Beerball Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 inside the 10, minute left they spike the ball on first down
Dan Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 inside the 10, minute left they spike the ball on first down Big Ben is looking very JPish in this game.
KD in CA Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 WTF were they thinking?? That was a Jauron call. Trying to save time for the Ravens to come back? Gonna be an interesting review here. And if they uphold the call, does Pitts go for the win on 4th? Good game.
VOR Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 WTF were they thinking?? That was a Jauron call. Trying to save time for the Ravens to come back? Gonna be an interesting review here. And if they uphold the call, does Pitts go for the win on 4th? Good game. Gotta kick the FG.
BuffaloWings Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 WTF were they thinking?? That was a Jauron call. Trying to save time for the Ravens to come back? Gonna be an interesting review here. And if they uphold the call, does Pitts go for the win on 4th? Good game. It looks to me like the ball touched the plane of the goal line, but I don't think he had possession until he came down. I think the call stands....and Tomlin kicks the FG.
Beerball Posted December 15, 2008 Author Posted December 15, 2008 WTF were they thinking?? That was a Jauron call. Trying to save time for the Ravens to come back? Gonna be an interesting review here. And if they uphold the call, does Pitts go for the win on 4th? Good game. wow, he was not in. go for it? eat my words, they gave him the TD. Did the ball ever cross the plane?
KD in CA Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 That's interesting. He didn't say the ball crossed the plane. He said "two feet in the end zone + possession". Is that a touchdown? Don't recall seeing that situation before.
VOR Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 Great time to have a defensive meltdown, Ravens.
CJPearl2 Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 Pitt is blessed because they have a great front office and great players.
KD in CA Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 Pitt is blessed because they have a great front office and great players. "Find a way to win". Obviously the Bills have the opposite mantra.
Beerball Posted December 15, 2008 Author Posted December 15, 2008 That's interesting. He didn't say the ball crossed the plane. He said "two feet in the end zone + possession". Is that a touchdown? Don't recall seeing that situation before. I always thought the ball had to cross. Guess not.
Tcali Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 I always thought the ball had to cross. Guess not. me too..wtf is that??
KD in CA Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 I always thought the ball had to cross. Guess not. Two feet = one ball? Actually, I guess that makes sense. If a guy makes a catch at the back of the endzone where he reaches over the back line and drags his feet, it's a TD. I guess we just aren't used to thinking of it from the perspective of the front of the EZ.
Simon Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 That's interesting. He didn't say the ball crossed the plane. He said "two feet in the end zone + possession". Is that a touchdown? Don't recall seeing that situation before. It was sort of loud here at the time. Didn't he also mumble something about the ball being "in" the plane? It doesn't matter where his feet were. I think they blew that one either way, there wasn't enough there to overturn what I thought was a great call on the field by the head linesman. If a guy makes a catch at the back of the endzone where he reaches over the back line and drags his feet, it's a TD. That's cuz at the back of the endzone the ball has already crossed the goalline by 10 yards. Apples to oranges.
Tcali Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 Two feet = one ball? Actually, I guess that makes sense. If a guy makes a catch at the back of the endzone where he reaches over the back line and drags his feet, it's a TD. I guess we just aren't used to thinking of it from the perspective of the front of the EZ. now your explanation makes absolutely no sense...lol
KD in CA Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 It was sort of loud here at the time. Didn't he also mumble something about the ball being "in" the plane?It doesn't matter where his feet were. I think they blew that one either way, there wasn't enough there to overturn what I thought was a great call on the field by the head linesman. The announcers seemed to agree with the call on the field that the ball didn't break the plane. Very hard to say because it's hard to tell from the side view exactly when he makes the catch. It was very close...IMO too close to overturn on the decision of whether or not he broke the plane. So I guess they gave it to them because his feet were down in the EZ. That's cuz at the back of the endzone the ball has already crossed the goalline by 10 yards. Apples to oranges. But that's irrelevant until the ball is in someone's hands, right?
Simon Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 IMO too close to overturn on the decision of whether or not he broke the plane. So I guess they gave it to them because his feet were down in the EZ. I agree the call on the field should have stood regardless of what it was. But the location of his feet is irrelevant and I don't know why the guy even mentioned it other than to establish that/when he had possession. His whole body can be in the endzone but if the ball doesn't hit the line it is not a TD so there's no way they gave it to him because of where his feet were. But that's irrelevant until the ball is in someone's hands, right? Yeah, I'm just saying it isn't a good comparison with this play because in this case (Bal/Pitt) the only thing that matters is whether the ball broke the plane, while in the back of the endzone the plane is irrelevant and the only thing that matters is feetdown w/ possession.
KD in CA Posted December 15, 2008 Posted December 15, 2008 But the location of his feet is irrelevant and I don't know why the guy even mentioned it other than to establish that/when he had possession.His whole body can be in the endzone but if the ball doesn't hit the line it is not a TD so there's no way they gave it to him because of where his feet were. Yup, at the core it's a rules question. If two feet and possession (without breaking the plane) is NOT a touchdown, than it was a bad reversal. But that's what the ref specifically said in his explanation of the reversal, hence my original post on the subject. Yeah, I'm just saying it isn't a good comparison with this play because in this case (Bal/Pitt) the only thing that matters is whether the ball broke the plane, while in the back of the endzone the plane is irrelevant and the only thing that matters is feetdown w/ possession. So are the rules are different in the front and back of the EZ? I didn't know that. I understand the practical nature of it, but that seems odd.
Recommended Posts