Was he down??

this is my first post... now i paused my dvr during the slow motion and came up with this.

if this image isnt done right i will try to fix it. but it shows that the ball is below his forearm and looks like his knee is down

1008092359-00.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:
The catch out of bounds is the one that still has me baffled...
seconded.

that guy's arm was clearly inbounds but also out of bounds. it's like they counted the guy's elbow as down inbounds and the literal next frame, which is 1/30 of a second, the rest of his arm was out of bounds. it should be out.

 
Oooohh, I didn't see that at all on the TV, but I didn't have the luxury of DVR.

Move forward a few frames though. Does that knee go further down? It is a *little* hard to tell right now if it's on the ground or if there's more room to go.

Almost looks like it's not quite down.

 
The catch out of bounds is the one that still has me baffled...
seconded.

that guy's arm was clearly inbounds but also out of bounds. it's like they counted the guy's elbow as down inbounds and the literal next frame, which is 1/30 of a second, the rest of his arm was out of bounds. it should be out.
Elbow and hand hit at the same time on the left hand that had the ball. Elbow in, hand out. Right elbow landed out of bounds. Even the clueless announcers were confused by the call....seriously...it was the Buffalo Wild Wings communication center.

 
Yeah, that makes it look like there's maaaaybe half an inch to go for his knee there, and we can't see the other end of the ball. That other end has to be pretty close to the line already in this picture, and Gabbert was moving pretty fast. Another split second could easily do it.

I think I can forgive the officials for not overturning this, still think it's awful close and a tough call. But interested in hearing about the next few frames.

 
this is my first post... now i paused my dvr during the slow motion and came up with this.

if this image isnt done right i will try to fix it. but it shows that the ball is below his forearm and looks like his knee is down

1008092359-00.jpg
EXCELLENT! just what I was looking for. Gracias.

 
no prob... but beer and jim have gotten to me... this is my first season being 21, so it's been good... but like i said i will take a closer look tomorrow before i go to work.

 
The thing that ticked me off about this play was the fact that the officials really did not take a hard, long look at the play. They took basically zero time and upheld the play as is. This is one of those plays you take your time to make sure you got right. Either way, it is not a replay that you could make a quick judgment on.

 
The knee touched one frame before that screenshot. Tough to tell from just the still, but you can see it when watching in slo-mo. Leg touches turf and ball is a good 3-4 inches from breaking the plane. Close call, but this wasn't a touchdown.

 
well i've watched it and it was close. but a fact that he was down short of the goal. but its a game of inches and refs haveta make quick judgement calls and i dont blame them. i wouldve probably made the same call. so close that it coulda gone either way.

i still dont understand that catch either. he was clearly out of bounds and never had a foot in with the ball. how is that not 'indisputable evidence'? as they claim they need. it was clear obvious and appearant.

 
as an arm chair ref, I gave him the TD... Mr. Decommit's only TD of any kind for the evening. :)

The call made on the field is obviously crucial to this discussion, or any call discussion, because it is pivotal to any review. There really wasn't enough to overturn it, IMO. I am objective enough to give the guy the benefit of the doubt on this and tell Gabbert to enjoy his one TD the whole night. :)

I'm actually more inclined to argue about a particular TD pass that the refs said was "bobbled" for an incomplete pass a couple of weeks ago, but I'll let that go for now.

 
Back
Top