Indiana vs. Duke Pinstripe Bowl

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

Did anyone see the end of the Indiana-Duke bowl game? Indiana "missed" a field goal even though on replay it looked like it was still inside the goal posts before it hooked out after it went past the goal posts.

They said that since the ball was above the goal posts, that the kick was not reviewable? That's ridiculous that a rule even exists that states it like that. That makes no sense. I thought the kick was good but the refs said he missed it yet it wasn't reviewable because of a ticky-tacky rule.

[WarTiger 4,120]

I saw it and thought it was no good when i saw it. The angle underneath the uprights isn't directly under the upright so its not conclusive anyway. I do agree that it seems odd that it wouldn't be reviewable because it was higher than the top of the uprights. That's exactly when they need to be reviewed the most. But its in the replay provisions.

SECTION 3. Reviewable Plays

Scoring Plays

ARTICLE 1. Reviewable plays involving a potential score include:

a. A potential touchdown or safety. [Exception: Safety by penalty for fouls

that are not specifically reviewable.]

b. Field goal attempts if and only if the ball is ruled (a) below or above the

crossbar or ( inside or outside the uprights when it is lower than the top

of the uprights. If the ball is higher than the top of the uprights as it crosses

the end line, the play may not be reviewed.

[FoundationEagle 637]

It would be very subjective to review on camera if it is above the uprights. It's very hard to determine where exactly the ball is. The only way to be sure on that would be to mount a camera to each upright, otherwise the camera angles would not be conclusive, if that makes sense.

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

Here's a couple of angles they showed:

https://vine.co/#/v/iA2VhPvQVYM

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

It would be very subjective to review on camera if it is above the uprights. It's very hard to determine where exactly the ball is. The only way to be sure on that would be to mount a camera to each upright, otherwise the camera angles would not be conclusive, if that makes sense.

They do it all the time when they review a ball carrier breaking the plane of the goal line. They don't always have a staright down the line goal line camera angle to show the ball breaking the plane. They sometimes have to make a judgment call even on replay.

[around4ever 4,140]

It would be very subjective to review on camera if it is above the uprights. It's very hard to determine where exactly the ball is. The only way to be sure on that would be to mount a camera to each upright, otherwise the camera angles would not be conclusive, if that makes sense.

Well, some games have pylon mounted cameras. Why couldn't they put a Go Pro on the uprights with enough of the upright in view to get a perspective?

I did not think it was good. The official right under the upright never hesitated. He made the call immediately. He has the best view of the upright and the ball.

[FoundationEagle 637]

It would be very subjective to review on camera if it is above the uprights. It's very hard to determine where exactly the ball is. The only way to be sure on that would be to mount a camera to each upright, otherwise the camera angles would not be conclusive, if that makes sense.

Well, some games have pylon mounted cameras. Why couldn't they put a Go Pro on the uprights with enough of the upright in view to get a perspective?

I did not think it was good. The official right under the upright never hesitated. He made the call immediately. He has the best view of the upright and the ball.

I'm not saying they couldn't install the cameras, just that they are not currently part of the setup. The difference between end zone reviews and fg reviews are in available angles and background. The end zone tends to have shots down the sideline, down the end zone line and 1 or 2 from up high. All of these have a field with clear white lines as the background making it fairly easy to determine where the ball actually is between the 3-4 camera angles. When it comes to fgs, currently the cameras are all looking at a background of the sky or a stadium with no clear lines and no set points of view designed to determine outcomes. I guess the issue would come in regards to fairness and budgets and getting everyone to agree . The smaller schools would have to have access to the goalpost cameras just as the TV games would. Not sure how the funding would work there. I'm sure they could get it going if they wanted, but it would take several high profile questionable fg calls to get everyone moving that way.

[AU64 10,122]

It would be very subjective to review on camera if it is above the uprights. It's very hard to determine where exactly the ball is. The only way to be sure on that would be to mount a camera to each upright, otherwise the camera angles would not be conclusive, if that makes sense.

Well, some games have pylon mounted cameras. Why couldn't they put a Go Pro on the uprights with enough of the upright in view to get a perspective?

I did not think it was good. The official right under the upright never hesitated. He made the call immediately. He has the best view of the upright and the ball.

I'm not saying they couldn't install the cameras, just that they are not currently part of the setup. The difference between end zone reviews and fg reviews are in available angles and background. The end zone tends to have shots down the sideline, down the end zone line and 1 or 2 from up high. All of these have a field with clear white lines as the background making it fairly easy to determine where the ball actually is between the 3-4 camera angles. When it comes to fgs, currently the cameras are all looking at a background of the sky or a stadium with no clear lines and no set points of view designed to determine outcomes. I guess the issue would come in regards to fairness and budgets and getting everyone to agree . The smaller schools would have to have access to the goalpost cameras just as the TV games would. Not sure how the funding would work there. I'm sure they could get it going if they wanted, but it would take several high profile questionable fg calls to get everyone moving that way.

Agree.....this was a bowl game played in a baseball stadium between a couple mediocre teams. .....JMO but I expect they did the minimum needed to satisfy the NCAA.

But a fun game....too bad it ended in controversy.

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

The NFL actually had a similar kick happen back in 2012 when the Ravens beat the Patriots but it was ruled good. The NFL's rule states more explicitly what constitutes a kick being good. The college rule is less clear.

Here's a good article from SB Nation that is informative:

http://www.sbnation....review-uprights

The NFL actually has the same rule in place. When Ravens kicker Justin Tucker kicked a game-winning field goal over the top of the uprights, it upset Patriots coach Bill Belichick, who drew a $50,000 fine yelling at refs to review the play. It irked him so much that the Patriots introduced a rule extending the length of the NFL's uprights from 30 feet to 35 feet. The NFL also explains that if a kick goes above the uprights, it's good if the ball passes entirely "between the outside edges" of the uprights.

For reference, here's the 2012 Ravens-Patriots controversial kick that was ruled good:

[FoundationEagle 637]

Ridiculous BB got fined for that. They protect refs these days like they are in the damn mafia. Oh, wait..maybe I'm onto something. Doesn't the mafia run Vegas?

[80Tiger 909]

Ridiculous BB got fined for that. They protect refs these days like they are in the damn mafia. Oh, wait..maybe I'm onto something. Doesn't the mafia run Vegas?

That is correct. If you remember the Corleone family sent Fredo out to Vegas to work with Mo Green. The problem was Fredo was making cocktail waitresses two at a time and the players couldn't get any drinks. So Mo had to slap Fredo around and they did not sit well with Michael. Anyway the rest is history.

[alexava 6,998]

the ball looked like (if the upright was extended) would have hit the outside half of the pole and deflected outward. that is all you can do is call it like it appears. i think the call was correct.

[cptau 169]

They made the goal uprights taller about 10 years to reduce the incidents of this happening. However if you watch the uprights in a windy game they move some. If you put a camera at the end of each upright they will move some in the wind again introducing uncertainty. All this adds costs too. The nfl spend a lot money adding 5 feet to the goal uprights last year.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/sports/football/nfl-scrambles-to-install-taller-uprights-after-rule-change.html?referer=&_r=0