I'm betting that's exactly what established that they didn't have indisputable evidence to overturn the call.
Dennard's arm was under Bell's, preventing him to catch the ball. Like I said earlier, they were calling PI's all day, barely allowing any kind of contact, so that is why I don't think it was a horrible call. Would I have called it? No, but I am not an official, and who knows if Dennard was warned before that, and it was the ref's last straw. Either way, that was two weeks ago, and I just don't think that call ruined the game for them. They had their chance, the lead and all to win, but they couldn't hold on. Their fault, not ours, not the refs.
The biggest problem I have with people complaining about both of these calls is the assumption that they decided the game. That there is no possible way for Nebraska to win if the calls are made differently.
No, the PI didn't doom Sparty, either. Nebraska was in control of the game, they were in Maher's chip shot range, and even after the PI call, MSU just needed to hold Nebraska out of the endzone from 5 yards out for two plays, knowing full well that Nebraska was going to pass. On top of all of that, I dispute that the call was even a bad one. Was it pass interference? Probably not. But then, Nebraska had been flagged for at least 3 phantom DPI's already in the game, all of them extending MSU drives. If your metric is consistency, the flag had to come out there, because there's no doubt that there was contact, and in that game, contact of any kind = defensive pass interference.
Yeah, this is probably the single line of reasoning that has turned me off to PSU's case post game. "Nebraska's other points would have NEVER happened had PSU been given that touchdown." OH REALLY? Because that 70 yard punt could have *never* happened with Nebraska down by three instead of up by four? Because Nebraska's offense which had rolled up 250 yards in a quarter and a half with a balanced attack was legitimately stoned by PSU's defense, not because we were incessently running the ball trying to burn clock?
With all the video I've seen, from every available angle, zoomed in and frame-by-frame, I'm firmly in the camp that thinks that whatever was called on the field would stand in this situation. Neither would be a terrible call. I still don't consider what we see in this .gif to be conclusive one way or another. Everything I've seen leaves me believing that in the few frames before the ball breaks the plane, it looks like the ball might be moving. I think that the question of whether or not the ball was coming out prior to him crossing the line is what they weren't able to conclusively answer, and thus they let the call stand. It's a tough break for PSU, a lucky one for us, and one that could have gone either way. That happens in this sport, and like most of you, I don't think it would have changed the outcome of the game.
Absolutely. The goal of any referee is to not be the story the next day. Sometimes there are close calls where they don't have a choice, but in both the MSU and PSU games (and frankly the UM game had it been closer), they failed in that regard. And yes, conferences review the officiating crew each week, and teams are allowed to submit video to the league for review if they think the refs blew it on something.
Yeah it all comes out more or less even in the end. What I think happened in A&M and Nebraska's cases was that the officials know who writes their checks, so if they screw up, they want to be sure they screw up in favor of the powers that be. And in Nebraska's case, I think the refs just hated Pelini (can't say I blame them) and knew they could get away with pretty much anything since Nebraska was a pariah in the league that year.
