Null



Sign in to follow this  
CleCoTiger

How was this pass ruled incomplete?

Recommended Posts

I watched and watched and watched.  I saw it ruled a catch...until it wasn't.  13:05 in the first quarter. How is this ruled not a catch? (Video is timeset to the play in question.)

 

 

Edited by CleCoTiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




5 minutes ago, SphyNxXx said:

That one had me calling livid. Felt like the refs were sending signals that UAT had an extra player...

I felt like the fix was in. No kidding. The SEC was gonna get bammer a playoff spot without them winning their division or the SEC Championship. Again.  I am very glad to have been wrong.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m still not sure what happened here. From where I was sitting it looked like the official who was right there called it a catch, which begs the question how was the ruling on the field an incompletion? Such bs.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They called it a catch on the field but another ref came in to over rule it incomplete so the review was for an incomplete pass.  They then said there wasn’t indisputable evidence that he caught it.  It was definitely odd to have the original call over turned for no clear reason.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, dyehardfanAU said:

By the time he possessed the ball he was out of bounds.

It looked good to me. His foot wasn't out and I knew we weren't getting any calls after this one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Tigger1985 said:

It looked good to me. His foot wasn't out and I knew we weren't getting any calls after this one.

It looked good to me too. But we did get one call later...got one more second added😎

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Win4AU said:

They called it a catch on the field but another ref came in to over rule it incomplete so the review was for an incomplete pass.  They then said there wasn’t indisputable evidence that he caught it.  It was definitely odd to have the original call over turned for no clear reason.

“They” meaning both with the best views.  It looked like the plan was to get it so a standing call was not in our favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That one made me fume. The ref in front of the receiver (the best view) ruled it a catch and the ref from the back came in and somehow was allowed to overrule him. The ruling on the field stood, but because of the camera work, it would have stood had the ruling stayed the way it was originally called as a catch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ClarkGriswold said:

We thought it was a catch too, but after watching the replays on the Jumbotron, it looked like his left elbow hit the ground out of bounds simultaneously with the catch. 

If that was the case, the ref would have said “the ruling on the field is confirmed”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pausing the video at 0:50, when he cradles the ball, his foot is out of bounds. That's assuming these videos are properly synced. It was weird to have two refs get overruled tho. Not sure what that was about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, smackydoodle said:

Pausing the video at 0:50, when he cradles the ball, his foot is out of bounds. That's assuming these videos are properly synced. It was weird to have two refs get overruled tho. Not sure what that was about.

That is what I thought I saw too when I kept replaying it.   The front official was paying attention to the catch and he did catch it.  However the back official saw that he was out of bounds as he controlled the catch.  Therefore they called it incomplete and the review let the call stand cause the video was not overly conclusive which is what they need to overturn it.

if there were to be any complaint about the refs it is how they completely blew the end of the first half, but that worked out in our favor so it is ok to make that screw up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, auburnphan said:

That is what I thought I saw too when I kept replaying it.   The front official was paying attention to the catch and he did catch it.  However the back official saw that he was out of bounds as he controlled the catch.  Therefore they called it incomplete and the review let the call stand cause the video was not overly conclusive which is what they need to overturn it.

if there were to be any complaint about the refs it is how they completely blew the end of the first half, but that worked out in our favor so it is ok to make that screw up.

I get what you saying about blowing the first half, but that is not the first time I’ve seen something like that with the clock and replay. Overall, that crew called a fair game, and it was nice to see for a change!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TXaubie said:

I get what you saying about blowing the first half, but that is not the first time I’ve seen something like that with the clock and replay. Overall, that crew called a fair game, and it was nice to see for a change!!

I agree about calling a fair game.  They really let them play out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dyehardfanAU said:

By the time he possessed the ball he was out of bounds.

Wrong. His right knee was immediately down when he caught it. His left foot touched out of bounds a half second later.

1ctmgIk.jpg

ra5pUlS.jpg

dCURrop.jpg

Edited by Viper
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CleCoTiger said:

We will agree to disagree. 

Honestly, I thought his left foot touched the sideline before he gained possession. Not gonna homer it .

Edited by Swamp Eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn’t tell where the other ref (one that called incomplete) was positioned, I wish they would clarify what made it incomplete during the replay call. If a play is that close they should have never changed the call on the field and just replay it. 

That was the beginning of the reason I can’t talk today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Viper said:

Wrong. His right knee was immediately down when he caught it. His left foot touched out of bounds a half second later.

1ctmgIk.jpg

ra5pUlS.jpg

dCURrop.jpg

A freeze frame still photo is not evidence. Thusly, it's called video replay. I didn't have an issue with the ruling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the refs would’ve kept that as a catch on the field then they wouldn’t have overturned it with review because there wasn’t enough evidence to do so. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Swamp Eagle said:

A freeze frame still photo is not evidence. Thusly, it's called video replay. I didn't have an issue with the ruling. 

I didn't have an issue with the ruling either. Just showing freeze frame evidence that the left foot did not touch out of bounds prior to the right knee (and left knee) down in bounds. In the 3rd image I posted, that is CBS' synced slow mo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Viper said:

I didn't have an issue with the ruling either. Just showing freeze frame evidence that the left foot did not touch out of bounds prior to the right knee (and left knee) down in bounds. In the 3rd image I posted, that is CBS' synced slow mo.

I get that, but possession requires a minimum amount of time and can't be proven in a still frame. Shed was on his left knee when the ball arrived, so that still frame could be just at the moment the ball was cradled. Live replay, it looked to me like his left foot was on the white by the time possession had taken place.

 

Hell of an effort nonetheless..

Edited by Swamp Eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this