Pats interception not an interception?

One of many experimental iterations ...

Goaldeje

The Legend
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,376
Reaction score
41
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

I didn't fault the refs on that one, assuming they had the same camera angles CBS had, cause there wasn't enough visual evidence to overturn.

But that sucks.
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,555
Reaction score
1,577
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

I'm not sure the ball hitting the turf automatically means it can't be ruled an INT...he has his hand under it (at least partially) and controlled the ball as he rolled. I saw that it looked like it touched the ground on the immediate replay, but it still looked like a legitimate pick to me.
 

burgold

The Team Captain
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
2,048
Reaction score
0
Points
0


I remember seeing that on the Jumbotron at the stadium and thinking that it could be overturned, but I really didn't think that the refs should or could. I like complaining about the refs... that's one call I don't think they blew.
 

Canadian Hog

2019 BGO Ballers Champ
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,266
Reaction score
64
Points
48
Location
Ontario, Canada


I think that these are the types of plays and bad breaks that come with the territory when you are a 4-9 team.

When and if this team ever does get things right and turns the corner, you will notice that we will be on the favourable end of these kinds of plays more often than not.
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

I'm not sure the ball hitting the turf automatically means it can't be ruled an INT...he has his hand under it (at least partially) and controlled the ball as he rolled. I saw that it looked like it touched the ground on the immediate replay, but it still looked like a legitimate pick to me.
This. ^^^



I was listening to someone a few games ago discussing the rule and if I heard it correctly, the tip of the ball can hit the ground as long as there is obvious possession of the ball in every other aspect of the play.

I will not swear by this, and I am too lazy to look it up but I am pretty sure that is what I heard about the rule.

But **** the refs, the Santana push off was not a push off and they took the game tying TD away from us!
 

Lanky Livingston

The Commissioner
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
27,017
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Houston, TX

Florida Atlantic

I'm not sure the ball hitting the turf automatically means it can't be ruled an INT...he has his hand under it (at least partially) and controlled the ball as he rolled. I saw that it looked like it touched the ground on the immediate replay, but it still looked like a legitimate pick to me.
The ball can't be moving at all when it hits the ground, or its incomplete. This is the Keyshawn rule. But a hand under the ball isn't the final determinant IIRC - its control of the ball, which you can't see from a still photo. I wasn't able to watch the game, so I don't know if he had control or not.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top