Va. Tech vs. Michigan

[Eamus Catuli]

The ball was touched the turf, therefor by rule makes it an incomplete pass, ALSO another reason why it was incomplete, the ball was moving as Coale slide out of bounds. The rule states a player must have complete control and the ball must not touch the ground, both were broken makingvit an incomplete.

Actually that's not true. Here is the rule

"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:



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.

[1inStripes]

The ball does move in his hand. Not much but a little.

[CoeburnCane]

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.

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.

[gchs_devils]

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

[Slobber Knocker]

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.

[GC-1]

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.

I agree that Boise had a good team. But according to BCS rules they were not eligible for a BCS bid. They A) didn't win their conference B) their conference champion wasn't eligible.

[Eamus Catuli]

Well you all must know more about officiating than the Supervisor of ACC Officials. He doesn't have a clue why it was overturned.

From roanoke.com

ACC official wants call at end of Sugar Bowl explained

From his vantage point in front of a high-definition television set in Miami, site of Wednesday night's Orange Bowl game between West Virginia and Clemson, ACC supervisor of football officials Doug Rhoads was watching intently as the Sugar Bowl went into overtime.

Virginia Tech had the ball first and appeared to score a touchdown on a pass from Logan Thomas to Danny Coale. Or, at least a touchdown was signaled.

There was a delay as the play was reviewed by a replay official assigned by the Pac-12. Rhoads doesn't know if he saw the play from every camera angle, but he saw multiple shots.

"I understood why they went to replay because it was a scoring play and it certainly met the criteria for being reviewed, but based on the replays I saw, I did not see indisputable evidence to overturn it," Rhoads said. "That's probably all I can say at this point.

"I thought the play would stand."

When the decision came down from the replay booth, the referee said the pass had been ruled incomplete because Coale did not maintain possession of the ball after hitting the ground.

Virginia Tech missed a subsequent field-goal attempt before Michigan converted a field goal for a 23-20 Wolverines' victory.

Rhoads said he emailed the Pac-12 supervisor of officials shortly after the game and expects an interpretation that first will be shared with ACC commissioner John Swofford. As of late afternoon Wednesday, Rhoads' email had not been answered.

[CoeburnCane]

I agree that Boise had a good team. But according to BCS rules they were not eligible for a BCS bid. They A) didn't win their conference B) their conference champion wasn't eligible.

Yeah, but Kansas State was eligible. And I think K-State would have beaten either VT or Michigan pretty badly. They're heavily underrated...Bill Snyder coming back to the head coaching spot for them turned them into a winner quicker than anyone else thought.