Michigan 13, Western Michigan 12

[JSpence]

Just to add a wrinkle to Sad Little Hill, remember this other factoid, the exact, to-the-frame sync of the live NBC broadcast scorebug clock to the stadium clock (in what would have been the opposite endzone for the final play, behind Michigan), just a couple minutes earlier.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2096569173241389460

It's all quite the mystery, though I've made my position clear on how little practical importance the metaphysics of whether ball had touched arm with 0:01 showing actually should have

They aren't in "exact to-the-frame" sync, though? I guess I got lucky, but this is me on my first try just clicking pause in my browser. Like I've said, the graphic clock is less out-of-sync than the embedded one, but it's a bit off and varies a bit. In many games, you can occasionally see it stutter with your naked eye. Not worth complaining over.. unless we use it for replay. Didn't see that coming.

Edit: sorry if this is too big or too small. Pictures are hard.

 

[RabidDawgClassic]

 

[JSpence]

They aren't in "exact to-the-frame" sync, though? I guess I got lucky, but this is me on my first try just clicking pause in my browser. Like I've said, the graphic clock is less out-of-sync than the embedded one, but it's a bit off and varies a bit. In many games, you can occasionally see it stutter with your naked eye. Not worth complaining over.. unless we use it for replay. Didn't see that coming.

Edit: sorry if this is too big or too small. Pictures are hard.

Haha, yeah, that was wild luck. That's the only frame like that.

You're still right to point this out, because the broadcast clock is inconsistent. It's within a frame here and it varies more than that. I'm confident that I could show it being early OR late within the same game.

So, now we can get back to what matters for our team - how people are proposing to "fix" it. I've read the NCAA memo for replay from broadcaster feeds. It's somehow worse than what I warned they'd do. For almost every reason, we don't want what they're thinking about pushing, guys. It's absurdly unclear in the details. AND it's just a memo. AND it's just a "should". The statement says internally that it's been reviewed, that could still show up in a draft. Let's hope they pull that back completely and come up with something else.

 

[phats22]

Haha, yeah, that was wild luck. That's the only frame like that.

You're still right to point this out, because the broadcast clock is inconsistent. It's within a frame here and it varies more than that. I'm confident that I could show it being early OR late within the same game.

So, now we can get back to what matters for our team - how people are proposing to "fix" it. I've read the NCAA memo for replay from broadcaster feeds. It's somehow worse than what I warned they'd do. For almost every reason, we don't want what they're thinking about pushing, guys. It's absurdly unclear in the details. AND it's just a memo. AND it's just a "should". The statement says internally that it's been reviewed, that could still show up in a draft. Let's hope they pull that back completely and come up with something else.

as per Gritty's post from a few days ago, the NFL'S approach makes more sense wherein the discrepancy needs to be 2 or more seconds for review. even if you made it one second difference, this wouldnt have happened

 

[Fly Illini Fly!]

100% still 1sec left:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2097765153957621972

Record it, watch it in slow motion (the top video)… there’s 1sec when it hits the player’s hand.

If that’s the clock they were going by (no clue), then they made the correct call.

If they were going by the one we saw (NBC), then they made the wrong call.

 

[ChiefGritty]

Haha, yeah, that was wild luck. That's the only frame like that.

And that's in fact a transitional frame.

The "0:36" is rendered on the clock without the top bit of the 6, that's it halfway between 6 and 5.

 

[Old.Edgy]

I don't understand how the above Zach Linfield video shows the play with the game clock and it seems to show there being 1 second on the clock at the time when the ball was touched, but the TV feed with the embedded game clock clearly shows the clock going down to 0 before the ball is touched.

On the TV feed, is there some sort of lag between the video and the game clock?? How could this be?

When I wore a younger mans clothes, there was always a difference between what the individual TV displayed and what was streaming through the air... I thought it was 6 seconds, but that seems not correct now... It was put in place by the moralists who wanted to be able to 'bleep-out' profanity or other problems in live tv shows... don't know if this is the case, but I remember it as being done ages ago...

 

[Dkayak]

B1G has no option other than to hold firm on the lame a$$ position of two clocks .

you can bet that Petitti is plenty upset about it . makes him & the league looks like amateurs ina big boy game

It’s an accurate look though. They’ve been allowing poor/biased officiating for a long time.

Never try to defend the indefensible. B1G should as a minimum admit they’ve really screwed the pooch with a tortured explanation that appears to be a defense of either a biased call or incompetent clock management. There is no conceivable third explanation.

 

[spotter]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2097793036331745326

 

[Dkayak]

I think all of this discourse, both here and nationwide, proves one thing: there was no indisputable evidence to overturn the original call on the field.

This would be an excellent argument for any WMU legal action. Where was the indisputable evidence? The raging dispute in the media proves there was none.

 

[sbillini]

This would be an excellent argument for any WMU legal action. Where was the indisputable evidence? The raging dispute in the media proves there was none.

I mean, we've just seen indisputable video evidence. And we also have the direct audio from the replay booth and the video they were seeing showing the same result as the video above. The replay booth had indisputable evidence.

The raging dispute is many people seeing the broadcast feed not agree with what the replay booth saw, assuming the replay feed was wrong, and, thus, jumping to conspiracy without really questioning the situation. In the end, the broadcast feed was the one that was apparently wrong, but many people refused to believe that could be the culprit. It was misplaced rage.

 

[WyattEarp]

Only in so far as the poor officiating and time keeping of the game.

I can't blame Michigan, as much as I hate to say it. If we were in that position we'd go for the win and not just give up.

My tinfoil hat says it's not a coincidence they found an extra second... but that would basically also mean the end of the sport.

 

[Mr. Roberts]

The most important thing to take away from all of this is that early indications are that Michigan sucks at football this year

 

[Thaillini22]

I mean, we've just seen indisputable video evidence. And we also have the direct audio from the replay booth and the video they were seeing showing the same result as the video above. The replay booth had indisputable evidence.

The raging dispute is many people seeing the broadcast feed not agree with what the replay booth saw, assuming the replay feed was wrong, and, thus, jumping to conspiracy without really questioning the situation. In the end, the broadcast feed was the one that was apparently wrong, but many people refused to believe that could be the culprit. It was misplaced rage.

Why don't they add time back on to the clock every time this happens throughout a game?

 

[WyattEarp]

I don’t blame Michigan for anything either
I also don’t think anyone consciously wants to rig the outcome
but
it’s so obviously a subconscious wish as it seems to benefit them vs their opponent all the time . year after year they get the benefit of the doubt on every friggin call .

Well maybe…?

I know this is low-hanging fruit…but this is a combination of words I just can’t bring myself to sign off, on:

“Michigan doesn’t want to consciously rig the outcome…”

 

[sbillini]

The most important thing to take away from all of this is that early indications are that Michigan sucks at football this year

yes, that definitely seems to be the case. And I think that's some great karma (better late than never) for all the things going on with that program over the past few years.

 

[RML]

I mean, we've just seen indisputable video evidence. And we also have the direct audio from the replay booth and the video they were seeing showing the same result as the video above. The replay booth had indisputable evidence.

The raging dispute is many people seeing the broadcast feed not agree with what the replay booth saw, assuming the replay feed was wrong, and, thus, jumping to conspiracy without really questioning the situation. In the end, the broadcast feed was the one that was apparently wrong, but many people refused to believe that could be the culprit. It was misplaced rage.

Ok, let me dust off my old lawyer hat. Your argument seems to be that "indisputable" means that all evidence PRESENTED TO THE REPLAY OFFICIALS leads to one conclusion that appears to be irrefutable, even if other evidence, not seen by those officials, points to a contradictory conclusion. Here, there were two contradictory pieces of evidence, so neither one could be considered "indisputable" in absolute terms. But if the officials are presented with only one of those pieces of evidence, then that one alone could APPEAR TO THEM to be indisputable.
Taking a step back, I would argue that if the rule requires "indisputable evidence" in absolute terms, then this example may prove that that standard can never be met.

 

[RML]

Hey, we all know the examples of Illinois being screwed by the rules, and the NCAA then changing the rules so no one else would be similarly screwed. We also know of horrendous officiating calls that gifted Michigan a win. Question: are there any examples of horrendous calls that STOLE a win from Michigan? I'm not aware of any, but--for fairness--it would be good to know if there are any. Notre Dame is the only team that I can imagine the refs would favor over Michigan.

 

[Dkayak]

I mean, we've just seen indisputable video evidence. And we also have the direct audio from the replay booth and the video they were seeing showing the same result as the video above. The replay booth had indisputable evidence.

The raging dispute is many people seeing the broadcast feed not agree with what the replay booth saw, assuming the replay feed was wrong, and, thus, jumping to conspiracy without really questioning the situation. In the end, the broadcast feed was the one that was apparently wrong, but many people refused to believe that could be the culprit. It was misplaced rage.

IMO, the only relevant evidence is what viewers and live spectators are shown. Official reviews should be limited to what is shared on the stadium and TV screens. Nothing else should EVER be considered.

Reliance on non-public video undermines the sport and fan support. Calls that are at odds with what we see breed distrust that the playing field is level. Terrible calls like the ignored egregious face mask do enough damage already. Don’t add to it with secret replay video.

 

[Dkayak]

Ok, let me dust off my old lawyer hat. Your argument seems to be that "indisputable" means that all evidence PRESENTED TO THE REPLAY OFFICIALS leads to one conclusion that appears to be irrefutable, even if other evidence, not seen by those officials, points to a contradictory conclusion. Here, there were two contradictory pieces of evidence, so neither one could be considered "indisputable" in absolute terms. But if the officials are presented with only one of those pieces of evidence, then that one alone could APPEAR TO THEM to be indisputable.
Taking a step back, I would argue that if the rule requires "indisputable evidence" in absolute terms, then this example may prove that that standard can never be met.

I’d argue that officials should never consider any evidence other than what’s presented to fans via stadium and broadcast replays. Problem solved by ensuring everybody sees the same evidence.

 

[illiniwil]

this was just a test. if they can screw WMU they can screw anybody!

 

[BalloonsTheElephant]

It really comes down to the fact that Michigan has been the favorable recipient of many missed calls and outcomes of obvious cheating scandals. I never actually thought there was a grand conspiracy to put a second back on the clock like this was US vs Russia in 1972.

However, it is fun to ridicule Michigan over the fact it took two hail mary plays to beat Western Michigan by 1 under a new head coach after the last one got fired after impregnating an assistant and then breaking into her apartment after he was fired. This was after Harbaugh left under a 10-year show-cause penalty for the sign stealing scandal. They also used the high COVID cases to skip their game with tOSU and cause them to be under the threshold of necessary games played to participate in the B1G championship game. Their basketball team was awarded the regular season B1G championship even though they had less wins and played three less games than Illinois. Juwan Howard hit another teams coach.

This is all in like the last 6 years. As The Dude said to Walter Sobchak, "You may be right, Michigan, but you're still an a-hole."

 

[sbillini]

Why don't they add time back on to the clock every time this happens throughout a game?

why would you add back time every time the broadcast clock isn't fully synced with the scoreboard clock? it doesn't affect the game itself.

Edit: also, i have no idea how often this actually happens.

 

[altgeld88]

This is all in like the last 6 years. As The Dude said to Walter Sobchak, "You may be right, Michigan, but you're still an a-hole."

"Bulls&$t. Put a second back on the clock, Dude."

"Michigan, this is not 'Nam. This is college football. There are rules."

 

[sbillini]

IMO, the only relevant evidence is what viewers and live spectators are shown. Official reviews should be limited to what is shared on the stadium and TV screens. Nothing else should EVER be considered.

Reliance on non-public video undermines the sport and fan support. Calls that are at odds with what we see breed distrust that the playing field is level. Terrible calls like the ignored egregious face mask do enough damage already. Don’t add to it with secret replay video.

The problem is what's shared on the stadium and what's shared on TV screens didn't match up. I think that's now been established. So what should replay deem "correct"? It's a valid debate and not sure if there's a clear answer, or even whether replay should make that call. But replay booth used stadium, which I think is appropriate and followed the guidelines they had per NCAA at the time.