Va. Tech vs. Michigan

[Slobber Knocker]

Surprised the lovers and the haters have not started something about this game. I enjoyed the game but I did not enjoy it as much as Oregan-Wisconsin and Stanford-Oklahoma State, Those two games spoiled me. Anyway, I felt the td pass was called back in OT was in fact incomplete...the nose of the ball looked like it hit the ground and moved. Good game but of course Hokie fans felt they got robbed and to me it looks like every time the QB from Michigan threw the ball, he was like a little kid throwing a beach ball...."Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" catch it!!!!!!

[gchs_devils]

Im not a Tech fan but I dont hate them. From a neutral standpoint: 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. Deep inside Tech fans know it was the right call. Just to sum things up, im not a UT fan either.

Oh btw, tech fans, blame Beamer, remember the dumbass call on 4th and 1 around mid field that set up another score for Mich? Thats what lost the game, not the OT. Be glad you were within 21 of that bunch.

[GC-1]

Lucky to stay within 21? Heck VT should have been up by 21 before the half if not for the usual choke job by the O coaches. Going into the shell in the red zone. And the Coale catch was a td. His left elbow touches the ground 1st with the ball in his right. I've seen much worse called a catch. Then again, if it had been ruled an incomplete I couldn't argue if the booth hadn't overturned it. That was one of those calls that could have gone either way.

[gchs_devils]

Thats a steal picture, he was bobbling the ball, meaning NO possession. End of story Hokie Pokie Chokies

[collegetrumpet2010]

Just to let you know a loss, especially a field goal loss in OT, is not automatically equal to a choke. Last year's Orange Bowl? THAT was a Choke because they let Stanford run all over them.

VT offense executed better than Michigan. Only problem is they couldn't score a td in the red zone and had to settle for FGs (4/5 in the whole game from a 3rd stringer). 3 of Michigan's scores came from key VT miscues, without which Michigan would not have rallied. The score should have probably already been VT 21-0 before the Michigan rally. Also, what led to the UM rally was VT's roughing the kicker on the punt. Then VT fumbled the following kick off, leading to a U of M field goal.

VT really should have won and I'm not arguing the OT call regarding the catch nor am I agreeing with it. With how their offense executed most of the game, they should have won and many Michigan fans I know agree with me.

[Biggin]

Just to let you know a loss, especially a field goal loss in OT, is not automatically equal to a choke. Last year's Orange Bowl? THAT was a Choke because they let Stanford run all over them.

VT offense executed better than Michigan. Only problem is they couldn't score a td in the red zone and had to settle for FGs (4/5 in the whole game from a 3rd stringer). 3 of Michigan's scores came from key VT miscues, without which Michigan would not have rallied. The score should have probably already been VT 21-0 before the Michigan rally. Also, what led to the UM rally was VT's roughing the kicker on the punt. Then VT fumbled the following kick off, leading to a U of M field goal.

VT really should have won and I'm not arguing the OT call regarding the catch nor am I agreeing with it. With how their offense executed most of the game, they should have won and many Michigan fans I know agree with me.

I dont think you understand what choking is, in sporting terms.
VT did not choke v. Stanford, they got the shit beat out of them and embarrassed on the field.

VT did choke v. Michigan because they gave away a game they should have won, i.e. choking.

[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