Don't ask Nebraska fans about Penn State's 1982 national title. Just don't do it.

[Redux]

And now I feel like an idiot, you had me convinced he had the ball. It's all coming back to me now...

 

[NUinID]

The fumble on the goal line in the 2012 game was reviewed and the evidence to overturn the call on the field was inconlusive. That is why the call stood as a fumble. IMO if it would have been called a TD it would have also stood. You just really couldn't tell.

The thing that always bothered me about that play was that Sean McD. and Chris Spielman were calling the game and in their mind it was a TD and they wouldn't let it go. They kept bringing up the rest of the game, and kept calling it a bad call. I just don't remember annoucers ever being so conviced that it was a bad call when the video evidnece really could have gone either way.

 

[Mierin]

The fact people don't remember the play very well reiterates the fact that the game didn't matter and wasn't even close to making up for the other call.

 

[broganreynik]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

 

[Landlord]

The fumble on the goal line in the 2012 game was reviewed and the evidence to overturn the call on the field was inconlusive. That is why the call stood as a fumble. IMO if it would have been called a TD it would have also stood. You just really couldn't tell.

The thing that always bothered me about that play was that Sean McD. and Chris Spielman were calling the game and in their mind it was a TD and they wouldn't let it go. They kept bringing up the rest of the game, and kept calling it a bad call. I just don't remember annoucers ever being so conviced that it was a bad call when the video evidnece really could have gone either way.

Nah, it was very clear on replay that it was a touchdown. The ruling was weird because the refs were saying that he was in the process of losing control of the ball as he was crossing the plane, but video didn't really show that at all. He was pretty obviously in the end zone.

 

[TonyStalloni]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

To me it is pretty clear the PSU receiver caught the ball with both feet off the ground and the first foot to come down was nearly 2 feet out of bounds. The NU guy on the sidelines was shocked to see it called a catch. I remember ABC replaying this many times during the game and them saying the refs made a mistake.

 

[funhusker]

Not sure how to embed the video, but this link is the 2012 play. I think it was pretty clearly a TD, but whatcha gonna do?

 

[broganreynik]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

To me it is pretty clear the PSU receiver caught the ball with both feet off the ground and the first foot to come down was nearly 2 feet out of bounds. The NU guy on the sidelines was shocked to see it called a catch. I remember ABC replaying this many times during the game and them saying the refs made a mistake.

Really? Because there's a link to the actual broadcast in the OP. It was CBS and they didn't say anything of the sort.
And if you can tell when the receiver catches the ball in that poor of resolution, you have way better eyes than me... Not that that would be hard, but I paused it and freeze framed it, you literally can't see when the ball is caught because it gets lost in the sideline because of the low resolution.

I wasn't alive during the game, so I don't know what other evidence there was, but the game broadcast that's on YouTube and every video I've seen of it hasn't been conclusive either way. If there's something I'm not privy to, that's another matter. But based solely on what I've been able to see, it's nowhere near as egregious as everyone seems to think it was.

 

[RedTexan]

One year after the Nebraska/Penn State game, Penn State played Alabama. The same official made a call against Alabama which negated what would have been a touchdown and given Alabama the lead with one second left in the game. The following week, Beano Cook was on ESPN and made a diagram of what the field looked like to that official. He had a small portion added to the area of the field where the Penn State player caught the ball at the two yard line and had a slightly larger area missing from the end of he end zone where the Alabama player caught the ball. I was wondering if anybody remembers seeing Beano Cook on ESPN that week? It was pretty funny. The following link contains a video of the Penn State/Alabama game highlights from the following year. If you go to about 8:50 of the video you hear the announcers state that this is the same endzone where Penn State scored to beat Nebraska right before the play in question.

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/9/7/2409959/video-1983-penn-state-vs-3-alabama-a-controversial-call-a-penn-state

 

[Mierin]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

To me it is pretty clear the PSU receiver caught the ball with both feet off the ground and the first foot to come down was nearly 2 feet out of bounds. The NU guy on the sidelines was shocked to see it called a catch. I remember ABC replaying this many times during the game and them saying the refs made a mistake.

Really? Because there's a link to the actual broadcast in the OP. It was CBS and they didn't say anything of the sort.
And if you can tell when the receiver catches the ball in that poor of resolution, you have way better eyes than me... Not that that would be hard, but I paused it and freeze framed it, you literally can't see when the ball is caught because it gets lost in the sideline because of the low resolution.

I wasn't alive during the game, so I don't know what other evidence there was, but the game broadcast that's on YouTube and every video I've seen of it hasn't been conclusive either way. If there's something I'm not privy to, that's another matter. But based solely on what I've been able to see, it's nowhere near as egregious as everyone seems to think it was.

You have to be joking with this. He jumps to catch the ball. After the jump, the first foot to land is a couple feet out of bounds.

Also, why are you talking about poor resolution? You do realize people watched this game in real-time once, right? Hate to break it to you but that's the something you're not privy to. You're entirely discounting everyone who watched this game on tv because you can only see it on YouTube. Not to mention the play has been shown many more times on tv since then. lol

 

[broganreynik]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

To me it is pretty clear the PSU receiver caught the ball with both feet off the ground and the first foot to come down was nearly 2 feet out of bounds. The NU guy on the sidelines was shocked to see it called a catch. I remember ABC replaying this many times during the game and them saying the refs made a mistake.

Really? Because there's a link to the actual broadcast in the OP. It was CBS and they didn't say anything of the sort.
And if you can tell when the receiver catches the ball in that poor of resolution, you have way better eyes than me... Not that that would be hard, but I paused it and freeze framed it, you literally can't see when the ball is caught because it gets lost in the sideline because of the low resolution.

I wasn't alive during the game, so I don't know what other evidence there was, but the game broadcast that's on YouTube and every video I've seen of it hasn't been conclusive either way. If there's something I'm not privy to, that's another matter. But based solely on what I've been able to see, it's nowhere near as egregious as everyone seems to think it was.

You have to be joking with this. He jumps to catch the ball. After the jump, the first foot to land is a couple feet out of bounds.

Also, why are you talking about poor resolution? You do realize people watched this game in real-time once, right? Hate to break it to you but that's the something you're not privy to. You're entirely discounting everyone who watched this game on tv because you can only see it on YouTube. Not to mention the play has been shown many more times on tv since then. lol

Why are you talking like you've got me? You're saying exactly what I said. I only know what I've seen. Plus, it's a matter if he has the ball when his left trailing foot touched the ground.
Like I said, I'm just talking about what I've seen. So, I don't see why you said what I already said.

The poor resolution stems from the fact that television broadcasts back then were actually poorer resolution. It's not like anyone was able to see HD replays from the sideline.

Seeing it realtime on a television that was made before doesn't make anything conclusive. Like I said, if there are other angles or pictures I'm not privy to, then that makes sense. But seeing it real-time is hardly an argument at all. Nobody had a better angle than that ref, and the catch and trailing foot touching were close enough that it'd be a hard call for anyone to make. Even if he was wrong, it's not outlandish to think he saw it differently than people who were watching on tv or were in the stands at a less advantageous angle.

I do in fact know that there are people who watched the game. I'm saying that I don't know if there were other angles or pictures that showed he was clearly out of bounds, but if there were, it wasn't in the game broadcast. So, like I said, I'm not privy to those things. I can only say what from what I've seen, and from what I've seen, I don't think it's as egregious as people make it out to be.

I'm not saying he made the right call. I'm saying I can see how he could make that call in "real-time".

 

[huKSer]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

To me it is pretty clear the PSU receiver caught the ball with both feet off the ground and the first foot to come down was nearly 2 feet out of bounds. The NU guy on the sidelines was shocked to see it called a catch. I remember ABC replaying this many times during the game and them saying the refs made a mistake.

Really? Because there's a link to the actual broadcast in the OP. It was CBS and they didn't say anything of the sort.
And if you can tell when the receiver catches the ball in that poor of resolution, you have way better eyes than me... Not that that would be hard, but I paused it and freeze framed it, you literally can't see when the ball is caught because it gets lost in the sideline because of the low resolution.

I wasn't alive during the game, so I don't know what other evidence there was, but the game broadcast that's on YouTube and every video I've seen of it hasn't been conclusive either way. If there's something I'm not privy to, that's another matter. But based solely on what I've been able to see, it's nowhere near as egregious as everyone seems to think it was.

You have to be joking with this. He jumps to catch the ball. After the jump, the first foot to land is a couple feet out of bounds.

Also, why are you talking about poor resolution? You do realize people watched this game in real-time once, right? Hate to break it to you but that's the something you're not privy to. You're entirely discounting everyone who watched this game on tv because you can only see it on YouTube. Not to mention the play has been shown many more times on tv since then. lol

Why are you talking like you've got me? You're saying exactly what I said. I only know what I've seen. Plus, it's a matter if he has the ball when his left trailing foot touched the ground.
Like I said, I'm just talking about what I've seen. So, I don't see why you said what I already said.

The poor resolution stems from the fact that television broadcasts back then were actually poorer resolution. It's not like anyone was able to see HD replays from the sideline.

Seeing it realtime on a television that was made before doesn't make anything conclusive. Like I said, if there are other angles or pictures I'm not privy to, then that makes sense. But seeing it real-time is hardly an argument at all. Nobody had a better angle than that ref, and the catch and trailing foot touching were close enough that it'd be a hard call for anyone to make. Even if he was wrong, it's not outlandish to think he saw it differently than people who were watching on tv or were in the stands at a less advantageous angle.

I do in fact know that there are people who watched the game. I'm saying that I don't know if there were other angles or pictures that showed he was clearly out of bounds, but if there were, it wasn't in the game broadcast. So, like I said, I'm not privy to those things. I can only say what from what I've seen, and from what I've seen, I don't think it's as egregious as people make it out to be.

I'm not saying he made the right call. I'm saying I can see how he could make that call in "real-time".

Would you accept it if the receiver said he was out of bounds.

Yeah, I didn't catch it

 

[broganreynik]

You know, call me what you will, but I'm not so sure that it wasn't a catch. Based on the YouTube video above, it's bang/bang, and I could definitely see it going either way. Maybe there was more evidence back in the day? A picture in the paper or Sports Illustrated or something?

I will say the refs sure had it a lot easier when things were in standard definition on a tube tv. Then again, it gave fan bases more reason to say they got robbed, because there wasn't conclusive evidence either way.

To me it is pretty clear the PSU receiver caught the ball with both feet off the ground and the first foot to come down was nearly 2 feet out of bounds. The NU guy on the sidelines was shocked to see it called a catch. I remember ABC replaying this many times during the game and them saying the refs made a mistake.

Really? Because there's a link to the actual broadcast in the OP. It was CBS and they didn't say anything of the sort.
And if you can tell when the receiver catches the ball in that poor of resolution, you have way better eyes than me... Not that that would be hard, but I paused it and freeze framed it, you literally can't see when the ball is caught because it gets lost in the sideline because of the low resolution.

I wasn't alive during the game, so I don't know what other evidence there was, but the game broadcast that's on YouTube and every video I've seen of it hasn't been conclusive either way. If there's something I'm not privy to, that's another matter. But based solely on what I've been able to see, it's nowhere near as egregious as everyone seems to think it was.

You have to be joking with this. He jumps to catch the ball. After the jump, the first foot to land is a couple feet out of bounds.

Also, why are you talking about poor resolution? You do realize people watched this game in real-time once, right? Hate to break it to you but that's the something you're not privy to. You're entirely discounting everyone who watched this game on tv because you can only see it on YouTube. Not to mention the play has been shown many more times on tv since then. lol

Why are you talking like you've got me? You're saying exactly what I said. I only know what I've seen. Plus, it's a matter if he has the ball when his left trailing foot touched the ground.
Like I said, I'm just talking about what I've seen. So, I don't see why you said what I already said.

The poor resolution stems from the fact that television broadcasts back then were actually poorer resolution. It's not like anyone was able to see HD replays from the sideline.

Seeing it realtime on a television that was made before doesn't make anything conclusive. Like I said, if there are other angles or pictures I'm not privy to, then that makes sense. But seeing it real-time is hardly an argument at all. Nobody had a better angle than that ref, and the catch and trailing foot touching were close enough that it'd be a hard call for anyone to make. Even if he was wrong, it's not outlandish to think he saw it differently than people who were watching on tv or were in the stands at a less advantageous angle.

I do in fact know that there are people who watched the game. I'm saying that I don't know if there were other angles or pictures that showed he was clearly out of bounds, but if there were, it wasn't in the game broadcast. So, like I said, I'm not privy to those things. I can only say what from what I've seen, and from what I've seen, I don't think it's as egregious as people make it out to be.

I'm not saying he made the right call. I'm saying I can see how he could make that call in "real-time".

Would you accept it if the receiver said he was out of bounds.
Yeah, I didn't catch it

Haha well, yeah. Doesn't get much more definitive than that.

 

[The Dude]

I wasn't even born yet and I could see he was out of bounds.

 

[huskertillIdie]