MAC is appealing to have WM recognized as the winner of the game.
https://lite.cnn.com/2026/09/08/sport/mac-appeals-michigan-clock-controversy-win
We'll see where that goes.
@hoosiermacerific you can stick your head in the ground and say whatever, but there's been enough analysis now to show the play took less than 9 seconds and the refs got the call right. The PR and all of that might be a mess, but the correct call was made.
More analysis showing players at different points on the field at the same time with synched clocks because of NBC's lagging video https://twitter.com/spegg08/status/2097532988489650379?s=20
I thought this was a pretty good read.
This part in particular sums up the sentiment and outrage factor. Just another NCAA soft spot that will get poked and prodded.
The NCAA rulebook can be contradictory.
A section on replays (Rule 12-6-1[c]) states that "all reviews shall be based upon video evidence provided by and coming directly from the televised production of the game or from other video means available to the replay official that is also available to the television producer."
This makes sense because if millions are seeing one thing, telling them it's another is exactly how you get into this mess. It doesn't appear NBC had access to the Big Ten's video.
Yet a section on how time is kept (Rule 3-4[a]) gives full control to game officials: "Playing time shall be kept with a game clock that may be either a stopwatch operated by the line judge, back judge, field judge or side judge, or a game clock operated by an assistant under the direction of the appropriate judge."
This also makes sense because why should a television broadcaster be the determining factor?
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
@gros-louis I disagree, just in that what I heard (think it was former ref Mike Periera on Josh Pate) that the protocol referees are instructed to follow is on time issues, follow the stadium and TV clocks because that's what people see and to help eliminate the possibility of controversy as has erupted here. Agree with that 100%. If the B10 keeps it's own clock, then it needs to be synched to the stadium clock and that is what should be displayed on TV.
And, the story you're referencing is down to saying that they deserved another play because he thinks there was .03 of a second on the clock. Three one hundreths of a second. In football, where we've never gotten into 10/ths of a second, let alone hundredths. I don't even think your explanation makes sense, because you're saying the networks video was lagging. If that were the case, it would be behind actual events, meaning it would show time remaining, not zeros.
Galen Clavio on the Crimsoncast (or whatever variation of his show he posted on youtube) got into all kinds of detail about why there were different clocks and time displayed, but if Periera is right, and refs are told to use the stadium/synched TV clocks, then the fact that another clock/time is kept by the B10 is irrelevant. At the end of his segment, he said "it's bad for the B10 if WMU wins." And, that's 100% correct, so you can't let the B10 be involved in the decision. Refs should have made (and did!) their judgement on the stadium clock. Game was over and WMU got screwed.
@gros-louis I disagree, just in that what I heard (think it was former ref Mike Periera on Josh Pate) that the protocol referees are instructed to follow is on time issues, follow the stadium and TV clocks because that's what people see and to help eliminate the possibility of controversy as has erupted here. Agree with that 100%. If the B10 keeps it's own clock, then it needs to be synched to the stadium clock and that is what should be displayed on TV.
And, the story you're referencing is down to saying that they deserved another play because he thinks there was .03 of a second on the clock. Three one hundreths of a second. In football, where we've never gotten into 10/ths of a second, let alone hundredths. I don't even think your explanation makes sense, because you're saying the networks video was lagging. If that were the case, it would be behind actual events, meaning it would show time remaining, not zeros.
Galen Clavio on the Crimsoncast (or whatever variation of his show he posted on youtube) got into all kinds of detail about why there were different clocks and time displayed, but if Periera is right, and refs are told to use the stadium/synched TV clocks, then the fact that another clock/time is kept by the B10 is irrelevant. At the end of his segment, he said "it's bad for the B10 if WMU wins." And, that's 100% correct, so you can't let the B10 be involved in the decision. Refs should have made (and did!) their judgement on the stadium clock. Game was over and WMU got screwed.
There is no protocol for the NCAA. Pereira was speaking about NFL protocol, because that's his experience.
The Athletic:
“It is my understanding that if there is a discrepancy between the video and replay command center versus the television network video that everybody sees, that replay is to use the TV video,” Pereira told The Athletic Sunday. “And that is the same protocol in the NFL, in the UFL. It’s the same. You use the footage that everybody sees if there is a discrepancy.”
That is not, however, spelled out in the NCAA’s Instant Replay Case Book. There is no reference to which clock to defer to if there is a discrepancy.
Within the Timing section of the Instant Replay Case Book, there are references directing officials to use “the game clock superimposed on the replay monitor.”
The bolded section is exactly what they did. By the book. Because you can see right here, that the replay monitor has 0:01 on it. And that's why initially the MAC was in agreement with the call. But then they either listened to Pereira or someone else and decided that even though there was time left on the clock (they even said so in their most recent statement) that protocol wasn't followed. But there is no established protocol, so that's a moot point.
Here's some additional context:
https://twitter.com/ChrisVannini/status/2097495401649545332?s=20
By the way, football already uses tenths of seconds, you just don't see it like you do for basketball. Different clock setups. Football clocks are absolute, meaning the clock won't move from :01 to :00 until every tenth of a second has elapsed.@gros-louis I disagree, just in that what I heard (think it was former ref Mike Periera on Josh Pate) that the protocol referees are instructed to follow is on time issues, follow the stadium and TV clocks because that's what people see and to help eliminate the possibility of controversy as has erupted here. Agree with that 100%. If the B10 keeps it's own clock, then it needs to be synched to the stadium clock and that is what should be displayed on TV.
And, the story you're referencing is down to saying that they deserved another play because he thinks there was .03 of a second on the clock. Three one hundreths of a second. In football, where we've never gotten into 10/ths of a second, let alone hundredths. I don't even think your explanation makes sense, because you're saying the networks video was lagging. If that were the case, it would be behind actual events, meaning it would show time remaining, not zeros.
Galen Clavio on the Crimsoncast (or whatever variation of his show he posted on youtube) got into all kinds of detail about why there were different clocks and time displayed, but if Periera is right, and refs are told to use the stadium/synched TV clocks, then the fact that another clock/time is kept by the B10 is irrelevant. At the end of his segment, he said "it's bad for the B10 if WMU wins." And, that's 100% correct, so you can't let the B10 be involved in the decision. Refs should have made (and did!) their judgement on the stadium clock. Game was over and WMU got screwed.
:00.9 = :01
:00.5 = :01
:00.1 = :01
:00.0 = :00
@gros-louis I disagree, just in that what I heard (think it was former ref Mike Periera on Josh Pate) that the protocol referees are instructed to follow is on time issues, follow the stadium and TV clocks because that's what people see and to help eliminate the possibility of controversy as has erupted here. Agree with that 100%. If the B10 keeps it's own clock, then it needs to be synched to the stadium clock and that is what should be displayed on TV.
And, the story you're referencing is down to saying that they deserved another play because he thinks there was .03 of a second on the clock. Three one hundreths of a second. In football, where we've never gotten into 10/ths of a second, let alone hundredths. I don't even think your explanation makes sense, because you're saying the networks video was lagging. If that were the case, it would be behind actual events, meaning it would show time remaining, not zeros.
Galen Clavio on the Crimsoncast (or whatever variation of his show he posted on youtube) got into all kinds of detail about why there were different clocks and time displayed, but if Periera is right, and refs are told to use the stadium/synched TV clocks, then the fact that another clock/time is kept by the B10 is irrelevant. At the end of his segment, he said "it's bad for the B10 if WMU wins." And, that's 100% correct, so you can't let the B10 be involved in the decision. Refs should have made (and did!) their judgement on the stadium clock. Game was over and WMU got screwed.
https://twitter.com/ZachLinfield/status/2097707265545371886?s=20
@gros-louis Your response is rife with contradictions. According to AI, Pereira was an NCAA ref for 14 years before working in the NFL. Assuming with his job now, he keeps in contact with refs and monitors and is aware of what they are being told. Then it says there's no reference to which clock to refer to if a discrepancy, and then the very next sentence it says there are references directing them to use the game clock, superimposed on the replay monitor.
Secondly, you're quoting Chris Vannini. Never heard of him, but AI says senior writer for The Athletic, who covers college football, dogs, pro wrestling, etc (believe that's from his X profile)... and he says The Hawkeye technology is the best. Sorry, that doesn't hold water. Pereira > Vannini. So Periera, who was a college official for 14 years and now is a paid expert on officiating and rulings, says there is a standard, and it's the same one the NFL follows, which means it is a standard for college refs, which is what he's commenting on. So, it sounds like the problem is that the B10 doesn't follow the common-sense approach the rest of college football and the NFL does, for obvious reasons. Again, if there's a better Hawkeye Technology clock, I'm all for it, IF it's what's displayed on TV and used as the game clock and not kept in some back room. It's not changing, UM was declared teh winner, but under extreme distrust and foolishness, and now they have the egg on their face to show why it's not how the rest of college football and NFL refs do it.
@gros-louis Now you're quoting/referencing a UM play by play guy? C'mon Dude. My Mom says I'm the bestest and 100% honest all the time, but that's not relevant here either. I can accept there's better technology and that should be used, when it's the game clock and what's shown on the broadcast and synched, as apparently, everyone but the B10 does. Bad calls still happen all the time. I can also accept that maybe there was .01-.03 on the clock when the defender touches the ball, and that UM folks could feel screwed because of that, and could even try and prove it with this new, special clock. But, they shouldn't have changed the outcome of the game or call based on it, if it's not the synched stadium and TV clock. You and Chris Vannini have convinced me a better clock exists, my argument is that it shouldn't have been used to change the outcome of a game, until it's the synched clock everyone in the stadium and on TV sees.
I didn't know who Zach Linfield is/was...what does him being a PxP guy for Michigan have to do with the video he recorded that clearly shows :01 on the game scoreboard? Is his video somehow biased? lol C'mon.@gros-louis Now you're quoting/referencing a UM play by play guy? C'mon Dude. My Mom says I'm the bestest and 100% honest all the time, but that's not relevant here either. I can accept there's better technology and that should be used, when it's the game clock and what's shown on the broadcast and synched, as apparently, everyone but the B10 does. Bad calls still happen all the time. I can also accept that maybe there was .01-.03 on the clock when the defender touches the ball, and that UM folks could feel screwed because of that, and could even try and prove it with this new, special clock. But, they shouldn't have changed the outcome of the game or call based on it, if it's not the synched stadium and TV clock. You and Chris Vannini have convinced me a better clock exists, my argument is that it shouldn't have been used to change the outcome of a game, until it's the synched clock everyone in the stadium and on TV sees.
There was no standard for the NCAA. Period. It is being implemented now.@gros-louis Your response is rife with contradictions. According to AI, Pereira was an NCAA ref for 14 years before working in the NFL. Assuming with his job now, he keeps in contact with refs and monitors and is aware of what they are being told. Then it says there's no reference to which clock to refer to if a discrepancy, and then the very next sentence it says there are references directing them to use the game clock, superimposed on the replay monitor.
Secondly, you're quoting Chris Vannini. Never heard of him, but AI says senior writer for The Athletic, who covers college football, dogs, pro wrestling, etc (believe that's from his X profile)... and he says The Hawkeye technology is the best. Sorry, that doesn't hold water. Pereira > Vannini. So Periera, who was a college official for 14 years and now is a paid expert on officiating and rulings, says there is a standard, and it's the same one the NFL follows, which means it is a standard for college refs, which is what he's commenting on. So, it sounds like the problem is that the B10 doesn't follow the common-sense approach the rest of college football and the NFL does, for obvious reasons. Again, if there's a better Hawkeye Technology clock, I'm all for it, IF it's what's displayed on TV and used as the game clock and not kept in some back room. It's not changing, UM was declared teh winner, but under extreme distrust and foolishness, and now they have the egg on their face to show why it's not how the rest of college football and NFL refs do it.
an explicit rule deferring to the TV broadcast graphics clock did not exist in the written NCAA rulebook prior to the incident, but the NCAA immediately issued a clarification memo.
-
At the time of the game: The NCAA Instant Replay Case Book only required that time be restored based on clear video evidence from a "game clock superimposed on the replay monitor." It did not explicitly define what to do if the network TV graphics clock and the internal stadium clock feed were out of sync.
-
The NCAA's Immediate Clarification: Following the controversy, NCAA Coordinator of Officials Ron Snodgrass issued an official memo to clarify the timing protocol:
-
The official game time remains the in-stadium clock.
-
For replay reviews, the replay official must use the embedded game clock contained within the main program (broadcast) feed.
-
If no embedded game clock is available in that feed, officials are instructed to use the game-clock graphic displayed on the TV broadcast.
-
The memo acknowledged that had this standardized interpretation been explicitly enforced, time would not have been added back, as the broadcast feed indicated the clock had expired.
Key Takeaway
While Hawk-Eye technology provides superior accuracy compared to the naked eye or standard stadium clocks, the Michigan incident exposed a procedural flaw: if the replay system uses a different video sync than what millions of television viewers are seeing, it destroys public confidence in the call. This is why the NCAA immediately clarified that replay booths must rely on the broadcast program feed clock to keep transparency consistent.
@gros-louis The video you posted, clearly showed :01 for sure, but from what I saw the play was no longer in view. Besides, I don't even think it's being argued that the video feed and stadium clock were out of synch, they were synched, but it was the fact that the B10 was using a different timing system for the replay video; that's the Hawkeye system you're talking about, no? The general public didn't have that video, correct, I mean, except for UM's play by play guy?
Basically, everything you've posted, including the NCAA clarification is 100% consistent with what Periera said: "everyone references the video and stadium clock"... except the B10 which introduced some other timing system for their replay. Stinks to high heaven and was 100% anticipatable and self-inflicted. Call shouldn't have been changed.
So Zach Linfield's view of the scoreboard clock could only be seen by him? Huh?@gros-louis The video you posted, clearly showed :01 for sure, but from what I saw the play was no longer in view. Besides, I don't even think it's being argued that the video feed and stadium clock were out of synch, they were synched, but it was the fact that the B10 was using a different timing system for the replay video; that's the Hawkeye system you're talking about, no? The general public didn't have that video, correct, I mean, except for UM's play by play guy?
Basically, everything you've posted, including the NCAA clarification is 100% consistent with what Periera said: "everyone references the video and stadium clock"... except the B10 which introduced some other timing system for their replay. Stinks to high heaven and was 100% anticipatable and self-inflicted. Call shouldn't have been changed.
I know 3 people that were in the stadium at the game. I've seen probably a half dozen other videos from phones from the stadium. All said/showed that when the play ended, there was :01 on the stadium scoreboard. So Hawkeye or no Hawkeye, NBC fucked it up.
End of the day, when the play started, there were 9 seconds on the clock. It's been shown over and over again that the play took less than 9 seconds to happen, so the call that was made was the correct one.
@gros-louis Last post on a subject I actually care very little about. I think we're arguing 2 different things, you're arguing whether there was actually any time once the defender touches the ball. I've conceded time and again, that's entirely possible. I'm saying the refs should not have consulted video beyond the synched scoreboard and TV feed to determine that. That was the refs "policy" as related by an actual ref, who is now paid to monitor such topics. There are the rules, and there are how officials are told to interpret those rules. Apparently in every case in all areas of college and pro football, the refs are told to use the synched video of the scoreboard and TV broadcast to make the call, for obvious reasons. But in the B10, when faced with a top team like UM facing a loss that is bad for the conference, they decide to use a different "special private" video source. Trust us, they say. I don't care if that video shows 20 seconds on the clock, the interpretation policy dictates they should use the video from the synched broadcast/stadium feed, like all other refs are told to do. Now you're saying multiple people say the scoreboard video showed a second left. If that were the case, why did the refs need to consult another source to determine there was still time, and why the outrage from everyone? And, why was the explanation "latency" in the video feed to explain why it showed zero? Latency would mean the network video feed was behind the stadium clock, not ahead. How much you want to bet every one of your "sources" who were watching the stadium clock instead of the most impactful play of the game, are UM fans or had money on UM? My final piece of evidence: you're agreeing with Dave Portnoy about a matter involving UM. Almost defacto proof you're wrong.