September 5, 2005
Kentucky loses to instant replay
With the introduction of instant replay in the major college conferences this year, we felt relatively comfortable that the great wrongs would be righted. Sadly, that was not the case this weekend and the result wound up costing a fiesty Kentucky football team a win over in-state rival, Louisville.
Don't belive what you read in the headlines. Louisville didn't "run over" Kentucky.
Louisville, one of the "Sizable Collection of at least One but Possibly More", had completely blown a 28-7 halftime lead on the road. ((sarcasm))Despite the complex scheme, Kentucky had broken the bonds of it's SEC heritage ((/sarcasm)) and was clawing it's way back into the game. And then it happened, replay & good officiating failed the underdog.
This game will be on ESPN Classic a couple times this week, so go watch and see if I'm not correct.
WIth 6:27 left in the fourth quarter, Kentucky is threatening to score and tie the game at 31-31. Kentucky has all the momentum in the world. Louisville's defense is absolutely done.
Headed to the goal line, UK QB Andre Woodson fumbles at the Louisville 2 yard-line. Everyone is going nuts when the officials don't stop play to review whether Woodson fumbled or not. But the officials were right - Woodson clearly fumbled.
But the officials were only half right. While lying out of bounds, Woodsen swats at and touches the ball. By rule, the play should be dead and it should be Kentucky's ball at the Louisville 2 yard-line.
But that's not what happened. On the field, officials determine that Louisville’s Brandon Johnson recovered the fumble in bounds, pulling in the ball that Woodson had swatted & spun. The officials give possession to Lousiville on their own 2 yard-line and that's it - basically game over.
Had Kentucky maintained possesion, it's not very difficult (if you watched the game) to project the Wildcats punching it in and tieing a game where they had Louiville firmly on the ropes. Would UK have won? Given the momentum the Cats had and they holes they had exposed in UofL's defense, I think Kentucky could have knocked off Louisville.
Kudos to Kentucky for fighting their way back in this one. I have no doubt that Andre Woodson is going to take this UK team farther than anyone (myself included) had forecasted this season. Despite two early, legit fumbles that put his team behind, he willed his team to win yesterday and --if he had gotten a fair shake-- would have delivered for UK. Unfortunately for Kentucky, I think the Cats lead the SEC in moral victories, and this will just have to be another added to a very long list.
Louisville should be very, very, very grateful that the got the win. The Cards should also be thankful that it was Kentucky exposing their defense and not a more potent offensive threat. Otherwise, UofL would be watching their sugar plum dreams dancing out the window. That said, Kentucky did expose Louisville. Kentucky exposed Louisville.
The Cards are going to have a long week of mending the chinks that the Wildcats found in their armor. Louisville has to fix their secondary and fix it fast or their going to get beat more than once.
More at the Kentucky & Louisville blogs.
Comments:
Cardfan said:
posted on September 6, 2005 12:44 AM — 63.93.158.6 — link — abuse?
most UofL fans thought that last years blowout of UK was sweet and i agree it was, but this was sweeter! Because UK and their fans had something they did not have then...hope..and it was taken away just like that. A much farther fall than from turning off the tv while watching your team get balnked last year. so this is much sweeter...oh, and the second guessing on calls makes it even more enjoyable as the fans have something to whine about this year and will keep the victory for UofL fresher longer. Thanks UK players for a wonderful loss for your fans and another great choke story for our fans.
See ya on the down side again next year at a stadium not built for a racist pig.
Peace!
Bill said:
posted on September 7, 2005 4:35 PM — 24.73.220.46 — link — abuse?
During the FSU Miami game, did anyone see irrefutable evidence that the dropped punt was not recovered by the Seminoles. From all angles shown on tv, the FSU player clearly had knees and elbows in bounds when the ball was covered. Other than the fact that the next play the Noles intercepted the ball and ran it down the the goal line, I saw nothing that should have reversed the on field call. Did anyone else see a reason to reverse the Call?
posted on September 7, 2005 11:18 PM — link — abuse?Kevin Donahue said:
If any part of a player is out of bounds, then the player is out of bounds & the ball is dead. The FSU player didn't recover the ball before he was out of bounds, and I'm an FSU fan. I was PO'd but (in my opinion) he was out of bounds and touched the ball. Good reversal - Miami's ball.
Aaron said:
posted on September 10, 2005 6:59 PM — 12.210.6.245 — link — abuse?
Missing the mark... yet again. Anything associated with University of Kentucky athletics seems to be suffixed with a neatly placed big blue exception these days. I'll start with your error ridden article. The officiating crew was not SEC, they were Big 10. The "run over" article was highlighting Michael Bush's rushing effort which, if you didn't notice, was the deciding offensive performance... especially since Bush was the reason it was "basically game over" for the last 6:21. Stop and think about that... SIX TWENTY ONE. How is Louisville completely on the "ropes" and, by your estimations, completely out of the game when they completely controlled the last half of the fourth? Louisville's lead was never "completely blown"... they led the entire game after a 7-7 tie. Since I was at the game and ESPN Classic didn't show the fumble in question, I can't determine if you're full of it on this call too. It fits quite well with the halftime presentation of UK's "SEC Champion" basketball team.... were we supposed to forget the drumbing by Florida in the SEC Championship game? At least with the game over "Big Blue Nation" can start complaining about something new.
Cary said:
posted on September 18, 2005 10:48 AM — 205.188.116.199 — link — abuse?
Kevin Donahse wrote, "go watch and see if I'm not correct" concerning the Woodson fumble and officials' call.
Reply: As ESPN commentators concluded, you were wrong about Woodson already being out of bounds when he fumbled, the correct call was made, and U of L won the game in spite of a nice comeback by UK. I agree with Aaron; there was still close to half of the 4th quarter left even if UK had scored. U of L showed it could regain control with its running game by running out the clock with UK's defense unable to stop them as they gained another 60 or 70 yeards. UK played a very good 2nd half, but it simply wasn't enough to stop the Cardinals this year.
posted on September 18, 2005 12:42 PM — link — abuse?
You either can't read or you're choosing not to. In the post above, I said the officials were correct that Woodson did fumble. I didn't say Woodsen was out of bounds when he fumbled, as you suggest.
What I said he was that Woodson fell out of bounds and then made contact with the loose ball. Since no one had yet recovered, that made it a dead ball and possession should have been ruled to KY.
So, as I said, go watch and see if I'm correct. (Hint: I am.)
Cary said:
posted on September 18, 2005 4:33 PM — 205.188.116.199 — link — abuse?
Reply to Kevin Donahue: I'll ignore the personal slam and apologize for any confusion in my earlier reply. You did say Woodson fumbled before going out of bounds, something other UK fans hadn't been willing to admit at first, thus my hastily-written response.
However, I have seen the video and stand by my view that the officals made the correct call, lacking the indisputable evidence necessary to overturn it. I also don't believe it would have changed the outcome of the game, though it would have made for a more exciting finish with U of L forced to turn it up a notch instead of just churning it out.
Conclusion: In the end, no one stole the game from UK. Even if the officials made a bad call on the fumble (which I don't believe they did), it's no more debatable than a missed offensive interference penalty on an earlier UK tocuhdown drive. This game, like most, was won and lost regardless of the officiating. In this case, U of L won, UK lost, and it's on to more important games.
posted on September 18, 2005 6:13 PM — link — abuse?
And we're talking about it weeks later, why?
Cary said:
posted on September 18, 2005 7:40 PM — 205.188.116.199 — link — abuse?
Just hoping that logic will overcome the thinking that a bad call or another UK touchdown would have changed the outcome as you seem to believe. See Aaron's earlier comment for clarification since it appears you ignored his well-supported response, admittedly much better than my own. Perhaps you're still smarting over FSU's loss to the Cards in 2002, and that's why you and Pete doubt Louisville is top 15 this season even when the USA Today and AP pollsters don't? And most of your Fanblogs authors? I do realize you finally gave them some credit at the end of last season, but seem to forget Brohm proved himself last year with significant playing time, not just mop-up duty for LeFors. Other than soft spots in the defensive secondary, why not give the Cards some credit, or at least some votes? Catch up to the rest for Week 4.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
I'm a Realist said:
posted on September 5, 2005 7:30 PM — 68.117.208.216 — link — abuse?Thank you. I was hoping someone else would notice that Louisville escaped with a little help from the officials. Good work.