questionable. He had it when the foot came down. I would not call a ball changing hands as indisputable evidence of an incomplete pass. Just my opinion. I think an Alabama or Norte Dame receiver would have gotten the TD.
The incomplete “overturn” in the endzone was a bit…
- Thread starter gr8spur
- Start date
In my opinion, there really wasn't any doubt the call of incomplete was correct. The ball bounced in his hands and he didn't secure it until his foot was off the ground. His other foot then came down out of bounds. There were lots of bad calls by officials in this game, I just don't feel this was one of them.
I didn’t see that he bobbled or otherwise lost control. He had it in his left hand holding it against his chest and brought his right hand over to hold it in both hands.
I agree. The fumble by Joyner though was a miscarriage of justice
Vann call could have gone either way I thought. Agree Dak`s right knee clearly touched ground first.
I agree here, but Vann should have dragged his feet slightly and that is easily a TD. Vann looked to make a lazy catch and stay on his feet. He should have dragged his feet and let himself go down and it's a sure touch down.
some really queer calls today
still 2-0 after the softest part of our schedule
some of our "fans" are really pissed about our record
go cocks!
still 2-0 after the softest part of our schedule
some of our "fans" are really pissed about our record
go cocks!
Seemed like a couple calls went against us that shouldn't have but we won so screw it. Beamer didn't seem to argue so maybe he got word they were correct calls? We won. We are 2-0. That's all that matters at 8pm tonight.
I honestly thought it was the right call to overturn, but since they completely blew the call on Dak's fumble (he was CLEARLY down) if figured they'd blow this one too, or at least give us a makeup call.
If they can't get this replay thing right, which it seems like they screw it up as much as they get it right, what is even the point?
If they can't get this replay thing right, which it seems like they screw it up as much as they get it right, what is even the point?
The replay of the Van catch was certainly not irrefutable. Nowhere near enough to overturn the call. On the other hand, it was plain as day that Dak was down before the ball popped out, yet they let that call stand.
I must have missed that. This isn't the questionable fumble in the end zone in the first quarter?
He bobbled the ball you have to maintain control to have possession. Unfortunately his foot was out after possession was obtained.
the fumble while I agree he was down, it was ruled a fumble on the field and I felt like the crappy camera angles couldn’t dispute the call.
the fumble while I agree he was down, it was ruled a fumble on the field and I felt like the crappy camera angles couldn’t dispute the call.
I don't agree with the rule/refs logic on this one. I believe a catch is legitimate even if there is a little bit of jostling of the ball. I think its unrealistic to expect an instantaneous, tightly secured ball to be considered a "catch". My goodness, it was a fraction of a second after he caught the ball until he went OB. And the ball never came out. I mean, sheesh, what do they want?. That's petty.
The fact many of us saw it differently means the replay was not clear proof he did not catch the ball. I fully admit I’m biased. I saw Vann catch the ball and then bring the ball to his body to secure it. I never saw loss of control. The TD call should have stood. The Zebras seemed to have a blood lust to toss a USC player from the game. All were overturned as they weren’t targeting. The intentional grounding call on Zeb was a joke. Fans come to see the game not the refs.
I don’t disagree with you but that’s not how the rule works and that’s not how it’s been called for at least 20 years. Per the rules it was incomplete.
I know. I just think they need to be a little more lenient on the rule.
What fumble are you talking about? Or are you talking about vann bobbling the catch?
An incompletion is not a fumble. His foot was on the ground when he first caught it but it was already going back up when the defender's arm caused it to bobble. By the time he resecured it he was way out of bounds. But I thought it was a beautiful pass.
had no problem with the van bobble as being over turned, even watching I told my son thats not a catch. The Joyner fumble had gray area. Had it been ruled a catch then it would have stayed a catch. Fact is the video wasnt clear if the ball was moving or not. So being ruled a fumble on the field is why it was upheld, just the way it goes. Now the 4th and 14..that was a BS move by the official as he knew exactly what he was doing.
I think we're talking about different plays. I missed the fumble in the 1st half. I almost missed the whole 1st half. As soon as I started watching we got a pick 6. I thought you were referring to the perfect pass to the endzone that was ruled incomplete. I'm sorry.
I just watched it again. He juggled it. Hit is hands when his foot was inbounds, but bounced up and he didn't grab and secure it completely until he was out of bounds.
Latest posts
-
-
5 Players Who Saw Their Stock Rise During The Spring: OFFENSE- Latest: Perry McCarty
-
-
