Hunt: Contradictions & ‘Running Pictures’

I tried to stay above the fray. I really did.

Go back and read SFN’s comments on the topic. Note that we were very careful to focus on the failure to use replay and didn’t harp on the result of the replay; which…upon further review…indicated that Akron’s running back failed to score a touchdown on the game’s final play. All we chose to stress was the same thing the rest of the world was stressing and that the Fayetteville Observer succintly expressed:

But it doesn’t matter whether the knee of Akron running back Dennis Kennedy hit the ground before the ball broke the plane of the end zone or not. If there’s a replay system in effect and a game-deciding score on the final play happens, it SHOULD be reviewed. Otherwise, what’s the point of having such a system?

I got pretty steamed yesterday when I saw quotes from UNC-CH grad and ACC director of officials Tommy Hunt. Hunt not only refused to admit the obvious that the play shuold have been reviewed more thoroughly by the game officials; he went so far as to use terms like “clearly” to describe the situation (as if there was no doubt about anything).

Hunt’s chutzpah really bothered me. His ability and willingness to proclaim without the slightest reservation that the result of the play was so unalienably clear was an insult to everyone’s intelligence. Again, I tried not to focus on the absurdity that everything that was so obviously murky was so crystal clear to Tommy Hunt.

But, today’s comments take the cake. Check out the following quote from today’s N&O:

Everything I saw looked like he scored; all the shots we got on video look like he scored,” Hunt said Monday. “We don’t count on still pictures. They are not dependable. We always get an amateur picture [in situations like this]. A running picture is much more valuable than a still photo.”

First, I need I need Cardiff Giant on this one. Cardiff, where are you? I challenge you to satire Hunt’s comments about “Running Pictures”. Running pictures? Is this 1930? I can’t get the thought of silent movies and Charlie Chaplin out of my head. It harkens to Lee Fowler and Bobby Purcell’s disdain 21st century techonology and the evil internet. Cardiff…this is your charge!

Second, I’d like to draw your attention to Hunt’s comments in the N&O ONE DAY EARLIER!

“We only had three shots of that play and no cameras on the goal line,” said Hunt, who attended the Duke-Wake Forest game in Winston-Salem. “[But] our person in the booth can slow it down, re-run it, FRAME IT, and he said it was a touchdown. Officials [also] said it was clearly a touchdown. When I saw it on ESPN, I concurred with their call.”

Wow. Could he be more of an idiot? Seriously. No wonder the moron is being forced into retirement this year. (Hopefully John Swofford can find another Carolina grad to slide into his spot before too many people post for the position)

* On one hand, Hunt procaims that the replay officials are in a great situation because they can STOP the video to “FRAME IT”…which then becomes the equivalent of…you guessed it…A PICTURE!

* But, on the other hand, they “don’t count on still pictures” because “they are not dependable”.

So, if “still pictures” are not dependable, then why do the replay officials slow down and STOP videos to make calls?

What Hunt should be articulating (even though it would make his case look even weaker) is the importance of THE ANGLE of the picture, be it a photograph or one of these fancy “moving pictures”. I actually believe and understand his comment that, “We always get an amateur picture [in situations like this].” But, just because something is an amateur photograph doesn’t make it any less credible. The key element in this is THE ANGLE OF THE PICTURE, not the nature of it being still or moving.

Hunt has talked so much that he has admitted the problem without being smart enough to recognize it, “We only had three shots of that play and no cameras on the goal line.” He is so married to his position that he can’t admit that his cameras were NOT in as good of a position as the photograph that was taken by Chris Coker in the stands.

The problem is not the nature of the pictures; the problem is the angle of the pictures and the inability of Tommy Hunt to (insert your complaint here).

General Headscratchers NCS Football

60 Responses to Hunt: Contradictions & ‘Running Pictures’

  1. WolfPup35 09/12/2006 at 9:53 PM #

    Is there absolute, incontrovertable proof that it WAS a Dodge???
    If not, it MUST have been a Dodge.

  2. WolfPup35 09/12/2006 at 10:00 PM #

    On a slightly more serous note….instead of calling for Amato’s head, why aren’t we calling for Hunt or Swofford’s head??? The ACC should have hired a commisioner, and director of officials that DID NOT ATTEND OR GRADUATE FROM ANY ACC SCHOOL!!! Granted, it may have helped for expansion to have someone “from here” who genuinely cared about the money errr….the conference, but as far as being an unbiased leader for the ACC, we need someone who graduated from, like Cal-Poly San Luis Obispo, or Strayer University Online. Maybe if we had someone like that, we’d get some unbiased, fair decisions on and off the field.

  3. WolfPup35 09/12/2006 at 10:01 PM #

    NOW I’M OFF TO SEE ONE OF THOSE FANCY RUNNIN’ PITCHER SHOWS, YOU KNOW THEY MAKES ‘EM WITH SOUND AND ALL NOW.

  4. highstick 09/12/2006 at 10:21 PM #

    The sad part about this is that as someone earlier said about Hunt “digging a hole and making it deeper” is that Chuck then jumps in the dang hole with him with his dumbass comments.

    Must be them darned Non-Qualifier Referees making all these bad calls!

    Now I think I understand why Chuck dropped the only course that I ever had with him when he was a graduate assistant after 1 or 2 classes. The professor teaching Comparative Economic Systems had a nasty habit of making you look like a dunce if you weren’t prepared for class. Chuck didn’t hang around for the fun to start!

  5. highstick 09/12/2006 at 10:34 PM #

    Read this comment last year from none other than our own AD:

    “Unlike the Big Ten model, however, every conference game – and perhaps – almost every game involving ACC schools – will use the new replay system. Even those games that won’t be televised will be equipped with replay capabilities, meaning every team in the league will get a fair shake, even those schools that may not appear on television as much.

    “It will cost a little more to do it that way,” said NC State athletics director Lee Fowler. “But all of us are now using video boards now anyway. We’ll probably have to add a camera to make sure we have enough angles for a good replay.”

    For the entire article see the following link:

    http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/061705aaa.html

  6. for2n8son 09/13/2006 at 12:16 PM #

    Oh Lordy! I feel another fund raiser comming.

  7. Wolfpack4ever 09/13/2006 at 8:31 PM #

    for2n8son Says:

    “Oh Lordy! I feel another fund raiser comming.”

    LOL Thank goodness the article was in June of 2005. You scared my wallet nearly to death. 😉

  8. highstick 09/13/2006 at 8:56 PM #

    Main point of the article that I was pointing out was about “camera angles”. I guess Fowler wouldn’t spring for the additional cameras on the goal line.

  9. WolfPup35 09/14/2006 at 4:01 PM #

    Take the cost out of Amato’s bowl game bonuses, maybe that will help with the replay problems AND deliver a message……..maybe not.

  10. jwrenn29 09/14/2006 at 10:49 PM #

    Why does it seem that everyone in a position of authority in the ACC is a UNC grad? Shouldn’t there be grads from other schools in positions of authority?

Leave a Reply