Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Opinions on that INT

FinalFourCy said:
I think it’s clearly a TD with the different angles posted, as Murdock caught the ball. Dual possession, if you’re being generous to the defender, still means TD.

But, I could see them calling incomplete live based on only Murdoch having possession and getting that possession while out of bounds. And given they don’t really take these reviews seriously, they potentially wouldn’t have overturned it.

Murdock made a GREAT catch imo, one that the refs didn’t think was likely and therefore were prejudice in their review. Unfortunately had Murdock not made an effort, it’s definitely incomplete.
Click to expand...

I do think it's interesting that the only difference between this play and other highlight reel plays we've seen where receivers have caught and pinned the ball against a defender and have been credited with receptions is the fact that the ball was pinned against the defender's chest in this situation instead of his back or side or helmet.
 
FerShizzle said:
This photo is taken once they got to the ground.
Click to expand...
Lazard has less possession on his one handed TD catch than Murdock had on that stillshot.

And that one frame photo fails to show the defender’s hand coming off the ball, as several video replays reveal.
 
clonedude said:
I'm sorry, but you aren't making any sense whatsover. Who is saying that the out of bounds line isn't coming into play here?

The official does NOT have to make a call the instant they hit the ground on who has possession. What if neither guy is determined to have possession when they hit the ground?

Your argument doesn't make any sense, I'm sorry. I don't think you can clearly say either guy has possession of the ball before they roll out of bounds until 3 yds out of bounds when Murdock gives up and the OSU guy wrestles it away.
Click to expand...

Wat? They're not going to let two players wrestle around on the ground for possession indefinitely, especially not while laying in the end zone, they're going to make a call either on possession or dual possession.

Think about a couple of players rolling around on the logo at midfield trying to get possession with the ball not hitting the ground. How long do you suppose officials should let a scrum like that go?
 
clonedude said:
So here's that Stanford TD catch where the WR has the ball pinned against the DB's back and it's ruled a TD. Without the DB's back there, would he have caught it? Who knows, but it certainly aided the catch. So you can argue that Murdock has it pinned against OSU's DB's chest instead of his back, so what's the difference? If the OSU DB is turned around and Murdock has it pinned against his back instead of his chest, it's a TD.

Click to expand...


The more I think about this Stanford catch, the more I think it should have been a touchdown for Murdock and ISU.

Murdock literally makes a one handed catch pinned against the DB's chest, nearly the exact same thing as the Stanford player does above, except Murdock's is one handed, and it's pinned on the DB's chest instead of his back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SolarGarlic
CyGuy5 said:
View attachment 51681

I saw this photo on instagram. Again, this clearly shows Murdock’s hand underneath the ball, the other on top of it. How this isn’t called a touchdown is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Definitely dual possession there, and from the video replays we know prior to this the defender’s hand (the one on top of Murdock’s) repeatedly comes off. TD
 
ISUAlum2002 said:
Wat? They're not going to let two players wrestle around on the ground for possession indefinitely, especially not while laying in the end zone, they're going to make a call either on possession or dual possession.

Think about a couple of players rolling around on the logo at midfield trying to get possession with the ball not hitting the ground. How long do you suppose officials should let a scrum like that go?
Click to expand...

Was the ball still moving as they went to the ground? If so, as they "wrestle" for the ball and fall out of bounds, it could be called incomplete.

For the record, I don't think it was. I think they both could have been considered to have possession if the defender's right hand is still on the ball. What can't be refuted is Murdock pinned and controlled the ball on the defender's chest throughout the entire play.
 
  • Agree
  • Useful
Reactions: CY21, jkclone and StLouisClone
ISUAlum2002 said:
I do think it's interesting that the only difference between this play and other highlight reel plays we've seen where receivers have caught and pinned the ball against a defender and have been credited with receptions is the fact that the ball was pinned against the defender's chest in this situation instead of his back or side or helmet.
Click to expand...

And of course the part where they are able to complete the play with ball in their hands to show the game officials clear possesion.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: FinalFourCy
Cyliam said:
And of course the part where they are able to complete the play with ball in their hands to show the game officials clear possesion.
Click to expand...
So... wrestling the ball away while you are laying out of bounds??? Is that when the play completed?
 
This feels like 2005 all over again, Multiple close loses. What a brutal season that was....
 
SolarGarlic said:
Except that was being touted as the most talented team in ISU history and this one was hoping for a bowl berth.
Click to expand...

Yep, it is a very, very different feeling. We were closing in on 10 years with McCarney and the 2005 team was supposed to be really good. We are in just our second year of Campbell. Not to mention that we aren't losing to sisters of the poor right now.
 
clonedude said:
The more I think about this Stanford catch, the more I think it should have been a touchdown for Murdock and ISU.

Murdock literally makes a one handed catch pinned against the DB's chest, nearly the exact same thing as the Stanford player does above, except Murdock's is one handed, and it's pinned on the DB's chest instead of his back.
Click to expand...

So its basically the same except the Stanford guy gets possession with two hands and Murdock doesn't, and the OSU defender has his arms around the ball too both in the air and on the ground and the defender in the Stanford play never does, and the OSU guy completes the process of the catch by standing up with the ball and showing it to the refs and of course the DB in the Stanford play can't cause he never has the ball.... But other than those things it's pretty much the exact same thing.
 
Cyliam said:
So its basically the same except the Stanford guy gets possession with two hands and Murdock doesn't, and the OSU defender has his arms around the ball too both in the air and on the ground and the defender in the Stanford play never does, and the OSU guy completes the process of the catch by standing up with the ball and showing it to the refs and of course the DB in the Stanford play can't cause he never has the ball.... But other than those things it's pretty much the exact same thing.
Click to expand...

So when did the OSU guy complete the process?
 
Cyliam said:
So its basically the same except the Stanford guy gets possession with two hands and Murdock doesn't, and the OSU defender has his arms around the ball too both in the air and on the ground and the defender in the Stanford play never does, and the OSU guy completes the process of the catch by standing up with the ball and showing it to the refs and of course the DB in the Stanford play can't cause he never has the ball.... But other than those things it's pretty much the exact same thing.
Click to expand...

You're so clueless. You can make one handed catches you know. And you said the OSU player had his hands around the ball too.... when? You mean on top of Murdock's hand and arm that actually is around the ball? And you said the OSU player had it on the ground too? When? Someone already posted a pic above on the ground showing Murdock then had BOTH of his hands around the ball on the ground.

But you are right that the OSU guy does stand up with the ball after wrestling it out of Murdock's hands 3 yds out of bounds AFTER the play is dead.

Go back to Stillwater you closet Cowboy fan. I've never seen someone who has "Cy" in his username defend the opposing team and the crooked officials against ISU like this.
 
SolarGarlic said:
Except that was being touted as the most talented team in ISU history and this one was hoping for a bowl berth.
Click to expand...

I do agree with that, maybe this team can get 8 wins, instead of the 7 that team got.

Supposedly we are going to have the greatest ISU team next year or the year after that, which makes me giddy to see what the coach has done with this team or it could be the kool aid from all the recruiting hype.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: amishclone
clonedude said:
You're so clueless. You can make one handed catches you know. And you said the OSU player had his hands around the ball too.... when? You mean on top of Murdock's hand and arm that actually is around the ball? And you said the OSU player had it on the ground too? When? Someone already posted a pic above on the ground showing Murdock then had BOTH of his hands around the ball on the ground.

But you are right that the OSU guy does stand up with the ball after wrestling it out of Murdock's hands 3 yds out of bounds AFTER the play is dead.

Go back to Stillwater you closet Cowboy fan. I've never seen someone who has "Cy" in his username defend the opposing team and the crooked officials against ISU like this.
Click to expand...

Lol. Sure you can make one handed catches. But you cant make one handed catches into the dbacks chest with both his arms around the football. Thats not control of the football.

I think I see part of the problem for some of you. People keep saying "dual possession". There is no such thing in the rulebook. The statute is "simultaneous possession". Meaning two players gain possession at the same time. If one player gains possession (which requires control) first then you cant have simultaneous possession.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: jkclone
FredCyclone said:
This feels like 2005 all over again, Multiple close loses. What a brutal season that was....
Click to expand...

Nah, that was a season where ISU was expected to be good, played very few good teams and lost to marginal/bad teams.

I suppose Texas isn't exactly great, but the losses so far are to good-decent teams and ISU wasn't expected to do much.

It would feel more like 2005 if they go down to Waco and get punked next weekend, which may happen. Winning is infectious like it was in October and so is losing like it's been for most of ISU's history.

This INT/weird call doesn't even exist with a better throw, or better yet, a call that maximizes ISU's strengths like many tall receivers in space, or like I've said elsewhere, if ISU doesn't give up huge plays and 49 (47? :)) points.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Spanky, cycloneML and Doc
Cyliam said:
Lol. Sure you can make one handed catches. But you cant make one handed catches into the dbacks chest with both his arms around the football. Thats not control of the football.

I think I see part of the problem for some of you. People keep saying "dual possession". There is no such thing in the rulebook. The statute is "simultaneous possession". Meaning two players gain possession at the same time. If one player gains possession (which requires control) first then you cant have simultaneous possession.
Click to expand...

You're finally right about one thing.... the simultaneous possession thing. You're right because the OSU player NEVER has possession of the ball. If anyone does, it has to be Murdock. Of the total amount of skin touching that ball, about 90% of it is Murdock's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom