Having obssessed about the game all week and now reading King Kaufman's article and all the letters, I'm confused. Why is Oklahoma somehow the bad guy? Since you just had jury duty, I think a crime metaphor is apt here. The remarks that Oklahoma is over-reacting and whining sound to me like complaining that crime victims should just shut up and take the crime like a man.

Its not like Oklahoma is complaining about every single call that went against them. We are complaining only about the one call - the one call that made the difference between certain victory and possible defeat. The Sooner players and coaches have owned up to their own roles in the defeat - the lack of defensive stops, the blocked field goal, the failures to punch into the end zone and so on. But this is sports. Shit happens.

Lets not forget that the Ducks were winning by a touchdown at half time. They had held OU to 6 points! They then "let" Oklahoma score 27 points to get ahead by 13 points in the fourth quarter. The Ducks "let" Adrian Peterson rush for over 210 yards and a 20 yard touchdown on 4th down. The Ducks would not have needed the onside kick if they simply held on to their lead in the second half. I mention this simply to point out that arguments that Oklahoma - or any team - should not "let" themselves get into a position to lose the game are ridiculous. No team in any sport can entirely control what happens on the field. Thats why you play the game.

Kaufman didn't get to the truth until the very end of his article. Cheating. The PAC 10 cheated. I know everyone wants to simply chalk up the bad call to human error. Everyone, even Oklahomans, can forgive human error. But what if wasn't human error? What if it was cheating? Isn't that question the elephant in the room that no one is talking about?

Oklahoma's outrage is not about being unable to forgive human error, nor is it about replay issues. We are outraged because the onside kick call has the odor of corruption about it.

Actually there were three blown calls. The 2 on the kickoff, touching the ball early and possesion, and the interference. Sure officials make mistakes but 3 on 2 plays with a minute to go? That's sheer incompetence. The on field refs should be suspeneded for the rest of the year and the replay ref fired. BTW, the replay guy had access to all the same angles as the tv audience.

I think you missed one of my main points.

You cannot legitimately compare alleged errors related to snap judgments on the field that are not reviewable under the rules with the on-side kick play because the on-side kick play was reviewed.

Indeed, if there were no video review, OU would have little to squabble about since the issue as to who touched the ball first and where was a close one, and the on-the-field call was within the range of reason on such a bang-bang play. For example, Oregon fans complain about an offensive pass interference call that was not made on one of OU's touchdown. Likewise, there was a defensive pass interference call that was not made against Oregon when one of its DB held OU's receiver who was streaking up the field for the ball on another play Both calls were incorrect, but there is nothing to complain about because they are not reviewable.

However, the video evidence, which was supposed to be reviewed is crystal clear on the disputed issue, the PAC 10 has admitted that and even the re-play official now says he blew the call.

Assume that you are an Oregon fan, and OU's Malcom Kelly streaks down the sideline with a 50 yard or so pass completion for a TD (much like in the game) but with about 1 minute left, but the video replay shows he clearly stepped out of bounds (as happened in the game). The video is reviewed, and shows him stepping out bounds, but the annoucement is made that there is conclusive evidence that he did not step out of bounds. As an Oregon fan, would you simply chalk that up to the breaks of the game, or justify the bad review call with thoughts that Oregon should have simply played better. I doubt you would and most fans would not either.

The question is why the on the field call was allowed to stand, particularly with the strange announcement that there was conclusive evidence that Oklahoma had touched the ball first

1. If all of the video really was not available to him, then OU is just SOL.

2. If all of the video really was available to him, but for some reason he could not or did not review it, then OU is also just SOL.

3. However, if all of the video was available and was reviewed by him, but he chose to ignore it, OU has a legitimate gripe.

The PAC 10 should simply hold a press conference, play the tape from the re-play booth, and have the re-play official and the 3 other people in the re-play booth with him explain exactedly what happened.

That is not too much to ask for.

Of course, none of this will change the outcome of the game, but something must be done to keep this from happening in the future.

I think the only fair solution is for both Oregon and Oklahoma to immediately discontinue their football programs, lay off all the coaches and staff, and let the "students" who play for them go home to their real jobs as broom pushers, carjackers, rapists, and meth fiends. Then the universities can get back to THEIR real jobs: educating students.

As King plainly pointed out, the refs did not carry QB Dixon to the endzone. As another LW pointed out, Oregon commentators largely felt the refs were ruling against them during the game. But the ones against OK were the only aggregious ones because....why again? OK still had a chance to win it with a 44-yard field goal at the end of the game, and blew it. Oregon has won games with 57-yard field goal.

The Intant-Replay reviewer reports what he had to go by, but that remains in doubt because there are "reports" that add'l video was made available but not used? Who made these reports? How is it the reviewer is judged guilty and lying until proven innocent?

Every football team gets screwed by bad calls not going their way at least once a season. To make this an exception and use threats against the Pac-10 and whine, whine, whine, makes OK look ridiculous.