it is clearly on the turf at 1:53:52 the slow down zoom from the back the balls nose hits the turf with Grant's hand in front.
Two Official Calls Question
- Thread starter nits74
- Start date
it is clearly on the turf at 1:53:52 the slow down zoom from the back the balls nose hits the turf with Grant's hand in front.
His left hand is in front, you can't see his right hand. The nose of the ball could be on the turf or on his right hand.
Right. My point all along. And, b/c the field call was a pick, it never should have been overturned. Not an egregious blown call, but it was a blown call.
Both of the calls you question were, at the very least, incredibly close calls that could have gone either way. Funny how some think the refs were out to get them, when there are plenty of calls/non-calls that benefitted Penn State, too. Off the top of my head, Barkley's knee being obviously down, and an egregious PI on one of your DBs near the end zone (I think Campbell?), both which went uncalled.
Too funny, now Barkley's knee was "obviously down" when video shows it unquestionably was not (nearly as amusing as your overturning field calls with no video showing the ball on the ground). But you're not "biased", you're just an Iowa @ssclown right?
from the front angle both hands are in front of the ball you can clearly see that... so if you see that on the front angle you don't have to see it on the back angle, which the right hand you can't see because the football on the turf is blocking the hand ... and we know from the front angle his right hand aint under the football...
I cant post the pictures but I have perfectly matched frames that I pulled out of final cut ... now I doubt it was looked at that closely, but why complain about the right call being made . . .
Lol, the video shows that his knee was unquestionably down. There is literally no disputing that. It is an incontrovertible fact. And I'm the biased one? Hilarious.
Officials missed calls on both sides. That is the nature of having humans officiate games. To pretend that the officials are out to get one side or favoring one side is fantasy (not directed at you in particular).
The record shows pretty clearly that over the years, in what might be called "big" conference games, this conference's officials, and certain crews in particular, have a habit of "missing" or blowing a lot more calls to the disadvantage of Penn State than in the team's favor. Who knows, maybe it's just an incredible coincidence.
And yes, the same thing happened Saturday night, though granted, it wasn't quite as bad as we've come to expect. I guess we should be grateful for that. In any case, Haley's interception, which had the potential to decisively turn the game at that point, should NOT have been overturned. There was no way in hell that the video evidence was "indisputable," which is the necessary standard.
As for McSorley's fumble, at minimum it should have been reviewed. OK, by the same standard of "indisputability," maybe the call on the field would have and should have stood. Either way, in both cases, Haley and McSorley, controversial and critical calls go against the Lions, with, in each case, an apparently different standard of judgment applied.
All this said, look, Iowa played great and hats off to them. Great program. Great coach. I have all the respect in the world for Iowa and was thrilled to just escape there with the W -- in spite of the officials.
Well, it's Monday and I have not seen one image, video or still, that shows Barkley's knee as being "unquestionably down." Can you provide that evidence? Since it was so obvious as you say, I'm guessing you won't have any problem locating numerous different sources.
But I'm guessing that since they didn't replay that video 100 times showing how "unquestionably down" his knee was and that the rules expert never chimed in and said how "unquestionably down" his knee was that maybe just maybe your search might be a little more difficult than you think. I'll be waiting.
It did slip and/or wobble as defender made contact before the ball started moving forward, if a QB loses control of the ball before the forward motion is started he can certainly push the ball forward 10 yards without having control..... should have been reviewed but that wouldn't changed anything, I'm OK with the outcome/call.
I believe the reviews (or lack thereof) went both ways in this game.
I think they got McSorley's fumble right. However, they should have left the ruling on the field stand with respect to the interception.
PSU got a big break on Barkleys run where the refs failed to review whether or not his knee went down on that big run. I think they replay showed that his knee was down and Barkley gained another 20 yards after his knee was down. IMO, this mistake was more blatant than the fumble and interception.
I agree the penalties appeared to be somewhat one sided in favor of Iowa but whining about it, especially after we won the game, is unbecoming. I suspect vocal whining about the officiating after every game only serves to worsen the officiating bias.
It was an odd field--when the twirler kicked up a spray of black stuff while running onto the field for her performance, it made one wonder...
Looked like McSorley's hand was going forward before the ball came out of his hand.
Youtube lets you adjust the speed of the playback. I watched it a 1/4 speed and I still can't tell if the ball hit the ground or if Hailey got his glove under it and it hit his glove instead of the ground. I hardly think it meets the requirement for overturning a call on the field... which can only result from indisputable video evidence
Literally just watch the play. The 1:42:50 mark of the video KnightSlayer posted below shows Barkley's knee was unquestionably down.
There is nothing disingenuous about it. You literally have video evidence showing you that his knee touched. There is no need for circumstantial evidence when there is clear and undisputed video evidence. There was no time for the ABC broadcast to show the play "over and over and over" because Penn State ran another play ten seconds later. If that play were to have been reviewed, it gets overturned 100 times out of 100. If you refuse to acknowledge that, you are either too stubborn to admit you are wrong, a massive homer, or incredibly unintelligent.
Ouch. That hurts. And they had plenty of time to stop the action. They went back and showed one replay, at least. How long do they need to signal down to stop the action? And all the time, even after a play is over TV will go back and show a close play over and over and over from several different angles. Yet, nothing here on this play where Barkley was "unquestionably down." Hmmmm, wonder why?
There is literally no possible way to watch the video and objectively say that his knee never touched. The video shows incontrovertible evidence that it did. If you want to ignore that to focus on subjective factors or motives, you are even dumber than I originally thought.
So I'm even dumber than one who is incredibly unintelligent? Holy smokes, it's pretty amazing that I can make it thru the day without hurting myself.
Keep clinging to this pal. I hope it keeps you warm. See ya...
I think it's pretty clear that Barkley's knee was down. Though I thought for sure that the Haley play would stand, the ball likely did touch the ground and move, but didn't think they had enough to overturn it. Overall, thought it was a well-officiated game.
This was a bad call, but it was essentially a make up call for a horrible PI call a few minutes earlier which was not PI.
The rubber kicks up from his heel/foot. His knee may have touched and I agree that I should have been reviewed, but there is no definitive visual evidence (that I have seen) that shows the knee touching.
The rubber is kicked up in front of his foot. Like I said. Youtube lets you slow down the video to 1/4 speed. You can absolutely see his knee scrap the ground. I call it like I see it.
Likely down yes. Incontrovertible no. The only thing incontrovertible is that you are a douchebag for still hanging out on this board 2 days later. GTFO of here and get a life.
I could say the same thing about your fans complaining about borderline calls/penalties in a game your team won. The only reason I am here is because said complaints are so delusional and petty I felt compelled to point out how wrong and stupid they are.
Why don't you feel compelled to STFU? We will complain about whatever we want to on our board. Go back to some backward-assed Iowa board and lick your wounds with your buddies.
The NCAA rules state that the review must be done made by the replay official on equipment in the replay box. Therefore the Jumbotron can not be used.
The conference did not change any rules. They still replay calls being reviewed inside the stadium.
