re: Mark May on SportsCenter...

quote:

---

I did in the other thread about this. That actually supports the case even more so that this was a ridiculous call. Since that phrase opens up literally EVERYTHING to potentially be adjudicated as a taunting penalty, the referees are then expected to exercise careful judgement in what they are going to include in their definition of taunting beyond what is explicitly spelled out in the rules. To include a literally split-second action that is almost impossible to notice without the aid of slow motion technology seems to be stretching the intent of this rule, particularly as "excessive" celebration.

---

It had nothing to do with excessive celebration and everything to do with taunting. It's really not that difficult, and you summed up the taunt pretty well in another post.

You also need to understand that when he looked at the UF player, he was also looking directly at the guy who put the flag on him. I'm going to guess it was far easier to see from that angle than it was from the sky cam from behind the play.

He's just lucky it didn't become 30 when he went into the crowd.

I am just happy that we got away with it last week when ODB Jr. Taunted the entire Kentucky defense.
I guess it could be taunting however my issue is that unlike every other rule that takes points off the board, this one will never give an unfair advantage to the team committing the penalty.

quote:

You think the refs are "missing" all of those other calls or do you think they are applying REASON to those other situations?

Quite obviously, it is the latter.
----------
Yes, but those occur during hand-to-hand interaction, this was quite different.

quote:

---

Yes, but those occur during hand-to-hand interaction, this was quite different.

---

Jeezus H. Christ.

Right but point was they never threw a dead ball penalty, I think if wing don't look at the Florida guys he don't get the flag .the flag was thrown because he directed toward them .I still think it was ticky tacky and probably shouldn't have gotten called

quote:

---

The SEC officiating committee already backed the call.

---

This is the same SEC officiating committee that backed the Bama replay booth's call in 2009...

By the letter of the rule, it was a penalty. Fine. Then call it all the time, every time someone (ball carrier or not) celebrates before a play is blown dead.

quote:

---

It had nothing to do with excessive celebration and everything to do with taunting. It's really not that difficult, and you summed up the taunt pretty well in another post.

---

Poor choice of words on my part with respect to excessive celebration. You are correct, it is about the taunt. With that said, a reading of the taunting rules does not cover what Wing did, so as mentioned in my post you quoted, it falls under the "not limited to" caveat and thus a careful application of judgement and reason. I, and apparently others, consider this unreasonable. In my own mind, it's the difference between a quick, slight snagging of the jersey and literally ripping someone's jersey off in terms of holding, for instance.

Considering how almost none of the rest of these taunting infractions are being called, the rule is apparently being applied unevenly and is, by definition, unfair. As it's currently implemented, the NCAA is just asking for a ref to make a similar call when it actually matters and the fanbase will be up in arms about it.

quote:

---

Honest to God. Look at what Wing did. If that's excessive or in any way taunting, then we need to seriously revisit our definitions.

---

I still think the call violated the spirit of what they wanted this rule to do. I hope you don't see this called again in a similar situation.

quote:

---

I still think the call violated the spirit of what they wanted this rule to do.

---

Exactly, it was to stop the flips and dives into the endzone. Not to stop a punter from running it in from 60 yards out...