Why the Wilcox INT should have stood

[erod]

My problem was this. I have no doubt it hit the ground, but had he held on, or caught the deflection, I have little doubt they would have let the TD stand.

The refs were awful. How did they not review Dez' catch on the sideline? How did they not call interference a few plays later? How do they miss the roughing call on Romo when he's on the ground? There were others. It was a horribly called game, as was the Washington game.

 

[ThreeandOut]

Ball never hit the ground.......they called it incomplete on pure judgment just because of the way it popped upward.........and it popped up like that because the receivers hand was against the ground which allowed his hand to be just about as hard as the ground. There was no evidence, no angle, no zoom that showed the ball touching the ground, and as someone else stated the zoom was to blurry to tell and it was not inconclusive evidence to overturn, end of story.

This. They never saw it hit the ground. They saw the ball bounce and assumed the ball had to have hit the ground for it to bounce the way it did.

 

[WV Cowboy]

the back of the football hit the ground, end of story...correct call!

Did you see footage that we have not seen?

If not, .. nothing we have seen shows that the ball absolutely hit the ground.

Not irrefutable evidence that the ball hit the ground.

Unless you have seen more than was shown on TV.

 

[Hostile]

This. Even if you disagree with my interpretation about the hand being under (which is fine), there was no irrefutable evidence to overturn the call on the field. Not a bit.

If the evidence of the ball absolutely touching the ground exists, I will gladly say they got the call right. No one will be able to produce that evidence. I guarantee it. I don't care how anti Cowboys anyone is, there is no evidence to overturn that call on the field and I would say the exact same thing if it was Miles Austin on the ground and Williams with the INT.

Prove it hit the ground. Show me the indisputable evidence. Or irrefutable evidence if the word matters to you.

 

[TheCount]

If the evidence of the ball absolutely touching the ground exists, I will gladly say they got the call right. No one will be able to produce that evidence. I guarantee it. I don't care how anti Cowboys anyone is, there is no evidence to overturn that call on the field and I would say the exact same thing if it was Miles Austin on the ground and Williams with the INT.

Prove it hit the ground. Show me the indisputable evidence. Or irrefutable evidence if the word matters to you.

Said everything I was going to say and I agree with whomever said if he had held onto it, they would have ruled it a TD and let it stand after review. Such nonsense.

 

[WV Cowboy]

Not true...........anything could happen. Actually there was no result of any return since the play was ruled an incomplete pass. Now who is right?

Did you even watch the game, or see this play?

His momentum as he caught the ball took him towards the sidelines in the EZ, .. he turned and brought it out, .. and was shoved out at the 6, .. end of play.

That was the result of the return itself, .. whether the play stood or not. The result of his return was him being shoved out at the 6.

But you are right, anything could happen. Anything could happen on any play, .. I am only talking about what DID happen.

Stay in the EZ.

 

[Zekeats]

This. They never saw it hit the ground. They saw the ball bounce and assumed the ball had to have hit the ground for it to bounce the way it did.

Also, the person on here claiming the ball hit the ground behind his hand is 100% wrong. The ball would never, NE

Did you even watch the game, or see this play?

His momentum as he caught the ball took him towards the sidelines in the EZ, .. he turned and brought it out, .. and was shoved out at the 6, .. end of play.

That was the result of the return itself, .. whether the play stood or not. The result of his return was him being shoved out at the 6.

But you are right, anything could happen. Anything could happen on any play, .. I am only talking about what DID happen.

That's fine and all but don't say it was a bad decision based on end results only..........When Romo underthrows Dez Bryant when he has his man beaten by 5 yards and the ball is intercepted by the corner doesn't mean it was a bad decision, it just means it was a bad outcome.

 

[WV Cowboy]

That's fine and all but don't say it was a bad decision based on end results only..........When Romo underthrows Dez Bryant when he has his man beaten by 5 yards and the ball is intercepted by the corner doesn't mean it was a bad decision, it just means it was a bad outcome.

Comparing those two scenario's, which are totally different, is ridiculous.

But using your example, if someone told Romo, ... "if you throw this pass it WILL be intercepted, but if you don't throw it, we will give you a 20 yd gain." If he still throws that pass it is a bad decision.

Wilcox should be aware enough to know that, "if I bring this out, I might not make the 10,(he made the 6) .. but if I down it in the EZ, I get the 20."

Bad decision to bring it out.

I said out loud when he caught it, .. take a knee.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

If it was us on offense and the Eagles on Def. I would be swearing that the ball hit the ground so I am fine with the call.

 

[85Cowboy85]

I think the OP is right on the first point but wrong on the second. This was discussed after week one on the Victor Cruz catch.



Basically for it to count as a touchdown the ball cannot touch the ground at any point while the player is going to the ground. A league source later confirmed that both the Cruz catch and the Johnson catch should have been ruled incomplete.

 

[Crown Royal]

I think the OP is right on the first point but wrong on the second. This was discussed after week one on the Victor Cruz catch.

Basically for it to count as a touchdown the ball cannot touch the ground at any point while the player is going to the ground. A league source later confirmed that both the Cruz catch and the Johnson catch should have been ruled incomplete.

These are different circumstances. neither of these players maintained control throughout the process.

 

[big dog cowboy]

No exaggeration, this may have been the worst call I've ever seen in an NFL game.

The sad part is we said the same thing after the Denver game.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Basically for it to count as a touchdown the ball cannot touch the ground at any point while the player is going to the ground.

This simply isn't true. It's exactly the same as any other completion. If the ball touches the ground while already firmly in control of the receiver and it stays firmly in his control after that, it can still be a completed pass.

 

[The Quest for Six]

Did you see footage that we have not seen?

If not, .. nothing we have seen shows that the ball absolutely hit the ground.

Not irrefutable evidence that the ball hit the ground.

Unless you have seen more than was shown on TV.

The backside of the ball hit the ground, period, end of story, the footage showed it, see the first page of the thread with the pics, the third and fourth pics, you can see the back of the football deform from hitting the ground slightly...and the refs explanation stated the same fact that the back of the football hit the ground.

 

[85Cowboy85]

These are different circumstances. neither of these players maintained control throughout the process.

After reading your post and thinking about it I went back and dug up the rule. You are right that it can touch the ground so long as he maintains control of it so the situation is different. However I think the player has to complete the catch first. Since the ball touched in the process of making the catch I think it would be ruled incomplete anyway.

 

[Crown Royal]

The backside of the ball hit the ground, period, end of story, the footage showed it, see the first page of the thread with the pics, the third and fourth pics, you can see the back of the football deform from hitting the ground slightly...and the refs explanation stated the same fact that the back of the football hit the ground.

You cannot see anything with that degree of pixelization.

 

[The Quest for Six]

You cannot see anything with that degree of pixelization.

you can see his finger on the ground, the back of the football is below his third finger and you see his hand roll over from the force of the ball hitting the ground...it's obvious.

 

[joseephuss]

you can see his finger on the ground, the back of the football is below his third finger and you see his hand roll over from the force of the ball hitting the ground...it's obvious.

I didn't think anything about it was obvious in the replays I saw. Had the ball come down into Avant's lap and it been ruled a TD, I didn't see how it would be overturned. There was not conclusive evidence in the replays FOX was showing.

 

[unionjack8]

Prove it. I contend there is no shot showing the ball on the ground without Avant's hand under it. There was no clear evidence. It should not have been over turned.

agreed but i read on here last night that NBC showed an angle that did show it, HOWEVER, FOX didnt have that angle at the time and hence the review officials and ref didnt have it either.
I am not a conspiracy/bias guy at all but i do think that the officials are of poor quality and have been worse than ever this year, for all teams.

 

[arglebargle]

agreed but i read on here last night that NBC showed an angle that did show it, HOWEVER, FOX didnt have that angle at the time and hence the review officials and ref didnt have it either.
I am not a conspiracy/bias guy at all but i do think that the officials are of poor quality and have been worse than ever this year, for all teams.

The NFL loves their part time refs. I think that comes from a bunch of reasons that have little to do with their competance on the field. When those guys mess up to the point that they are let go (we hope, but probably only at the end of a season), they head back to their cushy bank or insurance exec jobs.

The NFL needs younger, professional refs better able to keep up. But I suspect the off the field advantages of the present situation trump the on the field issues.