Historically, the football games between Western Kentucky and Middle Tennessee have been very close and two recent games have gone into overtime. In 20011, Western Kentucky won the game 36-33 in double overtime and last season Middle Tennessee won in triple overtime, 50-47.
Regardless of who wins, I can accept losing provided that the game is decided by the players and not the officials. One recent game that I watched and had trouble accepting the outcome was between Kent State and Marshall. Although Kent State's head coach, Paul Haynes, refused to discuss two controversial personal foul calls that enabled Marshall to win and chose not to make those calls the reason for the loss, fans like myself have a difficult time accepting, particularly when officials' bad calls can decide the outcome of the game. And it is especially frustrating when officials use the replay review and they don't overturn their decision when the replay shows they made the wrong call.
I can appreciate a coach, who when asked about controversial calls, merely says, "No comment," and does not allow his players to discuss them with the press when asked, as in the case with Paul Haynes, but of course fans are free to discuss them on sports boards without fear of reprisals.
So below I have included a post I made on the Kent State Report discussing the two controversial personal foul calls in the Marshall game to show how officials' bad calls can and will decide who wins in close games. Since the Marshall game with Western Kentucky could very well determine the Division winner this season, it is my hope that the players are able to decide who wins the game and not the officials as seen in the Kent State-Marshall game.
"Quarterbacks should wear dresses"
In yesterday's double overtime loss to Marshall, there were a pair of controversial personal foul penalties that led to the ejections of two of Kent State's best defensive backs in the fourth quarter – safety Nate Holley, who recorded 15 tackles before exiting, and cornerback Najee Murray, who had three pass breakups. In the personal foul penalty involving Holley, Marshall's quarterback, Chase Linton, slid going for a first down.
Although Holley's helmet appeared to make contact with Linton's helmet, the hit was not flagrant. Nevertheless, Holley was flagged and ejected for targeting. Consequently, the infraction extended the drive, and Marshall scored a touchdown to give the Herd the lead 20-19.
On Murray's personal foul penalty, Marshall was attempting a two-point conversion when Murray broke up a pass to Yurachek with a hard tackle. Although the replay clearly showed that Murray did not hit Yurachek above the shoulder pads, he also was called for targeting and thrown out of the game. Given a second chance, Marshall again went for two, converted, and led by three at that point in the game.
If the correct call had been made, Marshall would had led by only one and not three points with 12:32 left in the game. But the difference proved significant because Kent kicked a 33-yard field goal with 4:55 to play that would have given the Flashes the lead and most likely the win considering how well Kent's defense was playing.
It's bad enough that Kent State loses a game it should have won but now the Flashes have to play their next game against Miami without two of their best defensive players for the first half due to the suspension rule.
Whether a player deserves an ejection on top of a penalty is subject to debate -- particularly when one half of a game without a top player (or two top players in Kent's case) can alter the outcome of the game and perhaps the entire course of a season given the significance of conference games.
In both cases, neither Holley nor Murray's hits were severe enough to warrant a suspension in my view. Even the TV announcer thought Murray's targeting penalty would be overruled when the officials looked at the replay but unfortunately it wasn't and that bad call was the deciding factor in who won the game.
"I think that there are some gray areas, but people do the very best they can to coach to avoid these situations and also to call it on the field," Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio said after Spartans linebacker Riley Bullough was ejected for a targeting call against an Air Force receiver on a pass play over the middle. "Some hits are not intentional," said Dantonio.
"I think it should be determined sometimes on the severity of the hit in my mind. I can tell you that a game suspension is very difficult when you only have 12 games to play guaranteed to you. That's difficult to comprehend for a player."
I agree with Dantonio. And anyone who saw the questionable plays by Holley and Murray knows neither one was severe enough to warrant suspensions. I understand the purpose of the ruling but some of these targeting calls are way off base and diminish the integrity of the game.
Perhaps Jack Lambert was right when he said, "Quarterbacks should wear dresses." That certainly seems the way football is played today.
Regardless of who wins, I can accept losing provided that the game is decided by the players and not the officials. One recent game that I watched and had trouble accepting the outcome was between Kent State and Marshall. Although Kent State's head coach, Paul Haynes, refused to discuss two controversial personal foul calls that enabled Marshall to win and chose not to make those calls the reason for the loss, fans like myself have a difficult time accepting, particularly when officials' bad calls can decide the outcome of the game. And it is especially frustrating when officials use the replay review and they don't overturn their decision when the replay shows they made the wrong call.
I can appreciate a coach, who when asked about controversial calls, merely says, "No comment," and does not allow his players to discuss them with the press when asked, as in the case with Paul Haynes, but of course fans are free to discuss them on sports boards without fear of reprisals.
So below I have included a post I made on the Kent State Report discussing the two controversial personal foul calls in the Marshall game to show how officials' bad calls can and will decide who wins in close games. Since the Marshall game with Western Kentucky could very well determine the Division winner this season, it is my hope that the players are able to decide who wins the game and not the officials as seen in the Kent State-Marshall game.
"Quarterbacks should wear dresses"
In yesterday's double overtime loss to Marshall, there were a pair of controversial personal foul penalties that led to the ejections of two of Kent State's best defensive backs in the fourth quarter – safety Nate Holley, who recorded 15 tackles before exiting, and cornerback Najee Murray, who had three pass breakups. In the personal foul penalty involving Holley, Marshall's quarterback, Chase Linton, slid going for a first down.
Although Holley's helmet appeared to make contact with Linton's helmet, the hit was not flagrant. Nevertheless, Holley was flagged and ejected for targeting. Consequently, the infraction extended the drive, and Marshall scored a touchdown to give the Herd the lead 20-19.
On Murray's personal foul penalty, Marshall was attempting a two-point conversion when Murray broke up a pass to Yurachek with a hard tackle. Although the replay clearly showed that Murray did not hit Yurachek above the shoulder pads, he also was called for targeting and thrown out of the game. Given a second chance, Marshall again went for two, converted, and led by three at that point in the game.
If the correct call had been made, Marshall would had led by only one and not three points with 12:32 left in the game. But the difference proved significant because Kent kicked a 33-yard field goal with 4:55 to play that would have given the Flashes the lead and most likely the win considering how well Kent's defense was playing.
It's bad enough that Kent State loses a game it should have won but now the Flashes have to play their next game against Miami without two of their best defensive players for the first half due to the suspension rule.
Whether a player deserves an ejection on top of a penalty is subject to debate -- particularly when one half of a game without a top player (or two top players in Kent's case) can alter the outcome of the game and perhaps the entire course of a season given the significance of conference games.
In both cases, neither Holley nor Murray's hits were severe enough to warrant a suspension in my view. Even the TV announcer thought Murray's targeting penalty would be overruled when the officials looked at the replay but unfortunately it wasn't and that bad call was the deciding factor in who won the game.
"I think that there are some gray areas, but people do the very best they can to coach to avoid these situations and also to call it on the field," Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio said after Spartans linebacker Riley Bullough was ejected for a targeting call against an Air Force receiver on a pass play over the middle. "Some hits are not intentional," said Dantonio.
"I think it should be determined sometimes on the severity of the hit in my mind. I can tell you that a game suspension is very difficult when you only have 12 games to play guaranteed to you. That's difficult to comprehend for a player."
I agree with Dantonio. And anyone who saw the questionable plays by Holley and Murray knows neither one was severe enough to warrant suspensions. I understand the purpose of the ruling but some of these targeting calls are way off base and diminish the integrity of the game.
Perhaps Jack Lambert was right when he said, "Quarterbacks should wear dresses." That certainly seems the way football is played today.
