0-1 versus the Pylon

[alarson]

It's a dumb rule. A ball going out of bounds in the end zone on a fumble should be treated the same as a fumble going out of bounds on every other part of the field.

This would be the most consistent.

As someone said upwards in the thread though, that could just result in 'fumbles' forward the endzone, so you could just spot it at the 1yl or spot it at the spot of the fumble if it crosses into the endzone.

The idea that you should automatically hand it to the defense in that situation,however, is asinine.

 

[HFCS]

TV must not have had the replay they had at JTS. They slowed it down, it was clear. You are wrong, but its not your fault, you just didn't see the correct replay.

If the multiple views I saw showed the ball coming out and knee coming down at nearly the exact same time how is that conclusive enough to overturn the call on the field? That's not the way replay is supposed to work. It's the way they do it much of the time, but it's not the official procedure.

 

[HFCS]

This would be the most consistent.

As someone said upwards in the thread though, that could just result in 'fumbles' forward the endzone, so you could just spot it at the 1yl or spot it at the spot of the fumble if it crosses into the endzone.

The idea that you should automatically hand it to the defense in that situation,however, is asinine.

The way to confirm this is put yourself in the shoes of the benefitting team, you know you lucked out in a major way.

 

[Beyerball]

The pylon is out of bounds.

Technically pylon is in bounds

 

[HFCS]

This thread is begging for a post from Brent Blume. Should be an easy one since we all know the call was correct and just want to clarify the concept as simple as possible (as opposed to say the phantom 3 where I don't think the call was correct/defensible and was merely the Big 12 rationalizing as best they could).

 

[3TrueFans]

Technically pylon is in bounds

It's not. If the pylon were in bounds you could hit the pylon and then drop the ball into the end zone before touching down out of bounds and it would be a live ball. It's a touchdown as soon as a player that is in bounds hits the pylon with the ball because the pylon is out of bounds in the end zone.

b. A ball that touches a pylon is out of bounds behind the goal line

 

[thrillcat]

The pylon rules are just another perfect example of trying too hard to add more rules and possibilities that just don't make sense.

100% of the pylon is out of bounds, yet for some reason if you touch the pylon you're magically in bounds.

The pylon is an extension of the ground. If the pylon was not there and the player touched the ground where the pylon is located they would be 100% out of bounds. But because there's a pylon there its now in bounds.

None of it has any basis in common sense.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Ya it does happen more often than you would think. I felt that Sage was superb last night with his knowledge of the rules and the game, providing anecdotes and first hand experience to explain to the listener. He has a truly outstanding mind.

I agree. He knew exactly what both teams were trying to do.

 

[isuno1fan]

Also thought Sam's knee was clearly down.

 

[cycophagus]

Btw the pylon is in bounds. Thus when guys are diving and touch it. Its a touchdown. Btw everyone in our section saw Sams knee hit the ground before throwing the ball. Big screen had a perfect angle.

I saw this plain as day while watching live on my 15" computer screen. I didn't see any replay that could dispute it. In spite of that, both sets of announcers (Blum 'n Rose in the right ear, Walters and Heft in the left ... geeky, I know. :nerd6bs proclaimed confidence the call would be overturned. I would not trade either broadcast team for any in the country, but you have to admit, as good as they are, they are truly homers.

 

[HFCS]

I saw this plain as day while watching live on my 15" computer screen. I didn't see any replay that could dispute it. In spite of that, both sets of announcers (Blum 'n Rose in the right ear, Walters and Heft in the left ... geeky, I know. :nerd6bs proclaimed confidence the call would be overturned. I would not trade either broadcast team for any in the country, but you have to admit, as good as they are, they are truly homers.

Just watched replay on cyclones.tv and it's plain as day the ball comes out almost exactly when the knee touches down. There's a slow mo of the ball coming out almost exactly when the knee goes down, no other view is really necessary to know the replay official blew the call.

By definition the call on the field should stand every time in that type of play, very difficult call looking at the replay and thus an easy call to get right by going with the call on the field. Replay officials in general are horrible at following their procedure here (which is why I harp on it).

 

[superfan]

Just watched replay on cyclones.tv and it's plain as day the ball comes out almost exactly when the knee touches down. There's a slow mo of the ball coming out almost exactly when the knee goes down, no other view is really necessary to know the replay official blew the call.

By definition the call on the field should stand every time in that type of play, very difficult call looking at the replay and thus an easy call to get right by going with the call on the field. Replay officials in general are horrible at following their procedure here (which is why I harp on it).

Plain as day to me, too. Knee's down with the ball still in his hand.

 

[cloneswereall]

Just watched replay on cyclones.tv and it's plain as day the ball comes out almost exactly when the knee touches down. There's a slow mo of the ball coming out almost exactly when the knee goes down, no other view is really necessary to know the replay official blew the call.

By definition the call on the field should stand every time in that type of play, very difficult call looking at the replay and thus an easy call to get right by going with the call on the field. Replay officials in general are horrible at following their procedure here (which is why I harp on it).

You're right.

 

[HFCS]

Plain as day to me, too. Knee's down with the ball still in his hand.

Yes, it's too close. The ball is literally on the very tip of his fingers when the very tip of his knee is beginning to touch. Even your low res pic on the top shows some space between the ball and hand.

If they had called it incomplete there's also no way it should be overturned.

Replay officials need to improve or they need to change the replay rules. If the rules were that the official is supposed to recall the play as best as they can, then I'd accept overturning that call. The way the rules are, blown replay call.

 

[andybernard]

Yes, it's too close. The ball is literally on the very tip of his fingers when the very tip of his knee is beginning to touch. Even your low res pic on the top shows some space between the ball and hand.

If they had called it incomplete there's also no way it should be overturned.

Replay officials need to improve or they need to change the replay rules. If the rules were that the official is supposed to recall the play as best as they can, then I'd accept overturning that call. The way the rules are, blown replay call.

Sorry man, you're wrong. It's alright to admit it. It was clear on the big screen last night. It's clear in the picture above. If you are willing to admit that it is on the "tip of his fingers", then you admit it is still in his hands. It was a sack. Everything is going to be okay.

 

[andybernard]

Also, the whole ball is resting on his palm while his knee is clearly down.

 

[HFCS]

Sorry man, you're wrong. It's alright to admit it. It was clear on the big screen last night. It's clear in the picture above. If you are willing to admit that it is on the "tip of his fingers", then you admit it is still in his hands. It was a sack. Everything is going to be okay.

If it's the correct call there needs to be some massive changes in many other replay calls. I'd say over half the time that play is ruled inconclusive and the call on the field stands.

If you held a gun to my head and asked me to call the play as I thought it happened I'd say down too. If you asked me to call it as replay officials are to overturn calls on field, call on field stands whatever it was.

 

[andybernard]

If it's the correct call there needs to be some massive changes in many other replay calls. I'd say over half the time that play is ruled inconclusive and the call on the field stands.

If you held a gun to my head and asked me to call the play as I thought it happened I'd say down too. If you asked me to call it as replay officials are to overturn calls on field, call on field stands whatever it was.

I think this is where we are going to have to agree to disagree. But it doesn't matter, because we are 1-0, and that's all I really care about.

 

[VeloClone]

The fumble in the end zone was clearly the right call. This homer was trying to find anything to grasp on to and there was nothing there. The throw was close - so close that it is hard to get too worked up about it. The PI call was woefully bad. I see how the guy who threw the flag might be fooled. He was on the same plane as the players (the throw was essentially coming straight at him) so he couldn't see the space between the players. I don't understand why another official with a better view doesn't come in and overturn the clearly bad call.

 

[thrillcat]

The fumble in the end zone was clearly the right call. This homer was trying to find anything to grasp on to and there was nothing there. The throw was close - so close that it is hard to get too worked up about it. The PI call was woefully bad. I see how the guy who threw the fog might be fooled. He was on the same plane as the players (the throw was essentially coming straight at him) so he couldn't see the space between the players. I don't understand why another official with a better view doesn't come in and overturn the clearly bad call.

End Zone fumble was the right interpretation of a stupid rule, agreed.

The throw was close, agreed.

The PI call was ridiculously bad. The flag was thrown when the receiver and 2 defenders were all 2 feet apart. He anticipated early contact, threw the flag, and for some reason it wasn't questioned at all and the game went on.