Bottom line is that their is zero evidence of anything but dual position on that play. I would love to see examples in other games where that has been ruled an interception. The only time I can remember is the NFL game between Packers and Seahawks where the referees and replay officials were deemed incompetent by everyone in the media. That play was kinda the impetus that ended the NFL officials strike because the replacement officials were considered so incompetent.
Opinions on that INT
- Thread starter demoncore1031
- Start date
Also, the head ref needs to start attending the media conference after the game. Why do we continue to protect refs from the media, yet expect players who do not get paid to talk to the media? I'd love to hear why the replay booth spent more time reviewing the spot on OSUs last third down then they did on this play.
In the end it was a 50-50 call, if they would have called it a TD it would have stayed if they called it and INT it would have stayed, the replay was not going to overturn it. They called it INT which is the mistake because dual position goes to the offense, but because of how they called it on the field it was not getting overturned, the Big12Refs strike again.....
Why is it a 50/50 call? There is no evidence of anything but dual position!!!
Except for the times in which the Ok St db’s hand came off. Clearly a TD.
For the defender to have possession he needed Murdock to have possession, whereas for Murdock to have possession he didn’t need Okie Lite defender to have possession.
I thought the rule was a tie goes to the receiver. Both players had the ball.
Pass interference disparity from officials was a larger issue for me. ISU gets flagged 3 times in 2 PAT attempts. OSU gets away with interference on a seemingly identical play on a pass to Lazard.
Pass interference disparity from officials was a larger issue for me. ISU gets flagged 3 times in 2 PAT attempts. OSU gets away with interference on a seemingly identical play on a pass to Lazard.
A lot of misreporting by CF writers and others about the play “standing” after review. It was actually “confirmed” - which is egregious all on its own.
This picture keeps being linked by Oklahoma State fans like it supports it being an interception and I’m not sure why. It clearly shows Marchies hand on the ball underneath the defenders. That proves it is not sole possession for the defender.
There needs to be rule changes to help the flow of the game but the clock should stop on first downs. It isn’t like it stops until the next play it only stops till they set the ball
This is flat out wrong. It wasn’t a 50/50 call. I think people have shown plenty of clear and convincing evidence to say touchdown. Even if you disagree with that and think they had to stick with the call that isn’t what they said. They confirmed interception which means they would have overturned it had it been called a touchdown.
Actually, review “confirmed” an interception. That means had it been called a TD on the field, it would have, in fact, been overturned. Another failure of the officiating crew.
It was closer to the correct call than the wrong call. I would probably call it an interception. No way was it going to get overturned.
Look it sucks we lost the game but it was clearly an interception. The defender put the ball to his chest in the air, wrapped his arms around it, and kept it in his chest while be fell to the ground and the offensive player tried to rip it away. Dual possession is when two players gain possession at the same time amd maintain dual possession until the play is complete. That's not what happened.
It was a pick plain and simple, and all the tinfoil in the world isn't gonna change that.
It was a pick plain and simple, and all the tinfoil in the world isn't gonna change that.
No. They confirmed it. Meaning had it been called at TD they would have changed it to an INT.
