Should the Whithead 100Yard fumble have been overturned?Called a TD for Pitt

[Joe the Panther Fan]

You don't throw it, not the same as holding on every play..

Illegal man downfield is a point of emphasis by the NCAA this season. They instructed officials to call it. They told coaches to make sure that their players knew that if they did it it was going to get called. And for the most part officials are calling it. It was called twice on the same team in one of the games I was watching last weekend.

But I agree, it isn't the same as holding, which could (and in my opinion should) be called a lot more than it is, but has a lot of officials judgement to it. Illegal man down field is cut and dried. The lineman either has gone too far or he has not. In that case Johnson went too far. It was a penalty. Go back and watch it.

 

[oldpantherfan]

Bull !!! There were multiple angles and some looked like he crossed and others didn't. If you checked the rear and side angles he did not cross, but it appeared he did from the front. And funny but the side ref who was right there and had the best view called it a fumble where the front ref was obscured by players.
I don't feel that in was conclusive enough to overturn it. And you can't go on the announcers as they wer pro Clemson the whole game. even talking about how blweitt had missed earlier when he lined up for the final field goal, they never gave him a chance.

 

[cashbin99]

Hi, first time poster so I hope I don't do this wrong. I watched the replays numerous times. I did not see the ground causing the fumble nor a player knock the ball loose. But to me it appeared the ball. was coming out as the player fell. Since there was no clear angle showing control as the ball crossed the goal line I believe the call should not have been overturned. That's how I saw it.

Absolutely correct ! Everyone who is arguing that the ball crossed the line is not focusing on whether the ball carrier had control of the ball. There is not one single view that clearly demonstrates that the runner had control of the ball. If you cannot establish control, then the play should have stood as called. Very simple.

 

[Delpanther]

Absolutely correct ! Everyone who is arguing that the ball crossed the line is not focusing on whether the ball carrier had control of the ball. There is not one single view that clearly demonstrates that the runner had control of the ball. If you cannot establish control, then the play should have stood as called. Very simple.

This is absolutely correct. We got totally screwed on that call. Redemption was sweet...

 

[CJsE]

Absolutely correct ! Everyone who is arguing that the ball crossed the line is not focusing on whether the ball carrier had control of the ball. There is not one single view that clearly demonstrates that the runner had control of the ball. If you cannot establish control, then the play should have stood as called. Very simple.

Wrong.

The endzone replay at 36:20 shows that the runner had control of the ball until he hit his blocker's ass.
https://youtu.be/-5BPIhFitDA?t=36m19s
Then they sync 2 other angles together at 37:32, something they are able to do in the review booth, you can see that the blocker's ass was well beyond the goal line when he come into contact with it.

There were plenty of bad calls/no calls in the game, but this wasn't one of them. Pitt won, we can celebrate, stop being a salty homer.

 

[Delpanther]

Wrong.

The endzone replay at 36:20 shows that the runner had control of the ball until he hit his blocker's ass.

View embedded media

Then they sync 2 other angles together at 37:32, something they are able to do in the review booth, you can see that the blocker's ass was well beyond the goal line when he come into contact with it.

View embedded media

There were plenty of bad calls/no calls in the game, but this wasn't one of them. Pitt won, we can celebrate, stop being a salty homer.

On neither of those shots is it clear where the ball came loose relative to the ball's position to the goal line. That's why the replay officials took so long. The replay officials blew this call- there was ansolutely NOT irrefutable evidence the ball crossed the plane before the fumble. They just assumed it did in the absence of clear vonvlusive video evidence. However, all's well that ends well and as I mentioned in another thread the reversal of the call negated people arguing that Pitt won on s fluke.

 

[cashbin99]

Wrong.

The endzone replay at 36:20 shows that the runner had control of the ball until he hit his blocker's ass.

View embedded media

Then they sync 2 other angles together at 37:32, something they are able to do in the review booth, you can see that the blocker's ass was well beyond the goal line when he come into contact with it.

View embedded media

There were plenty of bad calls/no calls in the game, but this wasn't one of them. Pitt won, we can celebrate, stop being a salty homer.

Who is being a "salty homer". Go screw yourself with your name calling. Just having a legitimate discussion of the call. Despite your videos, I still don't see anything that conclusively shows that the carrier had control when the ball cross the line.

 

[JokePa]

There is NO WAY either of those shows he was in the end zone. No way what-so-ever

How about your crappy field get freaking sideline cameras. It is a joke not to have them. But if anything those angles show he didnt get in, or more likely there is no way to tell without a doubt.

If they initially called it a TD I would be alittle upset it was withheld. But they called it a Pitt TD. Absolutely no way it should be overturned, and Clemson got a major major homer call

 

[President Stache]

There is NO WAY either of those shows he was in the end zone. No way what-so-ever

How about your crappy field get freaking sideline cameras. It is a joke not to have them. But if anything those angles show he didnt get in, or more likely there is no way to tell without a doubt.

If they initially called it a TD I would be alittle upset it was withheld. But they called it a Pitt TD. Absolutely no way it should be overturned, and Clemson got a major major homer call

Agree it was a total joke. Not a conclusive replay anywhere