Andre Ellington was going in to score from short yardage, but lost the ball. WVU took it 99 yards for a TD, and proceeded to score like 43 unanswered points.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJones
Printable View
Andre Ellington was going in to score from short yardage, but lost the ball. WVU took it 99 yards for a TD, and proceeded to score like 43 unanswered points.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJones
I know I was away for like 20 or 30 min and that involved halftime. All hell musta broke lose
Tavon Austin thats what happened. The is legit!
And VT cant hang with the big boys of the SEC. Teams like UT, UK, and Vandy suck and should be kicked out of the SEC and let Tech and anyone else who wants to give it a shot In
Quote:
Originally Posted by gchs_devils
Holy Geez SMH
What stripes? You know its true.
Actually that's not true. Here is the ruleQuote:
Originally Posted by gchs_devils
"Eligible A80 is airborne when he receives a legal forward pass. He
grasps the ball firmly in his hands, and as he is returning toward the
ground, the nose of the football touches the ground before any part of
his body. A80 retains his firm control of the ball and it does not move
during this action. A80?s knees then touch the ground and he maintains
control of the ball. RULING: Completed pass."
Here is the catch:
http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/846244/catch.gif
The nose of the ball touches the ground but he does not bobble in any way. The elbow comes down in bounds. The call on the field was correct, and overturned for no reason. But honestly you can make a legitimate case for either side. Since that is the case, the call on the field should not have been overturned because there was not indisputable video evidence to change it.
I'm not that delusional though. It definitely shouldn't have come down to that play. As usual in big games, VT made numerous mistakes (on and off the field). But the fact of the matter is it did come down to that play, and I believe that was the wrong decision.
The ball does move in his hand. Not much but a little.
And not only that, but the moment the ground helps him to complete the catch (ball touches ground, moves closer to Coales body), it's an incompletion...as the ground can't assist you in making a legal reception. It's in his hands up and down, point of the ball hits, moves the the point of the ball into his elbow. Had the ball hit the ground and not moved in his hands--that would have exhibited complete control of the football, and a legal reception, but it did indeed move and the ground aided him in securing the football.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1inStripes
I'll give you a large scale scenario to illustrate: say you're my WR and I'm the QB. you're 10 yards away from me. I only get the ball 5 yards, but the ball bounces off the ground and up into your hands, allowing you to secure the ball. Is that a legal reception? No. That's what happened here on a much smaller/faster scale.
the ball shifts. its plain as day. more of the ball was below his grip, then when he lands the ball moves upward in his grip. GREAT CALL! Should of made the FG afterwards and then it would of went into double OT more than likely
Was an ok game like I have said earlier...both teams were not that good and certainlly not BCS worthy and the QB's were horrible IMO but I still feel that Boise State deserved to be at one these BCS games and felt they got ripped off. Fan base talks though I guess. I think Boise would have beat either Michigan or Va. Tech.