Skins miss the game winning field goal?

[AdamJT13]

Field goals are reviewable this year.

Someone suggested that since it passed over the highest part of the vertical bars, then it is not reviewable, but I have not seen that in print.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090102124.html

Replay on Field Goals: Instant replay can be used to review certain field goal and extra point attempts, but not those on which the ball passes above an upright.​

http://www.atlantafalcons.com/News/...ls_coaching_Falcons_on_2008_rule_changes.aspx

Field goals can be reviewed but, due to camera limitations, only balls track underneath the tips of the uprights can be viewed. Anything that flies above the goal post can not be reviewed.​

 

[TNCowboy]

It seems like it would be easy to make this a non-issue. Like some sort of sensor or mini-camera, or better yet, make the posts 10ft higher.

 

[Clarkson]

What I'm surprised at is the quickness in which the refs threw up their hands to declare it good. They usually look at each other, shake heads, and then do it. They both just walked forward before it was all the way through. Weird, really.

 

[YosemiteSam]

 

[RedskinNation]

I thought it was no good at first too...i'd still like to see a replay of it from another angle. People claim it went over the goalpost...if thats the case its a judgement call by the officials.

When watching the game i was SHOCKED that Aikman/Buck didnt mention it....none of the Cowboys mentioned anything on the field to the refs and Phillips didnt review it. I thought i was losing my mind cuz it was only me that noticed...then the messageboards lit up with the topic.

Im guessing the refs on the field saw that it was higher than the post but was inside and they didnt flinch for a second in signaling it was good...so i guess it was.

 

[Nexx]

when i saw it live, i thought he missed... when i watched it again in slow mo, i wasnt 100% sure.

 

[RedskinNation]

when i saw it live, i thought he missed... when i watched it again in slow mo, i wasnt 100% sure.

Here is a youtube clip....if u fast forward to 2:16 or 2:17 and pause it you can see how the ball is higher than the post and looks to BARELY be inside which makes the FG good. In addition I think the camera is slightly off-center to the right. Upon seeing this and seeing that the Refs didnt flinch I now agree with the refs that the kick was good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUnCfjNsDsM

 

[AdamJT13]

Here is a youtube clip....if u fast forward to 2:16 or 2:17 and pause it you can see how the ball is higher than the post and looks to BARELY be inside which makes the FG good. In addition I think the camera is slightly off-center to the right. Upon seeing this and seeing that the Refs didnt flinch I now agree with the refs that the kick was good.

Nobody can tell anything from the video because you have no way of knowing how far away the ball is. The only way to have visual proof is to have a camera directly above the right upright showing where the ball passed the plane of the goalposts. Otherwise, we just have to trust that the refs made the correct call, and they almost certainly did. It's just visually deceiving when you watch the replay.

 

[theebs]

I dont know how anyone could tell.

Wouldnt have mattered anyway, if you cant stop a team from running you cant win. Washington would have scored as many points as they needed to win.

http://img300.*************/img300/2766/nflfootballwashingtonreuy9.png

 

[Boysboy]

I dont know how anyone could tell.

Wouldnt have mattered anyway, if you cant stop a team from running you cant win. Washington would have scored as many points as they needed to win.

http://img300.*************/img300/2766/nflfootballwashingtonreuy9.png

I agree-while I thought it was a blown call, it had NOTHING to do with our MOST lethargic performance of the season.

The score wasn't as close as it looked-we didn't deserve to win this game. Now let's move on.

 

[Beast_from_East]

Isn't there normally another camera angle from the back of the kicker towards the endzone? Funny how we never saw a replay of that kick.

I think the refs go into autopilot on chip shot field goals, and assume that there is no way they can be missed. That's all I can think of.

Maybe they shouldnt have had 12 freaking man on the feild after a 3rd down stop and made them try a 50+ yarder that the refs would have paid attention to?

Even if that kick was no good, our defense had no answer at all for the Skins. They would have played differently in the 4th if the kick was no good and I am 100% convinced we would have lost anyways with the way we were playing.

 

[AmishCowboy]

The Way Portis was running the FG made no difference in the outcome.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I dont know how anyone could tell.

Wouldnt have mattered anyway, if you cant stop a team from running you cant win. Washington would have scored as many points as they needed to win.

http://img300.*************/img300/2766/nflfootballwashingtonreuy9.png

The ball looks to be directly above the right upright in the picture. If you draw a straight line from the right goal post to the top of the screen, the ball appears to touch this line.

From the rulebook, if the ball crosses over the top of the goalpost it is a good kick. So the posters that say the kick did not go through the uprights are 100% correct, however from the rulebook it appears the kick was good.

From this picture and the rulebook, I have to say the kick was good. Sorry fellas, I think the refs got it right.

Edit: Also, there are like 6 Cowboys watching the ball in this pic. If it looked no good from feild level, why has nobody said jack about it???

 

[ringmaster]

I was just reading on nfl.fanhouse.com that they think Suisham missed the field goal and the officals just got the call wrong. Did he really miss it?

Who cares we just lost that game, we can't be crying over spilled milk now.

Get ready for the Bengals, new week, new opponent.