subject on the board for several reasons:

1. The above pattern on holding calls that has pervaded for several years now.

2. The demonstrably false insistence of other schools' fans that Alabama gets all the calls.

3. The fact that blown calls, particularly badly missed illegal OL downfield, have directly cost us at least two conference losses -- one cost us a chance at a third consecutive national championship, and we were exceedingly fortunate that the other didn't have NC implications.

4. It's starting to fade now, but among fans aged 35 or older, there's still sensitivity to the SEC office allowing conference opponents an exceedingly high percentage of off weeks before playing Alabama, at one point, more than the entire rest of the conference combined.

4A. Not as familiar to a lot, but the SEC office warned every single school in the entire SEC...except Alabama, of course...away from Albert Means. Which, along with our own bumbling administration, led to more than a decade of continual misery.

5. Some calls during years where we honestly weren't championship contenders, so the damage was mostly confined to salvaging pride -- an inexplicably blown PI call in the end zone against LSU in the 2004 game in Baton Rouge, at least two calls of caught passes by Arkansas that were in fact traps (they would have been overturned by replay, if it were available at the time, and one was really close so I cut the refs some slack on that one. The other was clear). Another incredibly ticky-tack PI call on an interception against Arkansas that would have ended the game. Instead, we ended up losing in a later OT period because we couldn't convert a 42-yard FG.

6. The real OFC (raising my hand here) recalls a jobbing as inexplicable as the 2004 LSU call, in the 1984 game at Penn State. Nothing to do with SEC refs, but still hurts.

In short, we have a way longer-than-normal list of jobbings by both your zebra colleagues and the SEC office, and the continuing disparity between holding calls. I know it's a hard job. Believe me, I've done a similarly thankless job in the corporate world.

The old saying is that once is happenstance, twice makes you wonder, three times is a pattern, and four times is proof. We're so far beyond that, it's ridiculous. Whether it's conspiracy (I don't think so), intentional (maybe, especially lately and definitely back in the day under Roy Kramer), or human bias in favor of the underdog (likely), I don't know.

But there are far too many examples for there not to be something wrong.

That's a totally fair observation from a fan's perspective. And almost every fanbase feels exactly the same way about their team. I don't visit a lot of fan sites very often (yours is one of the more interesting ones so I stop by occasionally) but I always see comments very similar to this. Someone has to benefiting from all these missed calls that were in their favor. The one thing you can hang your hat on though is the huge disparity in holding fouls. That is extremely unusual. The numbers themselves can't be disputed.

 

[IndyBison]

Serious question: Can holding and facemask be called in the same incident?

It definitely could. There is no facemask in this photo because that requires grasping and pulling/twisting of a helmet opening. If both happened simultaneously it would likely just be a personal foul face mask.

 

[IndyBison]

I have held my peace on this till now:
Indy, while I respect you as a person and poster, quite frankly and honestly you are so full of BULL in your attempt to defend your fellow officials. I'm not just talking about Alabama games, either.
A few years ago OFFICIALS cost Arky a game against UF. There was a late hit by a UF Olineman on and Arky defensive lineman and the flag was thrown against the Arky player and the true call was not even close. It extended a drive for UF that ended in a go ahead td caught by a UF receiver after the receiver plainly and openly pulled the Arky defender's jersey and allowed the UF receiver to catch the go ahead score when if the right call had been made a few plays before Arky runs the clock out and wins the game.
In a UT/UF game the ref was five feet away from the UT receiver and UF defender when the UT player hit the UF player. The UF player responded (of course) and was the only one that got called.
Holding is holding whether away from the play or not, whether the other team is disadvantaged talant wise or not. A penalty is a penalty.
So, in the interest of maintaining people's respect for you on this board please dispense with the same excuses we get from Steve Shaw & co and the SEC Commisioner.
Officiating now days sucks because officials pick and choose what they want to call when they feel like it and it is pretty evident.

Thank you for the kind comments. I know it's just semantics and I know what you are talking about but a foul is the illegal act and the penalty is the enforcement. In rules, definitions are critical so I just thought I would share. Feel free to use either as I know what you are talking about.

You are right that holding is holding but part of the definition of a hold includes material restriction and impact on the play. That's why a hold on the back side is generally not a foul. That's what I've been trying to explain as well as Shaw and Pereira and Blandino and LeMonnier and McAuley, etc. If you read their Twitter feeds you'll see the responses are much more negative then your comments (everyone here is generally respectful with no personal attacks which I appreciate). They aren't excuses. They are definitions and explanations. It's how the rules committee (made of coaches) and powers that be in the NCAA and conferences want the game officiated. The same approaches exist in all sports. If you don't understand that you will continue to be frustrated with officials. I know because that's what I was like before I started officiating. It gave me a completely different understanding of the game.

I also know when I watch other sports I don't actually know the rules or philosophies of that sport in detail. We get most of our rules knowledge from announcers which is usually wrong. I think I shared this before and got yelled at for it, but there are no such fouls in basketball as reaching in or over the back. Since announcers use those terms to describe those fouls fans think anytime you go over the back or reach in you have committed a foul.

 

[edwd58]

In order for there to be a holding foul it needs to be a MATERIAL RESTRICTION that IMPACTS THE PLAY. Those who say you could call a hold on every play are only referring to an jersey grab or hand outside the frame. You could call that a hold but you would be incorrect. A run goes off tackle and the back side tackle restricts the DE it has no impact on the play. The run doesn't go back that direction. As a fan you would HATE watching football because there would be a lot of fouls.

On the play in the picture you can never tell a hold from a still. The action itself definitely fits the definition of a material restriction. The blocker is definite beat and that's a standard arm across the chest band bending back of the defender. Several unknowns though in this photo. You can't tell depth from this angle. It's really hard to tell if the defender is 2 yards from the passer or 6 yards. That would make a difference here as the passer is in the process of releasing the ball. If the defender is 6 yards away you would likely pass on this because it had no impact on the play. The other aspect is I have no idea what angle this is from. Is this from the end zone behind the passer? Is it an angle from the sideline. That would only help me determine what angles the officials covering this part of the play would have. I also don't know if this QB was in the pocket or if he's scrambled and we are somewhere else on the field. That would determine who has responsibility for this block. Let's say this was a 3-step drop and pass with the QB still in the pocket. The wing to the right of the picture would have the T (assuming this is the RT) at the snap. If his initial block is clean he's going to transition to his eligible receiver. The R will start with the opposite tackle. If the LT is engage in a possible foul then he's going to keep his eyes there and not come back to this T. That means it's possible nobody is watching this block at this exact moment. With 8-man though the C should be watching this unless he's also drawn to another block in the middle.

That's just some factors that go into any play. And all of that happens and is processed in 4-5 seconds. This may very well be a missed hold if no flag was thrown. I just wanted to share different factors that go into every play and how the officials have to watch players on every play.

Sir, I've no idea who you are, where you live, who your favorite team might be, if you're truly a football referee and any other number of things about you, but I'm going to do you a favor and let you know this so you might stop - you are embarrassing yourself with those explanations. You're dragging down refs from all sports (softball for me).

 

[IndyBison]

Based on the context provided by the rest of your post, I'm assuming you're serious with this comment. If you meant the whole 10-15 lines to be sarcastic, and I just didn't pick up on that intent, I apologize.

But Indy, if you weren't being sarcastic, this is the kind of statement that costs officials credibility.

Missing that call is indefensible, especially in light of your previous comments about officials never letting their guard down when it comes to personal safety issues. Grabbing the guy around the neck and twisting under the facemask isn't a personal safety issue? Are you really willing to rest a defense on saying that still is worthless?

If it were an isolated incident, and the distribution were approximately equal on both teams, we could overlook it, indefensible though it may be. After all, human beings are fallible. But it's not an isolated incident, and the incidence is anything but approximately equal. The frequency and skewed outcome are far beyond simple human frailty.

I just don't know how you defend that.

This kind of hold is not a safety issue. If it were it would be a personal foul and a 15-yard penalty. If the arm continues up and pins the head back after this you could definitely have a personal foul for hands to the face.

I'm definitely not being sarcastic. Context is everything with rules and a still picture doesn't provide that context. I tried to provide factors that could be involved around the play. The act alone in this picture definitely meets the definition of a material restriction so that part is definitely met.

It is possible the context of this was a missed holding foul. I have no idea. If it was missed I tried to explain one possible way nobody saw it or enough of it to KNOW it was a foul. Several here have said if the official doesn't see the entire play they can't guess. That's 100% true. If it was a miss then one or two of the officials would get a downgrade.

In another post I explained we missed a very similar hold to this in one of our games this year. It was by LG who was one of my keys (G-C-G). The reason I missed it was because the RG's initial block knocked his helmet off which drew my attention. He continued to block so I had to watch him to make sure he didn't continue too long to become a foul (a player who loses his helmet is not allowed to continue the play beyond the immediate action). The passer got rid of the ball fairly quickly. The helmet went toward the R so it got his attention too. Neither of us ever saw the LG. Nobody else on the crew would be looking in this area of the field. It was an obvious miss and if we were graded the same way as the D1 guys we would have received a downgrade. We reviewed the play as a crew and talked about how we have to be better. There was a DPI on the play that gave the offense a first and goal. If we had correctly called the hold the penalties would have offset.

 

[IndyBison]

Sir, I've no idea who you are, where you live, who your favorite team might be, if you're truly a football referee and any other number of things about you, but I'm going to do you a favor and let you know this so you might stop - you are embarrassing yourself with those explanations. You're dragging down refs from all sports (softball for me).

If you are a softball umpire than you know all your rules aren't black and white. One I learned about was a batted ball hitting a runner. I always thought the runner was out. But I learned if the ball has already passed an infielder (i.e. 3rd baseman playing in) it may not be an out. It could still be an out if the short stop could still make a play on the ball. I don't remember all the details but I think one rule set only said that means the SS can field it and another the umpire has to determine if the SS could have possibly made a play on a runner after fielding it. I'm sure you know that rule and these philosophies.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Thank you for the kind comments. I know it's just semantics and I know what you are talking about but a foul is the illegal act and the penalty is the enforcement. In rules, definitions are critical so I just thought I would share. Feel free to use either as I know what you are talking about.

You are right that holding is holding but part of the definition of a hold includes material restriction and impact on the play. That's why a hold on the back side is generally not a foul. That's what I've been trying to explain as well as Shaw and Pereira and Blandino and LeMonnier and McAuley, etc. If you read their Twitter feeds you'll see the responses are much more negative then your comments (everyone here is generally respectful with no personal attacks which I appreciate). They aren't excuses. They are definitions and explanations. It's how the rules committee (made of coaches) and powers that be in the NCAA and conferences want the game officiated. The same approaches exist in all sports. If you don't understand that you will continue to be frustrated with officials. I know because that's what I was like before I started officiating. It gave me a completely different understanding of the game.

I also know when I watch other sports I don't actually know the rules or philosophies of that sport in detail. We get most of our rules knowledge from announcers which is usually wrong. I think I shared this before and got yelled at for it, but there are no such fouls in basketball as reaching in or over the back. Since announcers use those terms to describe those fouls fans think anytime you go over the back or reach in you have committed a foul.

Your condescending attitude does you no favors.

Here's how the NCAA defines holding in the 2019 football rules manual:

Holding and Use of Hands or Arms: Offense
ARTICLE 3. a. Use of Hands. A teammate of a ball carrier or a passer legally may block with his shoulders, his hands, the outer surface of his arms or any other part of his body under the following provisions.
1. The hand(s) shall be:
(a) In advance of the elbow.
(b) Inside the frame of the opponent’s body (Exception: When the
opponent turns his back to the blocker) (A.R. 9-3-3-VI and VII). (c) At or below the shoulder(s) of the blocker and the opponent
(Exception: When the opponent squats, ducks or submarines). (d) Apart and never in a locked position.
2. The hand(s) shall be open with the palm(s) facing the frame of the opponent or closed or cupped with the palms not facing the opponent (A.R. 9-3-3-I-IV and VI-VIII).
b. Holding. The hand(s) and arm(s) shall not be used to grasp, pull, hook, clamp or encircle in any way that illegally impedes or illegally obstructs an opponent.
PENALTY—10 yards Penalties for Team A fouls behind the neutral zone are enforced from the previous spot. Safety if the foul occurs behind Team A’s goal line [S42].

Please show us where it says anything about "material restriction and impact on the play". I've been reading the NCAA rules for years (this will obviously shock you as you seem to believe we all just listen to fellow fans and color commentators) and I've literally NEVER seen this in the NCAA rules.

 

[bama2112]

I do like the Ignore option. Its better than me giving up time to someone who has more time than good sense.

 

[RTR91]

https://twitter.com/stadium/status/1185673224908136454?s=21


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CB4]

And if he's still holding when the runner doubles back yoiu have something. There has to be a line somewhere.

The comments by people here are no different anecdotally than any other fan base. I bet if you went to the Arkansas board during or after the game they are talking about all the fouls Alabama got away with and completely ignoring the fact they weren't called for any. If they did they would complain a couple of them were incorrect. It's human nature.

I am actually fascinated by the data you all have come up with. A disparity that large does seem unusual especially over a period of time. It's not unusual for a game here or there to have legitimately have a big disparity, but I would love to look through several plays to see what is actually happening. It doesn't seem to be hurting the Tide so that's the good news! I know it was an NFL number but Dean Blandino tweeted the other day that the team with the fewer fouls wins 49.7%. The team with the fewer turners wins 77% of the time. His point was people argue teams lose because they get more flags thrown than their opponent. At least in the NFL it makes no difference. Players committing turnovers has a much greater impact.

Your comment of “it doesn’t seem to be hurting the Tide” is telling. You’re right. The disparity in penalties called/holding calls on our opponents (which no random model could possibly explain) hasn’t hurt us....until it does. Most times we have the talent to overcome the bias (whether intentional or unintentional) by your colleagues.

Here is my problem: your statement that officials “don’t make a call if in the judgement of the official it doesn’t impact the play. That is the problem. WHY are you allowed that “judgement”? Does that mean guy lines up in the neutral zone and because he is away from the play you don’t flag it? Does it mean a team lines up in an illegal formation and you decide not to call it because “it’s 52-7 and this game is over” (in your judgement).

Officials already have enough calls where they use their judgement (OPI/DPI, personal fouls, etc). Fouls like motion, offsides, illegal formation are fouls, for the most part, that are rather black and white; they either are or they aren’t. Same holds true for holding. And to allow officials to ignore something that is clearly a foul based their “interpretation” of the affect on the play or the game situation is, in my mind, outside the realm of the the officials responsibility.

If it is penalty, throw the flag.

 

[IndyBison]

Your condescending attitude does you no favors.

Here's how the NCAA defines holding in the 2019 football rules manual:

Please show us where it says anything about "material restriction and impact on the play". I've been reading the NCAA rules for years (this will obviously shock you as you seem to believe we all just listen to fellow fans and color commentators) and I've literally NEVER seen this in the NCAA rules.

It's part of the terms "illegally impedes or illegally obstructs". Many rules are intentionally vague and open to further interpretation. These philosophies and interpretations support each of these rules so you can eliminate the gray. That's why we attend clinics and work scrimmages and watch training videos and have rules study meetings throughout the year. It's very similar to laws. Is driving 56 in a 55 violating the speed limit? Absolutely. Do the police stop someone going 56 in a 55? Probably not. Do they stop someone doing 62 in a 55? Probably not. If they cause an accident while doing 62 in a 55 will the speed be a factor in what charges they may face? Absolutely. If you just read the rule you only get part of the picture. It's a critical part of the picture, but it's not the entire picture. Many states have open container laws that would forbid you from having a beer in a tailgate before a football game in the stadium parking lot. Some places temporary rescind those laws and some places only enforce it if you are being obstinate and disruptive. But if you read the law literally every person there is violating the law.

I actually came here to share this video produced by Dean Blandino. He doesn't have an official position in NCAA officiating, but he's well respected and deeply understands college rules. This video is intended for fans and media, but official use it as well as part of their weekly training. If you don't like my explanations I'm guessing you aren't going to like his either. One of my favorite plays on this video is was the Nebraska runner stepping out of bounds but still running down the sideline as if he's in bounds. He'***** by a defender who is flagged for a personal foul. That's a judgement call by the official and he felt the defender committed a foul. Dean feels it shouldn't be a foul. The official is either going to be supported or downgraded. I have no idea. But my understanding and training on this situation would be no foul. It happens quickly and the defender has no idea if the runner stepped out of bounds or not. I had a very similar play in my HS game Friday night and I passed. The fans on my sideline felt otherwise, but their team was on offense. I understood why they thought that. If you officiate this by the letter of the rule this is a foul because the ball was dead as soon as the runner stepped on the sideline. Be the national supervisor of officials or conference supervisor: Do you want this to be a foul every time or do you agree with Dean's explanation that this should not be a foul? Both answers could be correct. It depends on who the authority is.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BtcOGbb8QOriqPFapKWwnCb66aY9VdHB/view

 

[crimsonaudio]

https://twitter.com/stadium/status/1185673224908136454?s=21

Good grief!

Something, something, eyes somewhere else, something, something, play moves so fast, something, something video doesn't really show what was happening, etc.

 

[DzynKingRTR]

Goot lort.

I don't think I can do this anymore.

I'd thank you for your perspective, IndyBison, but you're far more biased than any fan posting here...

I knew he was going to say that before he said it.

 

[IndyBison]

Your comment of “it doesn’t seem to be hurting the Tide” is telling. You’re right. The disparity in penalties called/holding calls on our opponents (which no random model could possibly explain) hasn’t hurt us....until it does. Most times we have the talent to overcome the bias (whether intentional or unintentional) by your colleagues.

Here is my problem: your statement that officials “don’t make a call if in the judgement of the official it doesn’t impact the play. That is the problem. WHY are you allowed that “judgement”? Does that mean guy lines up in the neutral zone and because he is away from the play you don’t flag it? Does it mean a team lines up in an illegal formation and you decide not to call it because “it’s 52-7 and this game is over” (in your judgement).

Officials already have enough calls where they use their judgement (OPI/DPI, personal fouls, etc). Fouls like motion, offsides, illegal formation are fouls, for the most part, that are rather black and white; they either are or they aren’t. Same holds true for holding. And to allow officials to ignore something that is clearly a foul based their “interpretation” of the affect on the play or the game situation is, in my mind, outside the realm of the the officials responsibility.

If it is penalty, throw the flag.

I didn't make the comment about hurting the Tide to say it's a non-issue and shouldn't be raised. I was just commenting that the Tide have been successful in spite of the undisputed discrepancy. I definitely think someone should analyze it. It's a very extreme discrepancy.

Why are officials allowed that judgement? That's exactly why sports hire impartial officials. Judgement is a critical element of officiating in any sport. The more experience you get the more you are able to apply the judgement consistently. The type of fouls you mention have a lot of judgement involved in them, but training, evaluations, video review, philosophies all try to reduce the gray in those judgments so they can be called as consistently as possible from official to official and game to game. Procedural fouls like neutral zone infractions, motion, and formation have less variation related to advantage/disadvantage. But judgement and philosophy will still come into play. For example, if a wideout who is supposed to be on the line is too far back (bonus points to anyone who knows what defines a player being on the line and extra bonus if anyone knows what "no-man's land" is) he'll be given a little more latitude than a tackle. The tackle gains a huge advantage on the edge rusher the further back he can be. The wideout lined up outside the numbers being covered by a DB who is 5 yards behind his LOS gets no advantage. The wing official will tell the wideout to make sure he moves up on future plays or it will become a foul (called preventative officiating and very common throughout a game).

 

[CB4]

Good grief!

Something, something, eyes somewhere else, something, something, play moves so fast, something, something video doesn't really show what was happening, etc.

But you don’t seem to understand. That “hold” didn’t affect the play {cough, cough}. You’re only seeing one it from one angle. { cough, cough} [blue font]

 

[CB4]

I didn't make the comment about hurting the Tide to say it's a non-issue and shouldn't be raised. I was just commenting that the Tide have been successful in spite of the undisputed discrepancy. I definitely think someone should analyze it. It's a very extreme discrepancy.

Why are officials allowed that judgement? That's exactly why sports hire impartial officials. Judgement is a critical element of officiating in any sport. The more experience you get the more you are able to apply the judgement consistently. The type of fouls you mention have a lot of judgement involved in them, but training, evaluations, video review, philosophies all try to reduce the gray in those judgments so they can be called as consistently as possible from official to official and game to game. Procedural fouls like neutral zone infractions, motion, and formation have less variation related to advantage/disadvantage. But judgement and philosophy will still come into play. For example, if a wideout who is supposed to be on the line is too far back (bonus points to anyone who knows what defines a player being on the line and extra bonus if anyone knows what "no-man's land" is) he'll be given a little more latitude than a tackle. The tackle gains a huge advantage on the edge rusher the further back he can be. The wideout lined up outside the numbers being covered by a DB who is 5 yards behind his LOS gets no advantage. The wing official will tell the wideout to make sure he moves up on future plays or it will become a foul (called preventative officiating and very common throughout a game).

And there in lies the problem. Consistency in judgement. So going back to the data expressed here in terms of bias, one would expect to see that consistency. The only consistency we’ve seen the last 8-10 years is being “consistently hosed”. And that data is undeniable.

Why would I want you to have greater latitude in rules interpretation if you’ve only proven your lack of consistency over an extended period of time?

Or have we just been a victim of those officials using our games as “experience” to develop that “consistency”?

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I didn't make the comment about hurting the Tide to say it's a non-issue and shouldn't be raised. I was just commenting that the Tide have been successful in spite of the undisputed discrepancy. I definitely think someone should analyze it. It's a very extreme discrepancy.

Why are officials allowed that judgement? That's exactly why sports hire impartial officials. Judgement is a critical element of officiating in any sport. The more experience you get the more you are able to apply the judgement consistently. The type of fouls you mention have a lot of judgement involved in them, but training, evaluations, video review, philosophies all try to reduce the gray in those judgments so they can be called as consistently as possible from official to official and game to game. Procedural fouls like neutral zone infractions, motion, and formation have less variation related to advantage/disadvantage. But judgement and philosophy will still come into play. For example, if a wideout who is supposed to be on the line is too far back (bonus points to anyone who knows what defines a player being on the line and extra bonus if anyone knows what "no-man's land" is) he'll be given a little more latitude than a tackle. The tackle gains a huge advantage on the edge rusher the further back he can be. The wideout lined up outside the numbers being covered by a DB who is 5 yards behind his LOS gets no advantage. The wing official will tell the wideout to make sure he moves up on future plays or it will become a foul (called preventative officiating and very common throughout a game).

At least you admit that you can't explain the extreme disparity of non-calls on teams playing Bama. You haven't even touched how on earth Arkansas could to through an entire game with no assessed penalties. If officials are the saints you claim, how is this even possible?

 

[CB4]

At least you admit that you can't explain the extreme disparity of non-calls on teams playing Bama. You haven't even touched how on earth Arkansas could to through an entire game with no assessed penalties. If officials are the saints you claim, how is this even possible?

Because Earle, it isn’t explainable.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Because Earle, it isn’t explainable.

No, it's not. And it means that we start at a disadvantage to every other team we play...

 

[4Q Basket Case]

No, it's not. And it means that we start at a disadvantage to every other team we play...

And have for a long time. Unfortunately, bias from SEC admin, including officials, isn't new. Dates back at least to Roy Kramer.