I turned toward J and told her, "If the Ducks get this onside kick, they'll win."

See, I've seen this movie before.

In a game against Texas Tech last season, referees made one terrible call and another iffy call that led directly to a Red Raiders win, 23-21, in Lubbock. The zebras even utilized instant replay to double-check their wrongness and, somehow, still left the call uncorrected.

In Saturday's game against Oregon, OU actually recovered an onside kick with the game 33-27 and about a minute left. Furthermore, the ball was clearly touched at about the 39-yard-line, one yard shy of what would constitute a legal touch.

The latter call is iffy; however, the indisputable video evidence -- and believe me, it's indisputable -- is that Sooners running back Allen Patrick recovered the ball. He didn't wrestle it from a Duck. No, the ball was touched illegally by one Oregon player, muffed by OU's Lendy Holmes and then punched back behind the pile into the arms of Patrick.

He fell to the ground and handed the refs the ball. The whistle blew when he had the ball.

And, still, OU somehow came up on the wrong side of this call.

And, OU somehow lost the game despite actually playing very well for most of it. You may disagree given that our defense allowed 501 yards of total offense; however, fundamentally, I thought we stepped it up a notch this week.

I was over the loss five minutes after Garrett Hartley's kick was blocked. Seriously. T, J and I turned on Bill Maher, poured a couple beverages and kicked back for an evening of television, karaoke and general chit-chat. You know, solving the world's problems.

However, on Sunday, I began to think about something that I think will eventually happen in sports.

Could this possibly be taken to court?

I mean, has there not been a tort committed here? There is actual, tangible damage, as well as significant intangible damage. The evidence is indisputable, and the action of the so-called expert in charge of handling the task was indisputably negligent.

Think of it this way. If I were to take my sainted mother in for surgery and the doctor were to leave his scissors in her stomach, I would at least be legally afforded a free scissors removal, right? Depending on the laws in the state and/or the agreements signed, a court would at least insist that the surgeon remove the obstruction.

Truth is, the NCAA is an organization whose members participate voluntarily. Therefore, the courts would likely never interfere in its business so long as its rules are being enforced to the letter of the law. It's like the Casey Martin golf-cart issue, where the courts said that any PGA player is under the purview of its organization.

I'm not saying that the outcome of a college football game should be challenged in a court of law. I'm suggesting that I'm surprised it hasn't happened before, and I'm here to tell you that it will happen at some point.

First, people spend a ton of money to go to these games, particularly the people who travel. Usually $50-100 per ticket, not to mention airfare, shelter and food.

Second, there is an unwritten expectation that the outcome of a game -- any game, any sport -- would be legitimate. For example, if it turned out that both teams were in on some sort of point fix, well, the courts -- I think -- could at least refund ticket money.

To me, this is more akin to concertgoers who spend their hard-earned bread only to be greeted by a performer who is so drunk, he can't perform. I think this happened to Neil Young, and forgive me if it wasn't him. I'm a big fan of his, but I seem to recall an incident where he was so intoxicated at one of his concerts that he couldn't perform.

Seems to me that ticketholders might have gotten a refund, but I'm not sure. I would presume that college football tickets have an as-is, whatever-happens clause associated with their sale.

Eventually, some legal eagle is going to challenge a game like this, but not on the basis that ticketholders have been wronged. No, I think they'll challenge the NCAA on the grounds that they have a good faith obligation to right wrongs even after the fact.

It's one thing to question a foul. However, it's another to catch the ball in bounds without any question of dropping it and have the catch still be called incomplete. That happened to OU in 1984 when Keith Stansberry intercepted Texas in the Cotton Bowl, in what would have given the Sooners a 15-12 win.

This one, the debacle in Oregon, is quite worse because the NCAA instituted instant replay to take care of these very situations. In my opinion, the NCAA must give itself the authority to change the outcome of games after the fact to save itself from the possibility of lawsuit in the future.

In my opinion, the NCAA needs not to give OU the win or Oregon a loss.

Saturday's game between the Sooners and Ducks should be wiped off the books as a no-contest.

And, for every armchair Sooner fan -- my brothers and sisters of the crimson-and-cream church of gridiron heaven -- I have one piece of advice. Don't jump off that cliff just yet.

The beauty about a college football Saturday is hanging out with old friends, acting silly, getting worked up about a game and then wasting the evening away with conversation and fun. The outcome truly is secondary, although it's always better to win.

Believe me, I hate it (H-A-T-E) when we lose. However, it's totally unhealthy to dwell on it for more than about 10 minutes.

However, I think the days of saying, "Well, there's nothing we can do about it" are probably soon to be over. Because the NCAA has put in methods of ensuring that calls are correct, such as they have by instituting instant replay, I'd submit that they're liable for ensuring a correct outcome in cases where the evidence is indisputable, even after the fact.

There is legal precedent for this. In the Internet world, any private organization who chooses to monitor its message boards (on its Web site, for example) is legally obligated to monitor its content for things like libel. Because the institution makes an active step toward monitoring content, they are then responsible for it.

The analogy could hold for college football and the NCAA's attempt to make sure its games are managed fairly and its outcomes are righteous.

Eventually, somebody's going to get brave enough and have the substantial resources required to challenge them on it.