So will this officiating crew....

[GrizzleMoose]

I watched the replay several times on the Henderson catch and it is very close either way. The explanation given by one of the announcers was that the referee called it incomplete and said Henderson was juggling it as he drug his foot in bounds. They the said that they gave him the catch because unlike the nfl, as long as you finish the catch and have one foot in, it is a catch. The fact that he was juggling the ball did not matter because he finished the catch and had one foot in. This is not my interpretation, this is what one of the announcers said. The replay does show that he had one foot in by the way.

 

[Bluenoser]

The explanation that they gave on Facebook is nothing more than a cover your ass, pure and simple.

Link?

Hey Bluenoser? Did that link work for you? How about you Alpha? For those of you who want to criticize the team and coaches and ignore the facts, this officiating crew blew it big time and they need to be held responsible. I am not saying that the Final outcome was because of their incompetence but we can't simply ignore the fact that they messed up big time in a playoff game. They need to be held responsible. Period. We may have still lost that game regardless, but I don't think we should just turn a blind eye to the matter because some people on here have an agenda to tear down the very team and program that they claim to support and love.

Uh, just checking in for the first time since that post.

Some thoughts:

1. Where do you see anywhere that I implied that I was OK with the call? Can you find that and repost it here? Do you see where I have an agenda against the coaching staff or the players? Please post that as well. That'd be great, thanks.

2. There are literally dozens and dozens of pages on the innernets. For all I know, there may even be thousands! One of my pet peeves is when someone references something they obviously just read on the internet, and then fails to provide a link to the original post. Hint: Use your mouse to single click on the URL on the top of the page. That is the address for that page on the internet. For most browsers, if you single click on the address, that selects the entire address. Computers have what is often referenced to as a "clipboard". On a Windows machine you can press [Ctrl+C] to copy the text. That places the URL into the clipboard. Then when you come to a new page, as long as you haven't copied something else, you can paste it into the new page with [Ctrl+V]. That way the person you are talking to can magically peruse your reference material. That way your reader doesn't have to spend a lot of time searching, wait, what? billions? trillions? of pages on the internet for the one you referred? That could take weeks!

Here is an example:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/09/12/web.index/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hint: The google search bar is entirely different than the address in the address bar. That often throws people but once you get it, it is obvious the difference.

3. The page you referenced with a link - believe it or not - was not Facebook but a link to a pdf on arbitersports.com.

4. Believe it or not I agree with you that was a horrible call and had a huge impact on the game.

5. I wanted to original link so that I could go make a similarly snarky response as this to the refs on their facebook page.

6. It is difficult to snark a pdf link.

7. When you snark someone for calling you out, make sure they are actually calling you out and not actually on your side. Lest you get snarked in return.

8. You're welcome.

 

[GrizzleMoose]

The explanation that they gave on Facebook is nothing more than a cover your ass, pure and simple.

Link?

Hey Bluenoser? Did that link work for you? How about you Alpha? For those of you who want to criticize the team and coaches and ignore the facts, this officiating crew blew it big time and they need to be held responsible. I am not saying that the Final outcome was because of their incompetence but we can't simply ignore the fact that they messed up big time in a playoff game. They need to be held responsible. Period. We may have still lost that game regardless, but I don't think we should just turn a blind eye to the matter because some people on here have an agenda to tear down the very team and program that they claim to support and love.

Uh, just checking in for the first time since that post.

Some thoughts:

1. Where do you see anywhere that I implied that I was OK with the call? Can you find that and repost it here? Do you see where I have an agenda against the coaching staff or the players? Please post that as well. That'd be great, thanks.

2. There are literally dozens and dozens of pages on the innernets. For all I know, there may even be thousands! One of my pet peeves is when someone references something they obviously just read on the internet, and then fails to provide a link to the original post. Hint: Use your mouse to single click on the URL on the top of the page. That is the address for that page on the internet. For most browsers, if you single click on the address, that selects the entire address. Computers have what is often referenced to as a "clipboard". On a Windows machine you can press [Ctrl+C] to copy the text. That places the URL into the clipboard. Then when you come to a new page, as long as you haven't copied something else, you can paste it into the new page with [Ctrl+V]. That way the person you are talking to can magically peruse your reference material. That way your reader doesn't have to spend a lot of time searching, wait, what? billions? trillions? of pages on the internet for the one you referred? That could take weeks!

Here is an example:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/09/12/web.index/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hint: The google search bar is entirely different than the address in the address bar. That often throws people but once you get it, it is obvious the difference.

3. The page you referenced with a link - believe it or not - was not Facebook but a link to a pdf on arbitersports.com.

4. Believe it or not I agree with you that was a horrible call and had a huge impact on the game.

5. I wanted to original link so that I could go make a similarly snarky response as this to the refs on their facebook page.

6. It is difficult to snark a pdf link.

7. When you snark someone for calling you out, make sure they are actually calling you out and not actually on your side. Lest you get snarked in return.

8. You're welcome.

Bluenosed, I was under the impression that you were asking for a link to the actual rules showing proof that the refs messed up, alpha was doing the same thing. The Facebook response was in a separate thread and had been up for a while so I was not aware that you were looking for the Facebook link. I did not post the Facebook response, it was in another thread. My bad, I am just so completely amazed at how some people on here actually think that what the refs did is ok. I am the type of person who believes thath everyone needs to be held accountable when they mess up like these morons did.

 

[Bluenoser]

Bluenosed, I was under the impression that you were asking for a link to the actual rules showing proof that the refs messed up, alpha was doing the same thing. The Facebook response was in a separate thread and had been up for a while so I was not aware that you were looking for the Facebook link. I did not post the Facebook response, it was in another thread. My bad, I am just so completely amazed at how some people on here actually think that what the refs did is ok. I am the type of person who believes thath everyone needs to be held accountable when they mess up like these morons did.

No problem. I may have overreacted being lumped in with Alpha who is no longer here.

I'd still love to see the link to the Facebook page as I still haven't seen it yet.

Cheers

 

[Robsnotes4u]

I watched the replay several times on the Henderson catch and it is very close either way. The explanation given by one of the announcers was that the referee called it incomplete and said Henderson was juggling it as he drug his foot in bounds. They the said that they gave him the catch because unlike the nfl, as long as you finish the catch and have one foot in, it is a catch. The fact that he was juggling the ball did not matter because he finished the catch and had one foot in. This is not my interpretation, this is what one of the announcers said. The replay does show that he had one foot in by the way.

First of all if you think it is or is not a catch it must be declared incomplete by rule. The play was called incomplete on the field. Second by rule as shown below the announcers interpretation of the rule is incorrect.

Incorrect, by the 2013 and 2014 NCAA manual. Go here to download the .pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=FpuHNF_Sd8ZWWFm10JQMUA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.eW0

Here is the ruling incase you do not want to download

ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.

 

[btecca]

This is ridiculous. Yes so the griz lost, however does that mean that these refs should get their paychecks when the job they were doing wasn't done to league officiating rules. If that is so awesome because I am going to become a ref next year. Didn't know it was so easy to make a paycheck without any accountability. Come on guys if this were something that was the fault of a player or coach we would be stripped of wins, charged money, and taken scholarships from. If we aren't going to hold the NCAA accountable for the officials they hire than who is. All I am saying is that this is messed up and it is sad that people get more mad at ESPN for only showing the game on ESPN3 than they do for matters of this type. Nobody has created any petitions for review into the conduct of these refs? I'll tell you I saw the worst officiated game ever on Saturday. Whatever happens the game is over but at least we can stop this from happening again. Good luck to the Griz in the offseason and hopefully we'll see a determined Griz team out there next year.

 

[catsack]

I watched the replay several times on the Henderson catch and it is very close either way. The explanation given by one of the announcers was that the referee called it incomplete and said Henderson was juggling it as he drug his foot in bounds. They the said that they gave him the catch because unlike the nfl, as long as you finish the catch and have one foot in, it is a catch. The fact that he was juggling the ball did not matter because he finished the catch and had one foot in. This is not my interpretation, this is what one of the announcers said. The replay does show that he had one foot in by the way.

First of all if you think it is or is not a catch it must be declared incomplete by rule. The play was called incomplete on the field. Second by rule as shown below the announcers interpretation of the rule is incorrect.

Incorrect, by the 2013 and 2014 NCAA manual. Go here to download the .pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=FpuHNF_Sd8ZWWFm10JQMUA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.eW0

Here is the ruling incase you do not want to download

ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.

Ball never touches the ground!

 

[fanofzoo]

Admit it Alpha Man, you are wrong on this one.

GrizzleMoose
eGrizzer in Training

Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:50 pm
I am a fan of: Griz

You have a better chance of the ncaa rescheduling the game.

 

[Raider]

I had lunch with a college official yesterday, and asked him his take. This has been the talk of officiating circles around the country for the last three days.

In short, this was a major, major error on the part of the officials in this game. This should have never happened, and he said he has never seen (or even heard) of this happening before. This wasn’t the only critical error in this game, and the white-hat completely lost control at a few points in the game.

This was a poorly officiated game, for BOTH SIDES, it’s just that this call was so unordinary it sticks out in everyone’s mind. Henderson was out of bounds, and the PI call in the 4th when their safety was called for PI on Jamal Jones was ticky-tack at best.

It’s really unfortunate this call happened in this games, because for most Griz fans in masks why they actually lost this game.

 

[grizfnz]

the PI call in the 4th when their safety was called for PI on Jamal Jones was ticky-tack at best.

Had it not been for that call CC wouldn't have had a single penalty. I can honestly say I don't believe I've ever seen a team play so clean. Even the WWF move where the CC player grabbed our o-line man's leg and lifted him off the ground for a takedown while the play was happening 15 yards down field was executed so flawlessly that the official WATCHING it happen couldn't bring it upon himself to throw a flag. Then take into account that not a single CC player managed to take a D lineman to the ground or grab on to a jersey all day..........Had it not been for the ticky-tack PI call I could have died a happy man, having witnessed the cleanest most fundamentally sound team I've ever see play the game. Oh well, I guess I'll just have to go on living, dreaming about what could have been.

 

[PlayerRep]

I thought the PI call was a good call. Defender was early and interfered with the catch. Usually called, sometimes not.

The non-call holding were bad several times. The worst was the non-call on the CC sideline when Tripp was outside his blocker but unable to get away from him to push the runner out of bounds because he was being held blatantly by the blocker. Allowed CC to pick up an important 3d and long around midfield. These were all normal calls/missed calls, which happen in almost every game. The blunder on the replay situation was in a category of incompetence by itself.

 

[poorgriz]

I thought the PI call was a good call. Defender was early and interfered with the catch. Usually called, sometimes not.

The non-call holding were bad several times. The worst was the non-call on the CC sideline when Tripp was outside his blocker but unable to get away from him to push the runner out of bounds because he was being held blatantly by the blocker. Allowed CC to pick up an important 3d and long around midfield. These were all normal calls/missed calls, which happen in almost every game. The blunder on the replay situation was in a category of incompetence by itself.

Let’s say there was no replay in this game. On that play in question, JJ rolls out and starts to run, looks down field and hits his receiver for the same gain. BUT, there’s a flag on the play and they call an illegal forward pass because they thought JJ was over the line. Everyone watches the replay and it’s not even close. He was WELL behind the line and it’s 100% indisputable. Griz get hosed. Mistake by the ref, and there’s nothing you can do about it. THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, and the end result is exactly the same as what happened on Saturday. So, WHY are you making such a big deal out of the replay mistake? WHY is it such a big deal to you? Would you STILL be whining about this one play if it were the above scenario? That’s fine if you all want to keep railing on and on about this and start a movement to get someone fired… but it’s not going to happen. What SHOULD happen is that this crew should be required to take a mandatory training course and intensive testing to make sure they understand how to properly implement instant replay in a game.

 

[Robsnotes4u]

I watched the replay several times on the Henderson catch and it is very close either way. The explanation given by one of the announcers was that the referee called it incomplete and said Henderson was juggling it as he drug his foot in bounds. They the said that they gave him the catch because unlike the nfl, as long as you finish the catch and have one foot in, it is a catch. The fact that he was juggling the ball did not matter because he finished the catch and had one foot in. This is not my interpretation, this is what one of the announcers said. The replay does show that he had one foot in by the way.

First of all if you think it is or is not a catch it must be declared incomplete by rule. The play was called incomplete on the field. Second by rule as shown below the announcers interpretation of the rule is incorrect.

Incorrect, by the 2013 and 2014 NCAA manual. Go here to download the .pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=FpuHNF_Sd8ZWWFm10JQMUA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.eW0

Here is the ruling incase you do not want to download

ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.

Ball never touches the ground!

Reread the bold! nothing to do with the ball touching the ground, he is bobbling the ball as he is going out of bounds. A foot would be considered any part of his body.
you can not see going frame by frame when his left foot is out of bounds, on the ground, yet there is no control when his right foot touches in bounds, in fact he doesn't gain control of the ball until he is another step out of bounds.

There is no evidence to over rule the call on the field. Remember it has to be indisputable. If the refs would have called it a catch, a person could argue the other way, until you look at the pictures and description below.

My point was the announcers were incorrect when the stated the ruling as you.

Here are two photos the first shows the left foot on the ground(look at the arrow) before the right foot scrapes down in bounds. The second photo shows the left foot (look at the arrow) after the right foot is coming off the ground for the next step. How do you know the right foot hit the ground first? The foot is in the exact same spot even though his body is moving from left to right. Impossible not to be the first foot down out of bounds.










here is the ball out in the sequence showing no control, fuzz but you can tell.

 

[Sportin' Life]

What SHOULD happen is that this crew should be required to take a mandatory training course and intensive testing to make sure they understand how to properly implement instant replay in a game.

The thing is we are in a division where the average attendance is about 9000, but that means that (assuming a normal distribution for the sake of shooting from the hip) half the teams average well less than that. Manhy games have very few people interested in watching them live, so it makes no sense to televise that game. And if games are not televised, there will be no instant replay, and so the officials don't need to be experts in it. It is just the nature of being in this division.

 

[GrizzleMoose]

I watched the replay several times on the Henderson catch and it is very close either way. The explanation given by one of the announcers was that the referee called it incomplete and said Henderson was juggling it as he drug his foot in bounds. They the said that they gave him the catch because unlike the nfl, as long as you finish the catch and have one foot in, it is a catch. The fact that he was juggling the ball did not matter because he finished the catch and had one foot in. This is not my interpretation, this is what one of the announcers said. The replay does show that he had one foot in by the way.

First of all if you think it is or is not a catch it must be declared incomplete by rule. The play was called incomplete on the field. Second by rule as shown below the announcers interpretation of the rule is incorrect.

Incorrect, by the 2013 and 2014 NCAA manual. Go here to download the .pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=FpuHNF_Sd8ZWWFm10JQMUA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.eW0

Here is the ruling incase you do not want to download

ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.

Ball never touches the ground!

Reread the bold! nothing to do with the ball touching the ground, he is bobbling the ball as he is going out of bounds. A foot would be considered any part of his body.
you can not see going frame by frame when his left foot is out of bounds, on the ground, yet there is no control when his right foot touches in bounds, in fact he doesn't gain control of the ball until he is another step out of bounds.

There is no evidence to over rule the call on the field. Remember it has to be indisputable. If the refs would have called it a catch, a person could argue the other way, until you look at the pictures and description below.

My point was the announcers were incorrect when the stated the ruling as you.

Here are two photos the first shows the left foot on the ground(look at the arrow) before the right foot scrapes down in bounds. The second photo shows the left foot (look at the arrow) after the right foot is coming off the ground for the next step. How do you know the right foot hit the ground first? The foot is in the exact same spot even though his body is moving from left to right. Impossible not to be the first foot down out of bounds.










here is the ball out in the sequence showing no control, fuzz but you can tell.

I believe that the parts you have in bold refer to if the player is going to the ground, especially part b. Henderson never went to the ground. Part c. Is not as clear as to what it is referencing but b. would not apply in this case since he never went to the ground.

I am not trying to argue that they got the call right or wrong, I was simply pointing out the announcers interpretation of the ruling.

 

[GrizzleMoose]

Admit it Alpha Man, you are wrong on this one.

GrizzleMoose
eGrizzer in Training

Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:50 pm
I am a fan of: Griz

You have a better chance of the ncaa rescheduling the game.

You got that right. :roll:

 

[Eriul]

I watched the replay several times on the Henderson catch and it is very close either way. The explanation given by one of the announcers was that the referee called it incomplete and said Henderson was juggling it as he drug his foot in bounds. They the said that they gave him the catch because unlike the nfl, as long as you finish the catch and have one foot in, it is a catch. The fact that he was juggling the ball did not matter because he finished the catch and had one foot in. This is not my interpretation, this is what one of the announcers said. The replay does show that he had one foot in by the way.

First of all if you think it is or is not a catch it must be declared incomplete by rule. The play was called incomplete on the field. Second by rule as shown below the announcers interpretation of the rule is incorrect.

Incorrect, by the 2013 and 2014 NCAA manual. Go here to download the .pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=FpuHNF_Sd8ZWWFm10JQMUA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.eW0

Here is the ruling incase you do not want to download

ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.

Ball never touches the ground!

Reread the bold! nothing to do with the ball touching the ground, he is bobbling the ball as he is going out of bounds. A foot would be considered any part of his body.
you can not see going frame by frame when his left foot is out of bounds, on the ground, yet there is no control when his right foot touches in bounds, in fact he doesn't gain control of the ball until he is another step out of bounds.

There is no evidence to over rule the call on the field. Remember it has to be indisputable. If the refs would have called it a catch, a person could argue the other way, until you look at the pictures and description below.

My point was the announcers were incorrect when the stated the ruling as you.

Here are two photos the first shows the left foot on the ground(look at the arrow) before the right foot scrapes down in bounds. The second photo shows the left foot (look at the arrow) after the right foot is coming off the ground for the next step. How do you know the right foot hit the ground first? The foot is in the exact same spot even though his body is moving from left to right. Impossible not to be the first foot down out of bounds.










here is the ball out in the sequence showing no control, fuzz but you can tell.

Dude let it go. We get it he was out of bounds. You're trying so hard to convince us that we got 1 call thus the officials fairly officiated the game. There were too many officiating blunders and this catch was one of VERY many.

 

[montana_jack]

You guys are putting way too much work into this.

 

[Robsnotes4u]

First of all if you think it is or is not a catch it must be declared incomplete by rule. The play was called incomplete on the field. Second by rule as shown below the announcers interpretation of the rule is incorrect.

Incorrect, by the 2013 and 2014 NCAA manual. Go here to download the .pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...=FpuHNF_Sd8ZWWFm10JQMUA&bvm=bv.57799294,d.eW0

Here is the ruling incase you do not want to download

ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures control of a live ball in flight with his hands or arms before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent) he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going to the ground out of bounds. If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch. If he regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.

Ball never touches the ground!

Reread the bold! nothing to do with the ball touching the ground, he is bobbling the ball as he is going out of bounds. A foot would be considered any part of his body.
you can not see going frame by frame when his left foot is out of bounds, on the ground, yet there is no control when his right foot touches in bounds, in fact he doesn't gain control of the ball until he is another step out of bounds.

There is no evidence to over rule the call on the field. Remember it has to be indisputable. If the refs would have called it a catch, a person could argue the other way, until you look at the pictures and description below.

My point was the announcers were incorrect when the stated the ruling as you.

Here are two photos the first shows the left foot on the ground(look at the arrow) before the right foot scrapes down in bounds. The second photo shows the left foot (look at the arrow) after the right foot is coming off the ground for the next step. How do you know the right foot hit the ground first? The foot is in the exact same spot even though his body is moving from left to right. Impossible not to be the first foot down out of bounds.










here is the ball out in the sequence showing no control, fuzz but you can tell.

Dude let it go. We get it he was out of bounds. You're trying so hard to convince us that we got 1 call thus the officials fairly officiated the game. There were too many officiating blunders and this catch was one of VERY many.

You are correct they were blunders, everyone needs to realize it wasn't one sided. This play actually did put points on the board that shouldn't have been. The game was won by CCU, not lost due to the refs. Every game someone loses they complain about the refs and forget the calls they do get. It is ridiculous. You could go through every play with a microscope and probably find penalties. Sometimes officials are out of position, or just didn't see it from their angle. We hear it every week the BSC refs suck, the Southland suck, etc. It is what it is. If they were better they would more than likely be in the BCS of Division 1 or NFL.

 

[Eriul]

Ball never touches the ground!

Reread the bold! nothing to do with the ball touching the ground, he is bobbling the ball as he is going out of bounds. A foot would be considered any part of his body.
you can not see going frame by frame when his left foot is out of bounds, on the ground, yet there is no control when his right foot touches in bounds, in fact he doesn't gain control of the ball until he is another step out of bounds.

There is no evidence to over rule the call on the field. Remember it has to be indisputable. If the refs would have called it a catch, a person could argue the other way, until you look at the pictures and description below.

My point was the announcers were incorrect when the stated the ruling as you.

Here are two photos the first shows the left foot on the ground(look at the arrow) before the right foot scrapes down in bounds. The second photo shows the left foot (look at the arrow) after the right foot is coming off the ground for the next step. How do you know the right foot hit the ground first? The foot is in the exact same spot even though his body is moving from left to right. Impossible not to be the first foot down out of bounds.










here is the ball out in the sequence showing no control, fuzz but you can tell.

Dude let it go. We get it he was out of bounds. You're trying so hard to convince us that we got 1 call thus the officials fairly officiated the game. There were too many officiating blunders and this catch was one of VERY many.

You are correct they were blunders, everyone needs to realize it wasn't one sided. This play actually did put points on the board that shouldn't have been. The game was won by CCU, not lost due to the refs. Every game someone loses they complain about the refs and forget the calls they do get. It is ridiculous. You could go through every play with a microscope and probably find penalties. Sometimes officials are out of position, or just didn't see it from their angle. We hear it every week the BSC refs suck, the Southland suck, etc. It is what it is. If they were better they would more than likely be in the BCS of Division 1 or NFL.

No one is accusing the refs of losing the game for us. Quote me from someone where someone has said that. What is ridiculous is if you ACTUALLY think this game wasn't 1 sided called by the refs. I'm not accusing conspiracy. I'm just saying there were A LOT of questionable calls against us and A LOT of questionable no calls against them, not including the ACTUAL penalty numbers, remember the PI on them was the ONLY penalty in the game when they WWF'd our O-lineman, held, celebrated more than we did, and had multiple PI's. This game was just horribly officiated and we DID get the bad end of the stick more than they did. Would it effect anything? I dunno but to say the game woulda been the same is just ignorant.

These teams were fairly equally matched imo and it was a very close game and the only reason I personally been bitching is that the refs had too much of an impact on the game. Less Zebras more Chanticleers and Grizzly's...that's my only beef.

otherwise yah, people need to let it go