Why the Wilcox INT should have stood

[Risen Star]

That is the part that I have found so funny in this thread, .. that there are some posters that say they know how a football will bounce in this, or that situation. LOL

A football will bounce in any direction it darn well pleases. Ha Ha!

It is just funny that some are trying to prove their point by saying that they know how the football would bounce to back up their opinion.

I found it funny too. But then I stopped laughing and I still knew a football will not bounce in the air like that off of a hand. It hit the turf.

Then a replay showed it hit the turf to confirm the obvious.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I thought the tip of the ball hit, too. I think you can see that in pic #4 of hairic's sequence. I don't think it would have been a wrong call if they'd let it stand, though.

To me the real story of that play wasn't even whether the ball hit the ground or not. It was the LOL-worthy ineptness of Foles missing a wide open WR for a TD, and the WR failing to catch even a poorly thrown pass. It was clear right there, if it wasn't already, that we were winning the game.

 

[Red Dragon]

I found it funny too. But then I stopped laughing and I still knew a football will not bounce in the air like that off of a hand. It hit the turf.

Then a replay showed it hit the turf to confirm the obvious.

Watch that replay even more closely, but focus on the ball's upward path only this time. The ball came in contact with multiple surfaces. It hit the turf, which caused a certain bounce, but that bounce was then propelled even higher when the ball hit Avant's right leg and right hand - both of which were moving upwards, which caused it to be pushed even higher.


There are several things to take away from this ruling, several of them that sound almost contradictory:

• First of all, the ball did hit the turf, and was an incompletion. We're in agreement on this one.
• Secondly, the ball bounced and flipped immediately as the result of contact with the hard turf - I think we're still in agreement on this.
• Thirdly, the ball was propelled upwards even further by contact with Avant's leg and hand, both of which were moving upwards. It was not just because of hitting the ground that it bounced high; it was because of contact with other moving objects as well.
  
• Finally, the official did not have clear, indisputable, overwhelming evidence to overturn the call. This is my main beef with the call. Not that the call was wrong - I think it was right. But it was not arrived at because of overwhelming evidence.

 

[AsthmaField]

Is the rule still the same about over-turning a call? Because I have wondered that a couple of times this year.

In the past, whatever call the on-field ref made stood unless there was conclusive evidence that the incorrect call was made. So, if a play like this one happens, and it is called an interception, then the booth review would have to show conclusive evidence that the ball did hit the ground in order to reverse the on-field call.

If that is still the case and the review has to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the ref who made the call was wrong, then there is no doubt that this didn't prove that it hit the ground. Maybe... maybe not, but we couldn't know for sure.

If they changed that, and I just didn't know that, then ok... but otherwise, I just don't see how there was enough visual evidence to overturn the on-field call of interception.

*shrug*

We kicked their *** anyway, but it sure would have been nice to see the Rook get an INT and for Kiffin to hold Kelly scoreless.

Now, if Wilcox would just learn to wrap up....

 

[Hostile]

Out to prove just how much of a fan you are.

Actually, I'm the guy who says he is no better or worse than any other dedicated fan. The fact is that you say more negative about this team than you do positive by a huge margin. The Grand Canyon is jealous of that gap. If you don't like someone observing that, then you are the only one who can do a blessed thing about it.

 

[tecolote]

If half the people see one thing and the othe half see another thing, how can the evidence be indisputable? It is obvious the ref took huge liberties with the spirit of the rule. No way was that overturnable.

You may think the ball hit the ground, or you may think it didn't, but anybody who says he or she is 100% certain that the ball hit/didn't hit the ground is either a wizard or a liar.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

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.

Exactly. There was no indisputable visual evidence.

 

[Red Dragon]

He will, as long as it is anti-Cowboys.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but there are people claiming to be Cowboys fans who say more negative stuff about the Dallas Cowboys than any Commanders, Steelers, Eagles, Giants, or any other team's fans than I have ever heard. I have a buddy who hates the Cowboys. Hates them. If I go past him at work wearing a Cowboys t-shirt 20 times a day (it would never be that many, just an example) he will say something every time. I hear less against the Cowboys from him than these guys. I hear him maybe one of two comments a day. So a max of 10 in a week's time, maybe. These guys have that many every day on this forum and Twitter. Fans of other teams spew less bile about our team than some of our fans. That is a sad fact.

I can pick 20 fans right now, and tell you to search back the last 100 comments for each. That is 2000 comments. if you can find 10% that have something positive to say I will faint dead away. Translate that to a marriage. If you can't say 1 good thing in 10 about your wife do you think it is going to last?

I will never understand the mentality of that.

Yep. It's actually why I like to visit the Giants, Eagles and Commanders message boards. It makes me realize that fans of other teams are just as harsh on their own team as Cowboys fans are on theirs. And after reading their absurd comments and posts, suddenly CowboysZone doesn't seem as ludicrous as it was before.