So, did the nose of the ball hit the ground?

[stevenash]

Forget for a moment you had a wager either way on the game, look at this clip objectively.

What do you think, level headed responses is what I am looking for.

[dudekid]

toss up really, although it looked like he had his elbow under the ball...maybe not a definite catch, but certainly not enough evidence there to overturn that call as the ruling was a TD on the field

[Cuse0323]

No wager on this game, you have to stick to the ruling on the field IMO. The nose hits the ground but he also seemed to have already secured it, way too close to overturn.

[Regul8er]

What the announcers failed to mention, was the ball shifting once the receiver hit the ground. Even if he originally maintained possession, you need to control the ball even after you've hit the ground. Amazing attempt, but almost impossible to secure that thing the way he laid out.

[baskets]

no, watch the ball move.

this one play will end up meaning about 5k for me. but waking up and looking at this objectively, at 0:43 and forward, you see where it precisely happens

[doublej95]

the game ended as a push for me. would have been nice to get the win but could have easily been a loss also. no point in crying over spilled milk.

[baskets]

Regul8r nailed out.

Give that man a bag of potato chips and a beer and send him to the review booth for all NFL and College games.

But for the majority of the review guys in football.. it's like they go down to a homeless shelter and ask any homeless fukk if he wants to do some 'booth reviewing' for a hot meal and a paper bag of spirit juice.

[str]

Going by rule, it did not seem to me to be enough evidence to overturn it IMO. In a perfect world, it should have been ruled incomplete and then the play stands for lack of evidence otherwise. However, that was not the call and video replay does not give you indisputable evidence that it was not.

[Deuce]

Yes

Ball moved when he hit the ground.

[EaglesPhan36]

No wager on this game, you have to stick to the ruling on the field IMO. The nose hits the ground but he also seemed to have already secured it, way too close to overturn.

This. If they called it incomplete, it would have been ruled incomplete. Ruling it a TD and overturning it on that evidence was weak sauce. Given that, Va.Tech had already thrown the game away at least three times. Going for it on 4th & 1 with the fake punt that led to three points. Fumbled kickoff return before the half led to three points. Also went for it on 4th & something in the red zone instead of kicking a FG. Nine points they could have been up and not have had to depend on a referee not being an idiot during a review.

[blackbeSSt]

What the announcers failed to mention, was the ball shifting once the receiver hit the ground. Even if he originally maintained possession, you need to control the ball even after you've hit the ground. Amazing attempt, but almost impossible to secure that thing the way he laid out.

looks like he's still holding it as he rolls into the camera guys

[oiler]

didnt see enough to change the call so it should of been td

[ngates815]

Ehh, I had Va Tech +10.5 in a parlay...So wasn't concerned too much. But I had them in my bowl pickem which if they would of won the game I'd be in 2nd place.


But when I was at first watching, I thought there was no way in hell he was gonna catch the ball in bounds. Then the review I thought the nose of the ball hit the ground and helped secure the ball in his arms. Then the announcers kept talking about the other 3 times that they had reviewed catches...and I thought there would be a real good chance that it would be ruled a TD.


Very surprised that they overruled it.


Sucks, but oh well.

[Jimmy Proffett]

You can't just stick with the ruling on the field in this case. Ref that called touchdown originally couldn't see that the ball touched the ground; receiver obstructed his view. And the nose of the ball did touch the ground, so no catch.

[blackbeSSt]

Ehh, I had Va Tech +10.5 in a parlay...So wasn't concerned too much. But I had them in my bowl pickem which if they would of won the game I'd be in 2nd place. But when I was at first watching, I thought there was no way in hell he was gonna catch the ball in bounds. Then the review I thought the nose of the ball hit the ground and helped secure the ball in his arms. Then the announcers kept talking about the other 3 times that they had reviewed catches...and I thought there would be a real good chance that it would be ruled a TD. Very surprised that they overruled it. Sucks, but oh well.

did you buy 7.5 points in a parlay

[stevenash]

Game did not effect my wallet one way or another, I would be fine with 'not enough evidence to overrule the original TD call, call stands, touchdown'

Having said that, I am also fine with the reversal.

[Glitch]

you would assume because of physics, gravity and geometry that the nose of the ball did hit before his 1 elbow (all thats necessary in college ball) this assumption would however be incorrect. he twisted his body (counter clockwise) at the last milisecond right after he secured the ball and sacrificed his elbow painfully hard against the ground

[playersonly69]

I was thinking no catch the whole time.

[Glitch]

Game did not effect my wallet one way or another, I would be fine with 'not enough evidence to overrule the original TD call, call stands, touchdown'

Having said that, I am also fine with the reversal.

hmmm nevermind

[TheMoneyShot]

It was ruled a touchdown on the field... you must stay with the call. Nothing there to overturn the call. Another great way of the video replay official changing the NCAA rules. F'ed me big time last night.

[TheMoneyShot]

This. If they called it incomplete, it would have been ruled incomplete. Ruling it a TD and overturning it on that evidence was weak sauce. Given that, Va.Tech had already thrown the game away at least three times. Going for it on 4th & 1 with the fake punt that led to three points. Fumbled kickoff return before the half led to three points. Also went for it on 4th & something in the red zone instead of kicking a FG. Nine points they could have been up and not have had to depend on a referee not being an idiot during a review.

Good point Eagles. But... is the video replay official thinking of VT's blown opportunities throughout the entire game? Should he base this in his decision on making this call? When I saw the play live... I said no f'ing way he made that catch. After watching the replays... I'm like I can't believe it... that kid's in... he's f'ing in. The ref made the call... a TD and he was in great position. Outstanding athleticism by that VT WR by the way... and whether or not the ball hit the ground... he had it secured the entire way through. Hell of a catch by that kid. I've seen many catches throughout the year far worse than that... called a completed catch. Hope that video replay official can sleep at night. I sure as hell can't. The rule states... indisputable video evidence... and by looking at all angles... you can't overturn the call on the field.

[ngates815]

did you buy 7.5 points in a parlay

Yes I did.

Remember I don't do this for a living, if I happen to win, cool, if I happen to lose, it won't matter.

But spending 150 on a 5 team parlay that pays out 400 just for action is fine with me....Sorry I'm not a professional gambler.

[Deuce]

The real cry was the false start on the game winning FG but he also did this on every FG in the game.

[TheMoneyShot]

LOL I noticed that too Deuce... entire game was just a bunch of BS... I'm the as#hole that goes ALL IN... I want to shoot myself. The twists and turns of this game... ups... downs... if anyone had 10k+ on this game... and too VT SU... I could only imagine... I wouldn't want to get up the next day. I was so F'ing pissed getting up earlier today...

It's what happens when you go ALL IN. I said I was 3 weeks ago... so I guess I can't bitch? But, what a game to get screwed on. Beamer didn't coach like a Hall of Fame coach.

[Glitch]

theres enough evidence to let it stand justifiably and indisputably.
willing to bet points with anyone who thinks this is not true.

ah well; no takers i guess. here is the proof anyway- screenshotted from the above video. look how he spins his body left to crash his elbow down RIGHT after securing the ball into his hands.

(ball is coming loose/ sliding down his forearm due to ground impact, this snap is showing his elbow hit first...you would need one a fraction of a second earlier to show the ball was securely in his hands right before this)

[Regul8er]

Glitch, if your argument if that this was indeed a catch, then you didn't do yourself justice by attaching this picture. Just sayin!

[kmarinouofm]

What the announcers failed to mention, was the ball shifting once the receiver hit the ground. Even if he originally maintained possession, you need to control the ball even after you've hit the ground. Amazing attempt, but almost impossible to secure that thing the way he laid out.

what no one looked at.. and what no one is really talking about is that to me.. it seemed like he was out of bounds with the ball.. when he goes to the ground.. his elbow is right on the line.. and the nose of the ball is touching the chalk... its tough with the above angle.. but last night i kept saying.. man.. he is out of bounds either way

[itchypickle]

Elbow touched first - should have ended the process. He maintained control and even from the angles shown last night I cannot see HOW they overturned the ruling on the field. A 50/50 should be kept as ruled on the field...or at least thats how they say it's supposed to be handled.

I pushed my wager of Tech +3 so not sad but still not happy. That Coale kid played his ass off in the game...made some great catches showing hands and feet and effort in catches in traffic and on the sideline....it's a shame that one was taken away from him. I felt sick to my stomach for him when it showed him on the sidelines after the overturn. Glaring example of why people hate referees having that much power sometimes...ruins it for the players.

[2daBank]

glitch arguing it a catch then showing a picture that basically shows it is not a catch? see tip of ball hit turf? then go to next pic where ball shifts after it hits ground, ball hits ground (indisputable) ball shifts after it makes contact with turf (again indisputable) = incomplete pass all day every day.. ..

[Housemoney]

The other two they reviewed were not catches that they didn't overturn. This was an unbelievable catch.

[FourLengthsClear]

No play on the game for me.

I don't see indisputable evidence one way or the other and as such the ruling on the field should have stood even if, on balance, I don't think it was a catch.

The better team on the day (VA Tech) failed to capitalise on their advantage, in the first half especially. If they had played a smarter game this would have all been moot.

[Glitch]

this picture is of the ball still not touching while his elbow IS touching. ball shifts when his elbow makes contact with the turf.

THIS specific one particular still picture is only intended to show that his elbow hit first. if someone wants to argue a different reason as to why its not a catch. control etc then that would be the next thing to screenshot. this is only a capturing of a single still moment.

[Deuce]

So just because his elbows hit before the ball hits the ground makes it a catch? The ball readjusts when he hits the ground only making more of a greater impact that he held onto the ball. I had no horse in this race because I had no action. I would just like you to clarify that.

[2daBank]

the fact his elbow touches before the ball means jack shit...doesnt matter at the end of the day game log says incomplete pass so it was a incomplete pass, not a great catch..

[Glitch]

if he establishes control at any point during the catch and brings it down to the ground (caught already at the ground so not hard) then the play is over when his elbow touches. doesnt matter if the ball is shaken more loose.