They played cover zero, problem was that the blitzers were totally inept and put no pressure on Ewers. I immediately thought it was the right call to force a check down by overloading the blocking scheme, but the players didn't make the play when it mattered most.

Safety bit on the WR's route break toward the 1st down marker, but then WR turned upfield in a 2nd move. Just a well-designed route. WR robably breaks it back off short to the 1st down marker if the DB stays deep after the double-move.

Onionman said:

---

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

Sign me up to work in the replay booth.

I'm good at watching replays on TV and making the correct call.

---

Well go ahead and become an official and fix this mess. What are you waiting for?

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

Pretty simple, it's even written out in bullet points in the rule book.

Here's the thing, the refs even those with a modicum of integrity throw the flag. There was no flag thrown on the targeting play; it was a booth buzz for time to review.

Not a single one of those should ever call another game.

Looked like a Bateman run operation. Put a damn 6'6" (like Noah Thomas) receiver at the goal line and let him play the ball. It shouldn't be that hard.

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

As the OP I assume you're considering me one of the loudest critics here….well wrong, I've spent more than a minute in every single area you mentioned. So I'll repeat again, you don't let a receiver get behind you as the safety there. Ever. I have no issue with the C-0 and love going after Ewers. Wasn't disguised well and Is have likely changed the call when it was obvious Ewers recognized it early and was making his own change.

Also, I'm not going to critique refs full speed calls. For the most part it's very difficult. But not getting slow motion replay cals right over and over like we see happen is either incompetence or bias. It's not difficult.

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

The call wasn't made on the field. It was called in the booth where they had plenty of time to view and discuss. Anyone who doesn't think that wasn't targeting - is thinking with their pocketbook and not the rulebook.

The true missed targeting call of the game. Dude literally lunged to the head/neck of Isaiah Bond. pic.twitter.com/r3iYp9Z4cC

— J❌red. (@SerJaredd) January 2, 2025

Arizona State had two ineligible linemen downfield… pic.twitter.com/vUkiezCaW1

— Hook'em Headlines (@HookemHeadlines) January 1, 2025

Trying to learn why this wasn't an Offensive Pass Interference when Skattebo shot his elbow back into Taaffe's chest to create separation. INSTEAD, it was called on Texas. 🤯 Looks like the powers that be were tired of blowouts... #RefCalls pic.twitter.com/CfTd4zpSDg

— Snarkisian (@Snarkisian) January 1, 2025

safety got caught with his eyes in the backfield ready to watch the DL/LB get the game winning sack.. safety wanted to watch it unfold.

MasonStorm said:

---

The true missed targeting call of the game. Dude literally lunged to the head/neck of Isaiah Bond. pic.twitter.com/r3iYp9Z4cC

— J❌red. (@SerJaredd) January 2, 2025

---

At the time, I thought the same thing, but they showed another angle where the defender clearly lead with the shoulder and hit the receiver square in the chest.

MasonStorm said:

---

Arizona State had two ineligible linemen downfield… pic.twitter.com/vUkiezCaW1

— Hook'em Headlines (@HookemHeadlines) January 1, 2025

---

The person conveniently doesn't show the original LOS, which I think was the three. In college, a lineman is allowed to get three yards down field. It's certainly close, but let's say they call it. Since there was also defensive holding called, you get offsetting penalties. Not really much of a win.

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

Hindsight with infinite replays is 20/10…which is twice as good as perfect.

MasonStorm said:

---

Trying to learn why this wasn't an Offensive Pass Interference when Skattebo shot his elbow back into Taaffe's chest to create separation. INSTEAD, it was called on Texas. 🤯 Looks like the powers that be were tired of blowouts... #RefCalls pic.twitter.com/CfTd4zpSDg

— Snarkisian (@Snarkisian) January 1, 2025

---

The DB is the clearly the one who initiated contact. The receiver is allowed to push off a DB who is already holding him/running into him. This was the correct call.

Also, it's tough to use an example where your DB clearly rips the receiver's helmet off and complain.

None of these examples are nearly as obvious as the no call on targeting.

Onionman said:

---

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

Sign me up to work in the replay booth.

I'm good at watching replays on TV and making the correct call.

---

Yep

I best most fans could do a good job getting the calls right

I know I could.
That was targeting if there ever was targeting

That's why the only logical explanation is that espn was protecting the sips

Nm

Im going to guess as well that it's not just a single official making the replay call without input from any other official. Like others have said, the terrible blitz on 4th and 13 cost them the game. Any other defensive call and the game ended right there.

Even if they'd gotten the targeting call, asu still needed to drive down the field close enough to get a field goal. With with their kicker would've needed to be really close.

I agree with that it was targeting, but it was not the reason ASU lost the game

A targeting call gets a first and into the outskirts of FG range. With less than a minute in regulation.

…but sure. That wasn't a game changing non-call.

Sword543w said:

---

I agree with that it was targeting, but it was not the reason ASU lost the game

---

You shouldn't comment anymore.

The worst part about the corruption in the game and the obvious non targeting call bc of money.

The entire reason that rule was supposedly put into place was for player safety. The ASU WR was Fed up from the targeting hit. And they still did not make the right call bc of Money, Texas-Ohio State, whatever.

Texas gets a golden ticket to the final 4 and stills needs officiating corruption.

Sword543w said:

---

I agree with that it was targeting, but it was not the reason ASU lost the game

---

It gave the whorns a chance at a walk-off field goal when it should have been ASU with the shot at a kick or OT. Yeah, I'd say it played a REALLY big part.

sleepybeagle said:

---

Stud Cantrell said:

---

Every person who criticizes officiating on a message board or public forum should serve as an official in some capacity to give proper perspective to their viewpoint. The loudest critics of coaches, players and game officials have never spent a minute in those areas, yet they purport to have infinite knowledge of what it takes to be at least successful, if not perfect in those endeavors.

---

The call wasn't made on the field. It was called in the booth where they had plenty of time to view and discuss. Anyone who doesn't think that wasn't targeting - is thinking with their pocketbook and not the rulebook.

---

Holy double negative smoke. I don't know what the hell you are saying, lol….