Former NFL head official agrees with replay

ICHawk24

ICHawk24

Well-Known Member
Replay does its job in Michigan-Iowa game - College Football News | FOX Sports on MSN

In my mind, whatever ended being called on the field — incomplete or a touchdown — would have stood in replay. That’s how close this play was.

If 50 people were in a bar watching this play, half of them would rule it an incomplete pass and the other half would rule it a touchdown. That’s reason alone to leave the call the way it was called on the field, and I agree with that decision 100 percent.
 
It was the right call cause we are Hawk fans. If the tables had been turned, and Iowa had been playing defense on that last drive, you can be sure that Iowa fans would have thought it was a horrible call.

It was a tough call. Ultimately, the fact that it was called incomplete on the field was the determining factor.
 
Thats not true, had it looked like a catch I would have said Iowa got lucky on that. He did not have control of the ball when it hit the ground, end of story.
 
ssckelley said:
Thats not true, had it looked like a catch I would have said Iowa got lucky on that. He did not have control of the ball when it hit the ground, end of story.
Click to expand...

Are you ALL Iowa fans? :)

Props for your owning up to a hypothetical situation. But I think it's safe to say my scenario would be the more likely one.
 
No, had the situation been reversed there would have been a thread on here saying that should have been ruled a catch, some would have blamed KOK, some would have said KF needs to be fired, and I probably would have taken a break from these forums. :D
 
From another site.

N9lqk.jpg
 
If there is a complaint, Michigan still had two chances after that and STILL couldn't score. It was the right call in the situation. Now the non call on the PI????
 
There was also a pretty blatant offensive pass-interference preceding the almost catch as Hemingway shoved Hyde out of the way (Hyde was complaining to the ref about the lack of a call). I would not expect that to be called, however, because about the only way for a receiver to get offensive PI is to take a knife out and stab the defensive back. It is not quite as bad as in the NFL, but it seems to be getting worse.

I thought the play in question was a no-catch from the very first replay, although I agree it was close.

On the very last play, that was definitely a 50-50 call for defensive PI on Lowery. I am glad they didn't call it, but had they called it I couldn't have argued too vehemently (only a little vehemently).
 
very tough call, at the time i thought it could hav went either way but the picture above shows it was not a catch.
 
As I understand it, the ground CAN assist you in the catch, so long as you maintain control through the end of the catch. I think this just happened within the last couple weeks with an Iowa opponent.

The thing is, I simply don't get why the ground rules are different depending on the circumstance. The ground CAN'T cause a fumble, but CAN help you catch. And it CAN help you stay on your feet. So in one circumstance ball contacting the ground makes the play dead, but in the other it's not a dead play??
 
I think it would have been different had he had an arm or hand underneath the ball and just the nose touched. But in this case the entire ball touched the ground, so it isn't a catch. Michigan fans argue that he had control of the ball when his knee touched the ground, well I didn't see it that way. I also thought it was defensive PI on that play.

There was PI on the last play though as the defender had his right arm around his back. Very close play and I can see why it was a no call. But they let the defensive PI go and the refs botched up the illegal snap call so really it is a wash.
 
ssckelley said:
I think it would have been different had he had an arm or hand underneath the ball and just the nose touched. But in this case the entire ball touched the ground, so it isn't a catch. Michigan fans argue that he had control of the ball when his knee touched the ground, well I didn't see it that way. I also thought it was defensive PI on that play.

There was PI on the last play though as the defender had his right arm around his back. Very close play and I can see why it was a no call. But they let the defensive PI go and the refs botched up the illegal snap call so really it is a wash.
Click to expand...

Where was the defensive PI on the no catch play? When the receiver moved Prater out of the way? And on the last play, they're not going to call that within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage...and as for the illegal snap, it should've been a false start or illegal procedure as Ferentz clearly started rocking way before he snapped the ball.

Edit: I said Prater, it was Micah Hyde on the coverage on that one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top