USC defeated Stanford, 31-28, after benefiting from a questionable call from the referees.
With eight minutes remaining in the fourth quarter, Stanford lined up for a fourth-down goal line push from the 1 yard line. The ball was handed to Cameron Scarlett, and Scarlett was ruled down, just short of the end zone.
But was he really down? Watch the shot below (via Dr. Saturday); it’s pretty clear that Scarlett fell on top of FB Daniel Marx and OG Brandon Fanaika. At no point did Scarlett touch the ground, and at no point should he have been ruled down:
Here’s an up-close, still shot (also via Dr. Saturday); the shot below makes it even clearer that Scarlett never touched the ground, and should not have been ruled down:
Nonetheless, the refs whistled Scarlett down, and instead of Stanford adding another seven points to its score, Stanford lost the game 31-28.
This was not the first time referees whistled down a goal line push even though a Stanford player never touched the ground. Against Notre Dame in 2012, a similar call from referees on a push by Stepfan Taylor likely cost Stanford an appearance in the National Championship Game.
Comments
From that angle, Scarlett was in
and was not down. The only argument would have been forward progress, but he was still driving his legs while riding the back of D. Marx. Why didn’t the official review that as a matter of course? I know Shaw didn’t have a challenge left, but that should have been reviewed. Shit. That is even more frustrating.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.02.17 6:51am
I think he was in...
SC still would’ve scored and retaken the lead but the Cardinal responded with a quick drive of their own. The score would’ve been 35-31, but I think SC would’ve drove down the field to take the win.
Stanford could’ve won. No doubt about it. But USC was clearly the better team in my opinion.
I’m hoping for Holiday Bowl versus Harbaugh and Michigan.
By charliefoy on 12.02.17 6:51am
Apparently Michigan is heading to the Outback Bowl.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.02.17 6:52am
Frustrating reviews
If that play had been reviewed does anyone think it would have been called a TD?
They didn’t overturn the 17 yard loss on the backwards pass that all the announcers agreed was a forward pass. And they blew the spot last week in the ND game where the runner was clearly short of the first down.
Pac-12 video review is just completely a crap shoot and doesn’t seem to correlate to what the eye sees
By WhatDoestheTreeSay? on 12.02.17 6:55am
Pac 12 refs are consistently awful
It’s shocking to me how bad they are week in and week out. How do they stay employed?
By g8tgod on 12.02.17 8:16pm
Unable to challenge because of previous blown call
Had the consistently awful Pac-12 refs not also blown both the call and the review on the non-backward pass, Shaw would’ve been able to challenge this blown call.
This was the worst-officiated football game I can remember seeing, and that’s saying something.
By Cardman88 on 12.02.17 7:03am
It's possible that is his left calf touches when he gets spun down
But it was close. Definitely needed a second look.
Compounding problems from bad officiating – refs don’t overturn their mistaken lateral call, and so Shaw loses his challenge and can’t force a review.
Aside from the ticky-tack holding and DPI calls (which were going both ways), USC only got one bad officiating break on the night – a grossly inaccurate 3rd down spot which forced them to punt. Stanford was the victim two really egregious mistakes that cost them between 7-14 points.
That said, Stanford did have good fumble luck in the game (I think the ball hit the ground three times, and Stanford got all three). If any of those three fumbles goes to USC, this game isn’t nearly as close. So not all the breaks were bad. Just didn’t have enough of them go the Cardinal’s way.
By Leland's Axe on 12.02.17 7:09am
I don't think it was reviewable anyway?
The problem wasn’t that they blew the call – the problem was how they blew it. By whistling the play dead before it was over I think the officials precluded any review – you can’t review when a play ends, can you?
This is why it was such a terrible call. Especially down near the end zone, the officials should err on the side of letting the play run. They didn’t, and Stanford paid the price. Add in the bizarre forward-pass call and they had two incredibly egregious errors.
Did the officials cost Stanford the game? Maybe? Probably. That "stop" was a huge momentum swing. At the very least, Stanford would’ve been leading and in command of their own destiny. For me, this is now up there with the Stepfan Taylor plays you cited against ND. Another of the ultimate what ifs around this program? And a perfectly good tool to use to poke holes in any USC fan’s pride around winning this game.
Stanford always knows they go into any game against USC having to beat both SC and the refs (which is amazing considering what an undisciplined mess SC usually is). Such is life – maybe someday the equation will flip, but I doubt it.
By RickeySteals on 12.02.17 8:37am
I think you may be right
You cannot review any action after the play is whistled dead. So there was nothing to overrule even if Scarlett had maintained forward motion and broken the plane. The play had already been ruled dead. Horrible officiating. Absolutely dreadful.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.02.17 8:55am
Really?
USC had over 500 yards of offense and frankly controlled the game from the beginning. And your analysis is a ref’s whistle cost Stanford the game? Hmmm, good analysis.
By Refsrule on 12.02.17 9:12am
They put up gaudy stats, but they only won by 3 points...
3 points is not much of a margin – a bad call could definitely swing a game that tight
By RickeySteals on 12.02.17 9:17am
Sure
And the multiple balls Stanford fumbled could have gone to SC and the score would have been much worse. The play already mentioned here that was called a backward pass / fumble was a short hair from being a pick 6. My point is, there are numerous plays that Stanford can actually control that would have changed the game. Focusing on the refs is folly.
By Refsrule on 12.02.17 9:25am
So I see you joined SB Nation today
to come over here and make some troll comments.
The refs were horrible; and this is just one instance. That play was pivotal to the game; and if you cannot see that, then you don’t understand football. Huge momentum swing; and the ref blew the play dead before it was over. Bad call. The refs should have reviewed it at a minimum. Are you saying that Dr. Saturday from Yahoo is a Stanford homer? Even he sees that it was a poor call.
All that said, even if the TD had been granted, there’s no guarantee Stanford would have won the game; but it was a pivotal moment in the game when the refs clearly did not make a clean call. At the very minimum, you let the play run until there is no doubt. Then there is the possibility of review.
By Jeff Tarnungus on 12.02.17 9:38am
yea i don't think you need to spend too much time refuting refsrule, that was clearly a big momentum swing.
I love coach shaw as a head coach and recruiter, but if only we could inject some fresh thinking in the offensive game plans next year. I know shaw has a history of not firing assistants, so maybe we keep bloomgren as "OC" to save face and get mark helfrich as an offensive consultant or something. Alabama seems to have gotten some good mileage out of their ex-SC consultants. Why can’t we?
By nerdnationfan on 12.02.17 9:50am
I think there should be an official channel for coaches to log complaints on officiating? come on stanford fans lets make some noise!
This shouldn’t be swept under the rug. David Shaw should look into this and say something. Otherwise how does Pac-12 officiating get some honest feedback and improve for next year. This game basically relegates Stanford to a Chicken Bowl or equivalent when we could have been going to a NY6 bowl. That’s real $$$ difference in terms of revenue and brand building.
By nerdnationfan on 12.02.17 9:35am
There is such a channel
Every Pac12 coach submits tape to the conference on Monday requesting that certain plays be reviewed and explained. Said channel has been in place for over 20 years
By Refsrule on 12.02.17 9:38am
Forward progress was stopped. Stanford got a pretty big break from the same judgment call earlier in the game when it was ruled forward progress was stopped a fraction of a second before the ball was fumbled and recovered by USC a play or two before Stanford’s first touchdown. Stanford had about a dozen red zone snaps on that drive to score and they couldn’t, then they gave up a 99 yard TD drive. Can’t really blame the refs when that happens. I do wish the game last night was worked by the officiating crew with the Asian head ref. They are the only Pac 12 refs who don’t make it a goal to throw 20 flags per game and there were some really light PI calls going against both teams last night.
Good game and good luck in your bowl.
By Shackleford on 12.02.17 10:23am
That wasn't a forward progress whistle
That was a "the ref thinks the player is down" whistle. Which he might have been, but by blowing the whistle so quickly there was no opportunity to review.
By Leland's Axe on 12.02.17 12:22pm
Refs and Shaw
The refs were bought and paid for—by USC, as were the ESPN announcer and color man. But as bad as the refs were, the person who lost the game for Stanford was Coach Shaw. His play-calling and (as he has all year) refusal to blitz the opposition QB, Darnold, gave USC the win. Also, his use of the clock and wasting time-outs (which should also be placed at the feet of Costello who seems to forget about the play clock) helped seal their Stanford’s fate. For the way Love fought for yardage, it’s a shame that effort was wasted by Shaw’s horrible play calling throughout the game and especially in the fourth quarter in the red zone. Because, apparently, of Costello’s slightly injured throwing hand thumb, Shaw called for running plays only when one pass to the end zone would have given Stanford the lead. And that almost lateral pass. I’ve screamed all year that Stanford doesn’t have the blockers at receiver to make such a dangerous play work. Passing down the middle was working as was roll-out passing by Costello. Why throw laterally? Big mistake.
Shaw’s been making bad play-calling all year. I expected him to let Costello loose in this one. Instead, he "went conservative" in the 3rd and part of the fourth quarter and only allowed Costello to "open it up" when the team was down by two scores and time was running out—that is, before he again "went conservative" near the goal line with first and goal.
Notice I’m not going to mention that the refs also added to the loss, especially the USC shagged punt that a USC player touched and a Stanford special teams player fell on before the whistle blew. Shaw didn’t question that non-call, either.
By Dave Levine on 12.02.17 10:41am
I think we all have our gripes about the play calling
but shaw as leader of the football program and recruiter is unparalleled in Stanford history. I’ve personally seen other eras like pre-harbaugh (don’t want to name names but you know who) and I think we can all agree shaw has been a great step forward even from harbaugh. now to take that final step and get into the playoffs, we need some fresh ideas. I was reading an article about saban and how he’s looking for new independent thinkers to challenge him and the status quo. my two cents is to hire an offensive consultant. helfrich comes to mind. he can stay for a year and then go off to his next HC job if it works well like what saban and kiffin worked out.
By nerdnationfan on 12.02.17 10:52am
I think we all have our gripes...
An interesting idea, nerd! I would certainly welcome that IF he called the plays and not Shaw. If Shaw’s still calling the plays next year, look for more frustrating comments and another 9-4 season or worse.
By Dave Levine on 12.03.17 2:54pm
The refs didn’t mess up that punt call. A Stanford player touched the punt first. If a player on the punting team touches a punted ball first, the punt return team is allowed to touch the ball without it being eligible for a turnover unless it’s something like picking it up and then fumbling it.
By Shackleford on 12.02.17 10:55am
The refs didn't mess up that punt call...
From the angle I saw on my big screen HD tv, the Stanford special teams player never touched it.
By Dave Levine on 12.03.17 2:56pm
Darnold went 4-5 for 97 yards when blitzed. Get your stats and analysis right my friend!!
Shaw did the best he could to manage this game. That this game was close with just 1 turnover luck by the card defense speaks volumes to the effort of KJ.
By layman on 12.02.17 9:12pm
Darnold went 4-5 for 97 yards when blitzed...
Stanford didn’t blitz when Darnold passed the bomb from his endzone, a crucial play in the fourth quarter. I watched the game carefully and there were only a handful of times that Stanford blitzed. The linebackers couldn’t cover their speedy wideouts even in the zone and they couldn’t plug the gaping holes in the defensive line, so why not blitz? Ya know?
By Dave Levine on 12.03.17 2:59pm