Injunction Officiating

I just saw something for the first time, and it's not good. In the second quarter of the South Florida-Rutgers game, South Florida blocked a Rutgers field goal. A Bulls player scooped the ball forward, where it was recoverd by another player. The second guy was hit from behind and lost the ball, where it was recovered by a third one who scored.

The officials conferred, chatted with the replay official in the pressbox, and then threw a flag on the play for illegally batting the ball forward.

Imagine what just went on. The replay booth reviewed a play, and assessed a penalty (a penalty that is in the judgment of the official - not, say, a 12 men on the field penalty that has an objective condition).

The men in the booth (Chris Fowler, Craig James and Doug Flutie) went on and on about how obvious the infraction was, and how they surely would throw a flag, but no one mentioned whether or not it's legal or right for an official to call penalties based on replay. I've never seen it before.

In the vast majority of cases, replay is used to assist in sighting issues (ball spotting and receptions) since refs can't see everything. But in this case, the refs in effect asked for a do-over from the replay booth on their own enforcement of the rules.

1. This sets a terrible precedent of overturning the results of officials' judgments after the play is over, and it could lead to perverse incentives if officials feel they can be bailed out by replay.

2. That being said, if this ruling was legitimate, there's no reason they can't initiate review of the most controversial and game-changing call in the sport - pass interference.