The oficials call on the Purdue last "no touchdown"

[papathawki]

With most everyone, I think, as I watched the Official Review of the last Purdue touchdown I was satisfied that it was a touchdown. The phone rang and it was my son who is a college official. He said "it's a touchback, our ball on the 20". I said, what the Hell are you talking about? He said the ball was fumbled into the end-zone, touchback. I said "huh?" He said, just wait & you'll see. I've learned that complaining about officials by amateures like me is best left to the professionals.

 

[bcl20]

Cool.

 

[Drakebulldog93]

Yeah, I schooled Vintage on that too.

 

[SixAMtailgate]

I'm no official and as soon as I saw the replay I said touchback.

 

[kmotuffe]

It's funny, I went from thinking it was a touchdown, to them getting it on the inch line, THEN after thinking, to the touchback.

Any way you slice it, what a crazy ending to that game! A good reminder to those reaching the ball out for the goal line as well...

 

[MNHawkeyeFreak]

I think I said something that would have just got filtered here.

 

[sodakhawkeye]

My wife called the fumble on the live play. I told her she was wrong. Turns out I was the one who was wrong.

 

[FalseMirage]

I listened to the game on the radio so I knew right away it was a touchback because Eddie is seldom wrong.

 

[cibula11]

I'm no official and as soon as I saw the replay I said touchback.

me too. I wasn't sure they'd see it that way, but I initially thought "touchback" was the right call.

 

[ssckelley]

My 1st grader got the call right when he seen the replay. Evidently he had seen that play before.

 

[swarm]

live looked like a td. upon first glance of the replay it was pretty clear no td and a fumble.

 

[KCRC]

There must be a special rule that I don't know about. What I saw, in order, was:

1) a fumble;
2) the runner's right hand displace the pylon;
3) the ball strike the pylon that had already been displaced

So, am I to understand that if the fumbled ball hits the pylon, it's an automatic touchback no matter where the pylon happens to be at that point? What if a WR was blocking a CB ahead of the play and the CB accidentally kicked the pylon to the 2 yard line, then the runner fumbles the ball and it hits the pylon laying on the ground at the 2? Touchback? I doubt it.

I'm glad we got the call though.

 

[ssckelley]

There must be a special rule that I don't know about. What I saw, in order, was:

1) a fumble;
2) the runner's right hand displace the pylon;
3) the ball strike the pylon that had already been displaced

So, am I to understand that if the fumbled ball hits the pylon, it's an automatic touchback no matter where the pylon happens to be at that point? What if a WR was blocking a CB ahead of the play and the CB accidentally kicked the pylon to the 2 yard line, then the runner fumbles the ball and it hits the pylon laying on the ground at the 2? Touchback? I doubt it.

I'm glad we got the call though.

What the heck were you looking at? That pylon was not displaced before the ball touched it.

 

[HawkeyeJim75]

I didn't have a answer other than he fumbled it. No TD! I wasn't sure from there.

 

[KCRC]

What the heck were you looking at? That pylon was not displaced before the ball touched it.

Sure looked like it to me. But I'm glad the review official agreed with you. Anybody dvr the game?

 

[theboat]

I'm no official and as soon as I saw the replay I said touchback.

Ditto. I was getting mad at the announcers because they didn't mention it until like the 4th replay.

 

[99topdawg]

I never questioned that he fumbled before touched the pylon. My question was, was there enough evidence to prove that the ball didn't cross the plane above the pylon before he fumbled?

 

[ssckelley]

Sure looked like it to me. But I'm glad the review official agreed with you. Anybody dvr the game?

You are the only person to say the pylon was displaced before the football hit it. If the pylon was displaced then it is the officials judgment on where the pylon should be in order to make the call. But I did not see the pylon get knocked over until after the ball hit it.

 

[shonblatt]

I never questioned that he fumbled before touched the pylon. My question was, was there enough evidence to prove that the ball didn't cross the plane above the pylon before he fumbled?

The front of the pylon is the plane of the end zone.

If the the ball is fumbled forward into the pylon (even from an angle), it's not possible that the ball was in the end zone before hitting the pylon.

If you can draw up a scenario where the ball was fumbled backward from the end zone into the front of the pylon, you will win the Nobel Prize for physics.

 

[ssckelley]

I never questioned that he fumbled before touched the pylon. My question was, was there enough evidence to prove that the ball didn't cross the plane above the pylon before he fumbled?

The plane and the pylon are one and the same. The ball was already out of his hand before it hit the pylon. The only question was if he was still in bounds or down before fumbling the ball, which replays clearly show his knees were not down and he was in bounds.