1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

Why the Wilcox INT should have stood

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by Crown Royal, Oct 21, 2013.

  1. BRoni

    BRoni Active Member

    461 Messages
    66 Likes Received
    I think the ball did hit the ground, however I agree that there was no evidence to prove it. If someone really thinks that the video we saw contained conclusive proof then I hope they are not my judge if I am ever on trial. The refs having video of another angle that wasn't available to us sure is a convenient excuse.
  2. Hostile

    Hostile Peace Zone Supporter

    118,355 Messages
    1,330 Likes Received
    I don't believe there is an angle anywhere that shows that ball clearly touching the ground. Why would NBC have it if they weren't even broadcasting the game? Every camera in there belonged to FOX.

    Period point blank, I am saying that shot does not exist and if it does exist it would already be posted and we'd all be saying, "Yeah, okay."
    sillycon likes this.
  3. unionjack8

    unionjack8 Well-Known Member

    1,924 Messages
    266 Likes Received
    i havent seen it, it was just a post i read on here last night
  4. Hostile

    Hostile Peace Zone Supporter

    118,355 Messages
    1,330 Likes Received
    I don't doubt you at all. I am simply saying to anyone who says that ball absolutely touched the ground, prove it. So far no one has, and I do not believe anyone will without photoshop skills.
  5. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Well-Known Member

    3,570 Messages
    366 Likes Received
    The reason the ball went so high was because Avant inadvertently used his right leg and right hand to knock it higher into the air.
    Carharris2 likes this.
  6. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Well-Known Member

    3,570 Messages
    366 Likes Received
    The ball did hit the ground, in my opinion - it wouldn't have flipped direction so drastically if it hadn't come in contact with the hard surface.
  7. Crown Royal

    Crown Royal Insulin Beware

    10,041 Messages
    442 Likes Received
    NFL ref isn't a physicist. Show it hitting on ground.
  8. Red Dragon

    Red Dragon Well-Known Member

    3,570 Messages
    366 Likes Received
    The biggest problem for the Eagles is that Foles threw that ball so low to begin with. Throw that ball just a bit higher and harder and it would almost certainly be a TD.
  9. Hostile

    Hostile Peace Zone Supporter

    118,355 Messages
    1,330 Likes Received
    Hands are a hard surface too. I can show you with a volleyball, they call it a pancake, that the ball will bounce up. It went higher after Avant touched it again and pushed it higher. No one can tell me an inflated football can't bounce off a hand.

    Like Crown Royal has been saying, show the proof it touched the ground. The refs have to see indisputable proof. Where is it? It isn't about what they believe. It is about what they see.

    The overturn was dead wrong.
    Everson24 likes this.
  10. gimmesix

    gimmesix Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life

    8,578 Messages
    420 Likes Received
    I think they overturned it because of the way the ball bounced up, essentially believing the ball could not have taken the initial bounce of his hand but had to have hit the ground.

    That being said, it shouldn't have been overturned because of a lack of evidence.

    That call, Dez's catch not being reviewed, the lack of a late-hit penalty on the Romo sack and multiple pass interference/defensive holds by Philadelphia's secondary made this another poorly officiated game not favoring Dallas. The end zone hold on Dez (both shoulder pads) was inexcusable.

    We did have a couple of noncalls go our way, though, that were borderline (so I was happy about that at least).
  11. Risen Star

    Risen Star Likes Collector Zone Supporter

    19,713 Messages
    5,243 Likes Received
    Correct. It obviously hit the ground. This is homer fan nonsense.
  12. Hostile

    Hostile Peace Zone Supporter

    118,355 Messages
    1,330 Likes Received
    Prove it. You can't. We both know it. This is just hater fan nonsense.
    Carharris2 and Boyzmamacita like this.
  13. Risen Star

    Risen Star Likes Collector Zone Supporter

    19,713 Messages
    5,243 Likes Received
    I don't need to prove it. Even though I did see a replay that showed the tip of the football hit the ground.

    My education tells me the ball doesn't bounce like that off of a hand.

    Find something else to play victim about.
  14. Airbag

    Airbag Active Member Zone Supporter

    156 Messages
    42 Likes Received
    May be the worst overturned call I have ever seen. As someone else posted, if that ball was caught for a touchdown there is no way that call would EVER be overturned due to hitting the ground.
  15. Risen Star

    Risen Star Likes Collector Zone Supporter

    19,713 Messages
    5,243 Likes Received
    I think it would have been. The replay I saw showed the ball shift and the tip of the football hit the ground.

    But I agree with the overall premise that the refs and league hate us, and therefore woe is us.
  16. BaybeeJay

    BaybeeJay Active Member

    443 Messages
    26 Likes Received
    I don't understand why people are confusing multiple rules on this play. Yes, if he had controlled the ball, they would have called it a completed pass. But they ruled he did not control the ball, and it hit the ground, so it is an incomplete pass.
  17. BRoni

    BRoni Active Member

    461 Messages
    66 Likes Received
    The ball did move and looks like it hit the ground based on the bounce it takes. You can't see if it hits the ground though. Even if you think it's wrong you have to let the call on the field stand.

    I think it was the right call anyway, so I won't cry. What bothers me more is why the booth didn't think it was worth reviewing the Dez catch. It was obviously worth taking a look at.
  18. StarBoyz83

    StarBoyz83 Well-Known Member

    2,776 Messages
    270 Likes Received
    I dont think it hit the ground at all!
  19. Hostile

    Hostile Peace Zone Supporter

    118,355 Messages
    1,330 Likes Received
    Nothing victim at all. You can't prove it. It is that simple. Hiding behind the don't need to is the same as an admission that you can't and anyone with half a brain knows it. You have not seen any such replay because it would already be posted. It doesn't exist, but since this topic is something anti-cowboys you spring right into it must be true mode. It's tired, it's old, and it's worn out, and no one gives a damn about yet another anti-Cowboys opinion from you or any of the other constant naysayers. If any one of you can show me that ball clearly touching the ground I will admit I'm wrong. But like I already said, you can't. Not from an undoctored photo anyway.
    Boyzmamacita, Carharris2 and bkight13 like this.
  20. bkight13

    bkight13 Well-Known Member Zone Supporter

    2,193 Messages
    555 Likes Received
    The thing is you can't see it hit the ground. You can interpret the bounce and assume part of the ball was on the ground, but the rule is supposed to be "clear visual evidence" is needed to overturn a ruling made on the field. It is a higher standard and it should be. The overturn was a bad call.

Share This Page