Why has no reporter asked Duzz why he didnt challenge?

[FreeportPanther]

It’s
Correct. It was a terrible call, but Pitt still should have stopped WF. Their QB was worse than Jurkovec. But Veilleux did nothing wrong, as witnessed by the fact that the same play happens over and over in football today and doesn’t get called the insane way the moron/jobber crew called it that time.

And the ACC sheepishly lying it about it three days after the crime, or Doofus Duz gutlessly blaming Veilleux instead of the refs (understandable given the persecution he’d face) or his terrible defense (which is the true gutless nature of his statements) don’t change that.

“Christian made a good play, it looked good at the time, and still looks good after watching the footage, but they called it how they called it. We still should have gotten a better punt and then stopped their young inexperienced quarterback, but we didn’t get it done. On to next week “ that’s exactly how it should have been said

LOL, Only PItt can figure out how to get a crucial first down on a great call and not get the first down!

Like giving up 2 onside kicks in less than 2 minutes and losing a game.

Or having first and goal at the one in State College and getting zero points!

Or losing to a bad team (GT) who didn't have a HC.

Or giving up 44 points to a meh MAC team and lose the game the year you win the ACC!!

Hey, it's PItt..........we're used to it!!

 

[thebadby2]

I think it probably gets upheld but you never know. The booth may have thought, "come on guys, he could have gotten 3 more yards, lets be real here."

The fact that you can't challenge that type of call may have had something to do with that....

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

LOL, Only PItt can figure out how to get a crucial first down on a great call and not get the first down!

Like giving up 2 onside kicks in less than 2 minutes and losing a game.

Or having first and goal at the one in State College and getting zero points!

Or losing to a bad team (GT) who didn't have a HC.

Or giving up 44 points to a meh MAC team and lose the game the year you win the ACC!!

Hey, it's PItt..........we're used to it!!

Definitely used to latter situations, but those were self induced. Officiating ‘mistakes’ / screw jobs are somewhat worse because the play had been performed SUCCESSFULLY.

But what separates a good program /good coach from, well, the ones WE have, are the determination and defiance to confront such a heinous situation and seize the game back. Especially against a bad team like Wake with possibly the worst QB Pitt had faced in years. But we caved.

Now Coach Doofus faces a real challenge. He was always just OK as far as results (but that’s still much better than his predecessors, I’ll grant). One good season out of 9 is not exactly Saban, not even the corpse of Lou Saban (that guy is a howl in the old NFL films though). However they one thing we could confidently say about Duz up to the last couple seasons is that he didn’t have the brain cramp kind of losses to fecal matter teams like all the other coaches before him. Well, after West Michigan in 21 (costing him a possible playoff chance!), then Georgia Tech last season, and now awful losses to three really bad teams… that accolade is dead. About all that’s left to praise for him is that he keeps the teams competitive in games where we should be slaughtered. Several of those games are now coming up. Can he avoid 1996-like embarrassments?

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Doesn't matter. You have 2 timeouts, you don't know what the replay official is going to do, you challenge the call.

Yep. Challenge it. No reason not to. Probably doesn't get overturned but its subjective so might as well try

 

[NCPitt]

Since Duz doesn’t pay attention to the offense (per his own words) he may not always (or even frequently) even know there’s a situation occurring that he needs to engage in immediately.

He seems to have lost something after 2021. I really think he thought he could just go on auto pilot after it. We’ve all been alarmed that his recruiting has seemed to tail off, losing on continuously on prospects rather than get better after that year (the ravages of increasing NIL by all schools and Pitt’s reluctance to go balls in on it is also part of that, and it may have a depressing aspect on him as well).

One awful season shouldn’t define him, but it gives cause to alarm. Fans, especially those here who seem more in tune with pro sports, don’t seem to realize the precipice a mediocre college program like Pitt is on continuously. You don’t get rewarded for sucking with high draft picks. You suffer even worse in recruiting and it often leads to a death spiral.

You really don't pay attention to anything other than your personal narrative, do you?

 

[NCPitt]

It’s
Correct. It was a terrible call, but Pitt still should have stopped WF. Their QB was worse than Jurkovec. But Veilleux did nothing wrong, as witnessed by the fact that the same play happens over and over in football today and doesn’t get called the insane way the moron/jobber crew called it that time.

And the ACC sheepishly lying it about it three days after the crime, or Doofus Duz gutlessly blaming Veilleux instead of the refs (understandable given the persecution he’d face) or his terrible defense (which is the true gutless nature of his statements) don’t change that.

“Christian made a good play, it looked good at the time, and still looks good after watching the footage, but they called it how they called it. We still should have gotten a better punt and then stopped their young inexperienced quarterback, but we didn’t get it done. On to next week “ that’s exactly how it should have been said

Did you even see what he said on Monday?

 

[Franb]

I don't think that's right. College coaches absolutely are allowed to challenge spots. In fact I would bet that is the call that college coaches challenge the most often (mostly because they already review the other "big stuff"). And college does not have a "you can't challenge any calls in the last two minutes" rule like the NFL does, college coaches can challenge calls at any point in the game (assuming that they have a timeout left).

What have you seen that makes you think the call couldn't have been challenged? I'd like to see that.

I listened to the Pitt mailbag podcast from the P-G writers, and that was their response to the question of a challenge. That, and the fact that no one has brought up the question of a challenge leads me to conclude that it could not be challenged.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I listened to the Pitt mailbag podcast from the P-G writers, and that was their response to the question of a challenge. That, and the fact that no one has brought up the question of a challenge leads me to conclude that it could not be challenged.

OK, so you are listening to people who don't know the rules. Got it.

The spot of the ball can absolutely be challenged in college football. OK, you can't challenge if you think your running back gained six yards on 1st and 10 but the ref only gave him four yards. But you absolutely can challenge spots on plays where the spot makes the difference between a first down or not. As I have said, it is probably the single most challenged type of call in college football.

And there is absolutely not a rule in college football like there is in the NFL that coaches cannot initiate a challenge in the last two minutes.

In short, people who say that the call could not be challenged are simply wrong.

Now the people who say that even if they challenged it almost certainly would not have mattered because they wouldn't overturn a call like that, I agree. It would have been tilting at a windmill. But sometimes you have to do that sort of thing, especially if you have a couple timeouts to burn.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

OK, so you are listening to people who don't know the rules. Got it.

The spot of the ball can absolutely be challenged in college football. OK, you can't challenge if you think your running back gained six yards on 1st and 10 but the ref only gave him four yards. But you absolutely can challenge spots on plays where the spot makes the difference between a first down or not. As I have said, it is probably the single most challenged type of call in college football.

And there is absolutely not a rule in college football like there is in the NFL that coaches cannot initiate a challenge in the last two minutes.

In short, people who say that the call could not be challenged are simply wrong.

Now the people who say that even if they challenged it almost certainly would not have mattered because they wouldn't overturn a call like that, I agree. It would have been tilting at a windmill. But sometimes you have to do that sort of thing, especially if you have a couple timeouts to burn.

And yet nobody cared to ask Duzz why he didnt challenge it. He sure as heck seemed upset with the call. So challenge it!

 

[DruidTM]

So anyone have the ACC official word on the FSU call?

Only seems fair they’d remark publicly on that as well

Or did they single out our game to make us feel like assholes for complaining? Lol

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

So anyone have the ACC official word on the FSU call?

Only seems fair they’d remark publicly on that as well

Or did they single out our game to make us feel like assholes for complaining? Lol

It didnt affect the outcome so it wasnt controversial. They dont comment on every single play. That was clearly a bad call but honestly, Duke, might have not known. Nobody knew that rule.

 

[Franb]

OK, so you are listening to people who don't know the rules. Got it.

The spot of the ball can absolutely be challenged in college football. OK, you can't challenge if you think your running back gained six yards on 1st and 10 but the ref only gave him four yards. But you absolutely can challenge spots on plays where the spot makes the difference between a first down or not. As I have said, it is probably the single most challenged type of call in college football.

And there is absolutely not a rule in college football like there is in the NFL that coaches cannot initiate a challenge in the last two minutes.

In short, people who say that the call could not be challenged are simply wrong.

Now the people who say that even if they challenged it almost certainly would not have mattered because they wouldn't overturn a call like that, I agree. It would have been tilting at a windmill. But sometimes you have to do that sort of thing, especially if you have a couple timeouts to burn.

I am assuming that the people who cover college football for a living, and have commented on this play, would have looked up the rule and based their comments on what they found. Since no one, including the ACC commenters who were certain that the spot was wrong, has suggested that the play could be challenged, and no one on Pitt's staff thought to challenge the play, it seems that the play could not be challenged.

When I first saw the play, my reaction was, why didn't Pitt challenge the call? But since not one media person, or Pitt coach, has suggested that it could be challenged, either they are all wrong, or it could not be challenged. The only explanation that makes sense is that the call on a slide cannot be challenged. And that is what Noah Hiles said - he looked up the rule and it cannot be reviewed, because it is a judgement call.

 

[CJsE]

I am assuming that the people who cover college football for a living, and have commented on this play, would have looked up the rule and based their comments on what they found. Since no one, including the ACC commenters who were certain that the spot was wrong, has suggested that the play could be challenged, and no one on Pitt's staff thought to challenge the play, it seems that the play could not be challenged.

When I first saw the play, my reaction was, why didn't Pitt challenge the call? But since not one media person, or Pitt coach, has suggested that it could be challenged, either they are all wrong, or it could not be challenged. The only explanation that makes sense is that the call on a slide cannot be challenged. And that is what Noah Hiles said - he looked up the rule and it cannot be reviewed, because it is a judgement call.

Then Noah Hiles is dead wrong, just like they were wrong about when a slide technically beings. It doesn't matter when they think a slide begins, the only thing that matter is what's in the rulebook and how referees have been instructed to officiate that rule.

The spot of a slide is not a judgement call, determining IF the QB is sliding is a judgement call. That's why the rulebook specifically states that you can't challenge the call of a fake-slide, but doesn't say you can't challenge the spot of said slide.

I have already posted the relevant sections of the official rulebook earlier in this thread, but this part comes from the official 2023 Replay Rulebook in Part 2 - Instant Replay Mechanics and Guidelines

• The first reviewable situation is whether a player made the line to gain or not, either for a first down or the goal line. If the runner is ruled down, replay can review that spot in relation to the line to gain. If the line to gain is not involved then that spot is not reviewable
• A ball carrier who obviously has given himself up and is sliding feet-first is down and defenseless (Rule 2-27-4).
• As soon as a player starts his slide (typically indicated by the player’s butt starting to drop), the play is over and the runner is down.

The only situation where Narduzzi couldn't challenge is if the replay official already reviewed the play and determined that the call was correct. But Narduzzi never claimed that and no one has said it.

Also, if you need an authority figure to explain how Noah is wrong then here is the NCAA Officiating Coordinator explaining that replay overturned this first down slide upon review.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Then Noah Hiles is dead wrong, just like they were wrong about when a slide technically beings. It doesn't matter when they think a slide begins, the only thing that matter is what's in the rulebook and how referees have been instructed to officiate that rule.

The spot of a slide is not a judgement call, determining IF the QB is sliding is a judgement call. That's why the rulebook specifically states that you can't challenge the call of a fake-slide, but doesn't say you can't challenge the spot of said slide.

I have already posted the relevant sections of the official rulebook earlier in this thread, but this part comes from the official 2023 Replay Rulebook in Part 2 - Instant Replay Mechanics and Guidelines


The only situation where Narduzzi couldn't challenge is if the replay official already reviewed the play and determined that the call was correct. But Narduzzi never claimed that and no one has said it.

Also, if you need an authority figure to explain how Noah is wrong then here is the NCAA Officiating Coordinator explaining that replay overturned this first down slide upon review.

View embedded media

I mean given the general knowledge of the people who have covered college football in this town over the last several decades I can't imagine how anyone could think that any of them are some sort of expert.

And it's not like the NCAA rule book is some sort of secret document. It's readily available on the web for anyone who wants to read it in whole or in part. That call was clearly and obviously challengable. As I said before, that kind of call is probably the most frequently challenged call in college football. The notion that you can't challenge a spot is simply wrong, as is anyone who believes that you can't.

 

[caleco's]

I think it probably gets upheld but you never know. The booth may have thought, "come on guys, he could have gotten 3 more yards, lets be real here."

Because everyone knows the rules but you