UW Huskies football game

Regarding the public and local media outcry of the UW-BYU football game, I would like to put forth the definitive case as to why the Huskies have only themselves to blame, and NOT the refs. Here's the argument:

Jake Locker committed an unsportsmanlike penalty by tossing the ball straight up into the air to celebrate. You may not agree with the rule, but that is beside the point. Read the rule: he broke it. None of this talk I've heard from local sportscasters that this is "up to the referees discretion." Bullshit. Stop feeding the hungry, angry mob your lies. Here's the rule, plain as day (Rule 9-2-1-a-2 of the 2008 NCAA® Football Rules and Interpretations):

2. After a score or any other play, the player in possession immediately must return the ball to an official or leave it near the dead-ball spot.
This prohibits:
(a) Kicking, throwing, spinning or carrying (including off of the field) the ball any distance that requires an official to retrieve it.
(b) Spiking the ball to the ground [Exception: A forward pass to
conserve time (Rule 7-3-2-d)].
(c) Throwing the ball high into the air (emphasis added)
(d) Any other unsportsmanlike act or actions that delay the game.

Yup, seems pretty clear to me. Obviously, the refs are totally out of control.

Now, if that doesn't destroy the argument that the refs screwed the Dawgs over (although it should), then consider this as well: the Huskies still had a chance to tie the game with a simple 33-yard PAT. Now, I say simple because here are the stats on field goal attempts from 30-39 yards away from the 2007 NCAA D-IA season: over 75% of kicks from that range were made! How many PATs were made (or field goals from 1-19 yards, since an average PAT is 18 yards, this should also be considered)? Glad you asked: just under 98%. Now, that may sound like a big difference, but the math states that it is only about 30% more difficult to make a kick of 35 yards than a "normal" PAT kick. So the degree of difficulty went from a 1 to a 1.3. Are you joking me? Make the PAT!

And the real kicker (pun completely intentional) is that the Huskies front line coudn't keep their freakin' blocking assignments! When you can't block to save your life, it doesn't matter if you're 35 or 3.5 yards away. And yes, I realize that trajectory factors in to this as well (closer to goal = increased angle = reduced chance of being blocked etc.), but did you SEE the Cougars come through? We didn't stop them at all! In this particular case, it wouldn't have made any difference.

Look, I understand that if you're a Husky football fan, it's been a long time since you experienced anything resembling a significant victory. But whining about how the refs screwed us isn't going to make this team any better, and it will only gain us recognition as whiners and losers. Great teams don't blame others, they take responsibility for their results. This is the only road to improvement. Maybe you don't believe in moral victories, but the Huskies took the #15 ranked team in the nation (for what that's worth) to the wire...and almost won! For a team that has won exactly 12 games since 2004, I'd say that should count for something.

And just to set the record straight, I love the Huskies. They are, and always will be, my favorite team (with maybe USC as the only exception--hey! I was born in SoCal!). But even though I'm a huge fan of the Huskies, I'm an even huger fan of truth, reason, and rationality. Time to grow up, sportfans.

NOTE: The Steve Kelley column, as absurd as it is at times, does manage to state at one point that, "Washington can't use one penalty...as an excuse for this loss." He goes on to state that Washington kicker Ryan Perkins could have made the PAT (um, srsly, what about THE BLOCKING!), and that the Huskies looked hapless on defense, allowing the Cougars offense to have their way with them, especially when it counted in the fourth quarter.

But, and you knew their had to be a but, I absolutely hate how he says, "Every call is a judgment call. Every holding penalty that isn't flagged is a judgment call." Everyone always uses holding or pass interference as an example. Well, guess what? Holding and pass interference ARE judgment calls because it is impossible to account for all the different variables involved. Those infractions are not black and white. But having read the rule regarding touchdown celebrations, how could anyone argue that what Jake Locker did wasn't a penalty? That is a case of black and white. Just because some penalties require a degree of subjectivity does not mean that all penalties require a degree of subjectivity. Would Steve argue that refs should be given latitude when it comes to calling a delay of game penalty?

Look, certain situations are easier to judge than others. This is true in life, and it is true in football. Why is this so surprising? Sometimes, the metrics involved in measuring a penalty are well-defined, and in other cases, they are not so well-defined. Just because there is ambiguity in some decisions, does not mean that all decisions should be seen as just as clouded. Not all penalties are created equal, Steve.

How would it have been fair to the BYU fans if the referees had not made that call? We can't argue for inconsistency only when that inconsistency benefits our own team. And as for the holding analogy? Well, again, just because we poorly enforce one rule (one that is much harder to monitor and less specifically worded than an after-touchdown celebration, I might add) does not mean we should poorly enforce other rules.

Human error is part of the game. It's impossible to make every call every time, but when it is clear that there is an infraction, such as in the case of Jake Locker's celebration, a non-call would have been gross negligence on the part of the referees. I am glad that they made the call because even if Locker's celebration wasn't intentionally unsportsmanlike, it clearly violated the rules. Only Huskies fans were upset. If the shoe had been on the other foot, Huskies fans would be applauding the referees call. As it is, I am applauding the referees...as well as objective rationality.