Posted October 08, 2013

Stanford coach David Shaw fires back at Washington coach Steve Sarkisian

David Shaw, Pac-12, Stanford Cardinal, Steve Sarkisian, Washington Huskies
Steve Sarkisian took exception to what he felt were fake Stanford injuries. David Shaw took exception to his exception.

Steve Sarkisian took a rare step to bluntly accuse Stanford of what he felt were fake injuries. (Cal Sport Media via AP)

After Washington lost to Stanford 31-28 on Saturday night, Steve Sarkisian seemed to imply the Cardinal players may have been faking injuries.

The exact quote, from Tom Fornelli at CBS:

“Their defensive line coach (former Washington assistant Randy Hart) was telling them to sit down,” Sarkisian said. “I guess that’s how we play here at Stanford, so we’ll have to prepare for that next time. At some point, we’ll get repaid for it. That never serves a purpose for us, and we’ll never do that.”

Well, Stanford coach David Shaw didn’t take too kindly to that insinuation, and he made that perfectly clear during the Pac-12 teleconference on Tuesday.

Usually coaches will skirt an issue by talking in generalizations or taking more roundabout, vague pot shots at other coaches, so it’s much ado about nothing. But in this instance, Sarkisian directly accused Shaw’s team of doing something, and the Stanford coach fired back — in a teleconference no less. While there might be a bit of hyperbolic language in Shaw’s statement that the Cardinal has “never” faked injuries, those are strong words from the typically level-headed coach.

This faking injuries thing has been a big deal in the Pac-12 for a few years now, and Shaw directly referenced Washington defensive line coach Tosh Lupoi, who was suspended for instructing players to fake injuries against Oregon in 2010 while working for Cal.

When I asked Arizona State wide receiver Jaelen Strong about it before ASU’s game against Stanford, he said the offense just has to go out and play and that they don’t worry about whether a defender is faking. You never really will know if a player is faking or not in football, and with all this emphasis on player safety, the officials are going to err on the side of caution rather than try to address flopping in the same way basketball is.

Regardless, it looks like the Stanford-Washington rivalry is heating up a bit, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Sarkisian had other things to say post-Shaw rant.

STAPLES: Huskies’ mistakes, controversial call doom comeback against Cardinal

36 comments
C-Diddy
C-Diddy

First orgasms and now this.  When will it end?!

DHLA
DHLA

Hey...some FACTS please? I'm a diehard Duck and a proper Husky foe...and I watched the tape and counted at least three times when Stanford players went down in second-half during hurry-up Husky drives...and then returned to the game swiftly. 

Not saying they were faking it. But how about some reporting here, SI. Tell us what the video showed and ask fans to send you cellphone vids of the Stanford sideline. That's how Cal was found out to be lying four or five years ago when its coach was equally indignant about accusations that his kids feigned injury to stop Oregon.

Five days after the game and all you can report is "he said, she said" stuff?





Ciscos
Ciscos

Having a player fake an injury to slow down or "get" an effective "unofficial" timeout has been going on for years. Not only in the NFL but in college too.  Those that profess "shock" at this little strategy tool haven't been paying attention.  This tactic, although not advertised, will continue to be used.

As much as I like and respect David Shaw as a coach, the veracity of his rebuttal toward Coach Sark tells me there's some truth in there.  

"The [coach] doth protest too much, methinks." ~ William Shakespeare

KrisBaker
KrisBaker

Of course Stanford was faking injuries to slow down Washington's offence.  And guess what?  It worked.  Instead of trying to deny it, Stanford fans should be complimenting their coach for employing an effective strategy.

GOOGLE ......Mae Brussel
GOOGLE ......Mae Brussel

Stanford always has, and always will bend or break the "rules" of the game.

'

'

Stanford's coach is the liar  ! ! !

atwood.t
atwood.t

David's Shaw's comments are not accurate.  Stanford clearlly faked injuries 3 years ago against Oregon but that was with Harbaugh as coach. 

6marK6
6marK6

Sarkisian, don't badmouth the coach of the University of Texas, erhhh, I mean Stanford. 

JeffBockert
JeffBockert

Somebody was hurt constantly, they were definitely faking injuries to try to slow Washington down and to allow their guys to catch their breaths. It's a common tactic against the no huddle, many teams use it. The rules committee hasn't caught up to the modern game. I can guarantee you, if Alabama does play Oregon for the title, they will fake injuries - expect it. 

J-Ceezy
J-Ceezy

If its really about player safety, take an injured guy out for the quarter or 15:00 minutes of game clock.  That'll stop a guy from flopping.

Jim94
Jim94

Think what you will but an extraordinary number of players went down and somehow had a miraculous healing to go in for the next play. If it looks like a duck---

Baconpizza
Baconpizza

Call him whatever you want, Shaw is light years ahead of Sark as a coach.

youngte13
youngte13

Of course Shaw is denying any faking going on; what else is he going to say? Class-less.

gwdowell4
gwdowell4

I was at this game and there was NO question that Stanford was faking injuries in the 4th quarter.  It was just as bad as Cal a few years ago against Oregon.  Every time a guy went down, they RAN back on the field after sitting out a play.

Total coward move by a coach who saw that his team was outmatched.

Cory J
Cory J

Shaw needs to shut his mouth.  The Cardinal REPEATEDLY had a man look like he had been shot...yet miraculously found their way onto the field for the NEXT play.  The NCAA could easily solve this by saying a player must sit for 5 plays if he needs an injury timeout.  But that would be expecting Mr. Emmert to actually do the job he is paid millions of dollars to do.  Clearly, this is too much to ask of him.

Ciscos
Ciscos

@JeffBockert ~ The "Rules" committee is fully aware, has been for years - and isn't going to touch it.  It's simple, how do you know if a player is hurt or not?  Given the inert potential for injury playing football, no one and I mean no one is going to try and mitigate what constitutes an injury vs one that is being faked.

jafco99
jafco99

@JeffBockert You are an idiot.  Now that we have cleared that up, Stanford had four players down.  One on a kickoff play that should have resulted in an ejection of the UW player.  Stanford's player missed the rest of the game.  Three to defensive ends or linebackers; one resulted in two or more missed plays, the other two may have been one play.  Washington had a player down - for one play.  Washington made two long drives; the first had no players down for either team.  The second had two players down in quick succession, but then continued for ten plays or so until Stanford intercepted the ball.  In no circumstance did Stanford blunt your drives by "faking" injuries.  You however blunted quite a few of your own drives by faking "being able to play sound fundamental football against a great team".  Shove it.

jafco99
jafco99

@J-Ceezy So bring that up at the next NCAA rules committee meeting.  Until then, a player on the ground is hurt for as long as it takes him to get back in the game if he can.

mike202
mike202

@Jim94 I could understand the miracles if it was Notre Dame, but Stanford?

JeffBockert
JeffBockert

@Baconpizza Wow, really? UW beat them last year and, had Stanford not faked injuries this year, they'd have beat them again. You have no idea what you are talking about. Go back to watching hockey and soccer please. 

Cory J
Cory J

@Baconpizza - Yeah, I guess that's why he had to resort to bush league tactics to slow down the Husky offense.  SMH...ignorance, thy name is "Baconpizza".

JeffBockert
JeffBockert

@gwdowell4  Yep, totally agree, if you watched the game, there isn't a question. They faked injuries. 

Tim59
Tim59

@gwdowell4 yeah they outmatched Stanford so much that they never lead once in the game. 

jafco99
jafco99

@Cory J Repeatedly?  Like once (Vaughters) in the first couple of plays in the second half, then two in close succession, about midway through a drive that I believe later Stanford stopped with an INT.  Skov was out two plays; Gardner only one.  You had at least one player down and then "miraculously" back in a play later.  You may not have noticed, probably being drunk, but those two teams were slamming the crap out of one another.  The Stanford D was making Price run for his life back there.  Lots of bodies flying, legs akimbo.  You lost - and your coach keeps losing.  Shape up; you're a disgrace to the PAC12. 

choprz
choprz

@Cory J Agree whole-heartedly.  Mr. Shaw should just skirt the question with a simple 'next' if he is going down the he said/he said coaster.  5 plays - like it!

canine34
canine34

@Cory J I agree, it's a simple solution.  I've heard some people bounce around different ideas as to the length of time a player must sit out, but five plays sounds about right.

It's nice to agree with someone in an online comments section for a change.

atwood.t
atwood.t

@jafco99 @JeffBockert jafco...I am a Stanford fan but I agree that Stanford was faking some injuries in the fourth quarter. They did it a few years ago vs Oregon (I think it was Skov then as well).  I also think that Stanford got outplayed in the second half but they made just enough plays to win and the final score is all that matters not the total yards, time of possession, etc.

MyronBernard
MyronBernard

Dislike button. How about you act like an adult and try to respond to reasonable comments without calling people names and insulting people. The fact that you're so defensive about shows something. Truth is what Jeff said makes sense. It is a common tactic. It's admitted to be done by both players and coaches (Brian Urlacher anyone?). And the rules committee definitely hasn't caught up to it. That's just fact. If a player causes a play stoppage for injury they should be required to sit out the rest of the drive. Skov took 5 minutes to get off field and they took one play off before missing a beat. For an opposing coach or fanbase to not think that's fishy is asinine. 

JeffBockert
JeffBockert

@Tim59 @gwdowell4  Ah, did you watch the 4th quarter? Do you know anything about strategy and about the point of running the no huddle to tire out a defense - especially the D Line? Please don't comment if you don't know a dang thing about football. 

gwdowell4
gwdowell4

@Tim59 @gwdowell4 30 first downs for UW to 14 for Stan. 489 off yds for UW to 284 for Stan. all while having the ball for fewer minutes.  Aside from the opening Kickoff, Stan got blown off the ball and was outscored 28-24.  Shaw could see that they could not stop UW in the second half.

jafco99
jafco99

@JeffBockert @jafco99 @gwdowell4 @Tim59 Yeah, Bockert, crushed.  Like 31-28, Stanford. Like Washington stays number one in penalties.  Like washington has no idea how to defend a kick, for the tune of 240 yards on special teams.  Outside of class (coaches here being referred to), fundamentals and minor other aspects of college football, I agree: Washington dominated (about three hours of my time Saturday night as I enjoyed seeing them work so hard to go down in flaming defeat).

JeffBockert
JeffBockert

@jafco99 @gwdowell4 @Tim59  I'd say the team that was cheating to win was classless. Take away the kick returns and Stanford got crushed - face the facts. 

jafco99
jafco99

@gwdowell4 @Tim59 Except that they did, idiot.  You pukes from Dogtown are pukes; i.e. classless.