They can't review penalties but they can review if the ball was tipped at the line. If a ball gets tipped, all WR's in the vicinity of the ball can be tackled. In my opinion, it was a huge make up call--the PI call was bad, but the ball definitely wasn't tipped.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Yea, the ball was not tipped. They used an angle that was misleading to make the call. The ball was pass the defenders hands which made it look like his fingers touched the ball when paused at the right time. If you look at the angle they showed once from the top, the ball goes straight through his arms and no where near his right hand.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
VT/BC: Pass interference reviewed in replay. It was the touching of the pass that was reviewed. Since it was touched, there is no foul— Mike Pereira (@MikePereira) November 2, 2013
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
but was there INDISPUTABLE evidence that the ball WAS touched? It didn't look like it was touched to me. The ball came out wobbly when Thomas threw it before it got to the line. It didn't appear to me that anything about the flight of the ball changed after it was "touched". I think it was a really bad PI call and I think the refs were covering that up with a make up call. They made a bad call, but they didn't have indisputable evidence to overturn it if you ask me. I texted a friend of mine that video review never helps us out right before they announced the ruling. I wasn't surprised but I'm still pissed.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
They kept showing one angle that made it look like maybe he touched it. In the first angle they showed, the ball goes straight between his hands. Because of the angle of the camera, it made it look like he touched it. Bad call; not indisputable. But based on our history, you know how that goes...
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
I don't understand why that play was even reviewed. I thought there were certain instances where they ALWAYS review (scoring/turnovers) and when there is a challenge. Why did they stop the game and review the play without a challenge flag?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
So we now know why the refs changed the call. They were making up for the pass interference. The tip had nothing to do with it. They were just looking for an excuse to change the call. Pathetic.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
On a side note, we're a preeminent engineering school. I think we should have the most advanced set of permanent in-stadium cameras on the planet to catch every angle of every play all the time. We are Virginia Tech, we can do that!
No, scratch that, we should do that.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
remember when we blocked that punt against clemson? the refs were like 'nuh uh' but it changed direction after our guy tipped it. it was clear. this made me think of that play.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
The "tipped" review was a make-up call for the fact that there shouldn't have been a flag in the first place. The ball was clearly uncatchable and I don't really think there was very much contact either.
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
We seem to have a history with replay officials....Clemson, Mich, BC...I'm sure there's others that are escaping me at the moment. I just cringe every time I hear "The previous play is under further review."
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Anybody have a shot of that play?
When I saw it live, I thought there was defensive holding which stayed on to become PI.
In that case, the PI was moot, he was impeded by the holding to run the route, making the ball uncatchable.
But I didn't see a replay of the part leading up to the tip.
If I saw what I thought I saw, the tip would only negate the PI, not the hold. Since the hold wasn't called, in favor of the higher penalty of PI, the non-tip tip, negated the hold as well.
Anybody have a clip of that where we can see the contact downfield?
Log in or register to post comments about the Virginia Tech Hokies
Comments
They can't review penalties but they can review if the ball was tipped at the line. If a ball gets tipped, all WR's in the vicinity of the ball can be tackled. In my opinion, it was a huge make up call--the PI call was bad, but the ball definitely wasn't tipped.
I was yelling at the TV screen "snap the damn ball!!!!!"
Yea, the ball was not tipped. They used an angle that was misleading to make the call. The ball was pass the defenders hands which made it look like his fingers touched the ball when paused at the right time. If you look at the angle they showed once from the top, the ball goes straight through his arms and no where near his right hand.
It was a bad PI call so the refs used the tipped ball excuse to make up for it
It was a bad call covered up by a really bad call. Sometimes life sucks.
I was gonna say this in my reply. I think they just used that to cover up their initial screw up. On to the next one.
Per this NFL rule guru:
but was there INDISPUTABLE evidence that the ball WAS touched? It didn't look like it was touched to me. The ball came out wobbly when Thomas threw it before it got to the line. It didn't appear to me that anything about the flight of the ball changed after it was "touched". I think it was a really bad PI call and I think the refs were covering that up with a make up call. They made a bad call, but they didn't have indisputable evidence to overturn it if you ask me. I texted a friend of mine that video review never helps us out right before they announced the ruling. I wasn't surprised but I'm still pissed.
They kept showing one angle that made it look like maybe he touched it. In the first angle they showed, the ball goes straight between his hands. Because of the angle of the camera, it made it look like he touched it. Bad call; not indisputable. But based on our history, you know how that goes...
I don't understand why that play was even reviewed. I thought there were certain instances where they ALWAYS review (scoring/turnovers) and when there is a challenge. Why did they stop the game and review the play without a challenge flag?
Afterwards, what I heard was it was a bad flag to begin with (uncatchable ball) that they used the review to overturn with the questionable tipping.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=0BRKtGDyc_0&list=UUdm8J5qYtdG...
It was definitely not tipped. In case anyone was still wondering...
Oh my god it wasn't even close. Why didn't we see that camera angle? Brilliant find, jmock
So we now know why the refs changed the call. They were making up for the pass interference. The tip had nothing to do with it. They were just looking for an excuse to change the call. Pathetic.
On a side note, we're a preeminent engineering school. I think we should have the most advanced set of permanent in-stadium cameras on the planet to catch every angle of every play all the time. We are Virginia Tech, we can do that!
No, scratch that, we should do that.
Well the game was in Chesnut Hill, Massachusetts... but I guess we could set up cameras in every other schools' stadium while we're at it.
Indeed. Totally forgot about that.
remember when we blocked that punt against clemson? the refs were like 'nuh uh' but it changed direction after our guy tipped it. it was clear. this made me think of that play.
The "tipped" review was a make-up call for the fact that there shouldn't have been a flag in the first place. The ball was clearly uncatchable and I don't really think there was very much contact either.
We seem to have a history with replay officials....Clemson, Mich, BC...I'm sure there's others that are escaping me at the moment. I just cringe every time I hear "The previous play is under further review."
Also Duke, I have never seen that many spot reviews.
Anybody have a shot of that play?
When I saw it live, I thought there was defensive holding which stayed on to become PI.
In that case, the PI was moot, he was impeded by the holding to run the route, making the ball uncatchable.
But I didn't see a replay of the part leading up to the tip.
If I saw what I thought I saw, the tip would only negate the PI, not the hold. Since the hold wasn't called, in favor of the higher penalty of PI, the non-tip tip, negated the hold as well.
Anybody have a clip of that where we can see the contact downfield?