Steelers/Ravens, was that a TD?

[1cheater]

I say no, the ball didn't cross the plain of the end zone.. How the fuck can they reverse the call on the field? He had his feet in the endzone, but the ball never broke the plain.

 

[2PLAYSMAX]

Unless the ref has a camera view we didn't have on the broadcast, no way was there enough evidence.

THE SHAFT I believe was given.

 

[Addict101]

Awful overturning of a call. They called THE BALL short of the goaline, and it was somewhat clear it didn't cross. If they wouldve called it a TD, would they have overturned it to saying it wasn't? No way.

Ravens got the shaft.

 

[bigtendominator]

It wasn't 100%. I can see an arguement for both sides, but don't believe it should been overturned because of the call on the field.

 

[TheProphetprofit]

This is all I can say....Im a big steeler fan but also a fan of $ so I had a 500.00 parlay with balt/ne. To me it was a TD even though it cost me a good chunk of change. Thats as close to being unbiased as i can be... froze image on tivo and looked for awhile and i still come up with TD

 

[BadCo]

Indiscernible evidence to over turn the call on the field.

End of story,but just like vs Hawks in Superbowl the Steelers are bread and butter to NFL marketing.

Kind of like a stewards inquiry at the track they will move the favorite up as more patrons will cash and be merry and love the sport.

Something you have to put in to your handicapping equations?

 

[Maniac]

Fucking Bullshit is what it was!

I always thought that reviews needed indisputable evidence to overturn a call on the field - unless they had some miracle camera angle then there is surely no way that they can say that the views we all had contained enough to overturn that call

:fckmad:

 

[TheProphetprofit]

BadCO...steelers have more apology letters from NFL officials than most teams because refs bolw so many calls not in thier favor

 

[prodigy]

strangest thing is that i dont even think the referee explanation mentioned anything about the ball breaking the plane. i think he focused on having possession and feet down in the endzone. almost seems like he didnt even know why the play was being reviewed. weird. pitt is the luckiest team in nfl by far. could easily be .500 this season.

 

[BadCo]

BadCO...steelers have more apology letters from NFL officials than most teams because refs bolw so many calls not in thier favor

Where was coach Holgrems letter of apology?

Must of got lost in the mail.

 

[PapaParlay]

I disagree with the OP. I thought the ball crossed the plane without a doubt, but I don't think he had his feet down until the ball was outside of the end zone. I was on pittsburgh though, so I'll take the win even if I don't agree with the call.

 

[VIEJODINOSAUR]

I was under the impression that if your feet are in the end zone and you have possesion, that it is a TD....somebody correct me if I am wrong....thanks

 

[Rambo]

Im so pissed. I watched that whole game with my dad who is a huge ravens fan and long time baltimore football fan and to see us lose that game at the end over that call really hurts. I had that feeling the whole game the steelers would do something to win it. Now its gonna be tough just for the ravens to make the playoffs.

 

[Dante]

I was under the impression that if your feet are in the end zone and you have possesion, that it is a TD....somebody correct me if I am wrong....thanks

yep your right according to ESPN radio... its not like a running back having to break the plane of the goalline... the recievers 2 feet have to be in the endzone when the ball is caught

that was a legal TD as holmes 2 feet were in the endzone when he caught it

 

[BadCo]

I was under the impression that if your feet are in the end zone and you have possesion, that it is a TD....somebody correct me if I am wrong....thanks

When the play happened I said to my self touchdown.

And I still think it was but not called that way.

Watching the fucking thing 20 times in 10 different speeds I see where the official could call it not a TD.

So what I saw was no indiscernible evidence to over turn the call on the field.

 

[VIEJODINOSAUR]

yep your right according to ESPN radio... its not like a running back having to break the plane of the goalline... the recievers 2 feet have to be in the endzone when the ball is caught

that was a legal TD as holmes 2 feet were in the endzone when he caught it

Thanks Dante....I thought I was losing my mind for a moment....:toast:

 

[whalewager]

uh yeah...it was a td...did you guys not see the 6 put on the scoreboard

 

[Maniac]

I was under the impression that if your feet are in the end zone and you have possesion, that it is a TD....somebody correct me if I am wrong....thanks

Now I have calmed down a little bit I am wondering this same thing now, but have to say I am not sure on the exact ruling in this situation.

The way I saw it, the ball did cross the plane (just!) but I dont think the reciever had complete control and possession till it was back out of the end zone again but once he did get control both his feet were down in the end zone - even if the ball never crossed the plain again.

So does the TD count because:

a) The reciever had possession while he was in the end zone - even though the ball itself never broke the plane while he was in possession.

b) The ball was judged to have crossed the plane while in possession of the reciever (which it didn't look like to me).

c) It shouldn't have stood.


Personally I dont know the exact rule here, but if (a) is indeed correct then I can at least take it on the chin and say fair enough - it's not gonna get me my lost money back, but at least I could move on and wouldn;t be stewing about it...

 

[VIEJODINOSAUR]

The ref said that Holmes had both feet down and was in possesion of the ball....just have to assume that the refs know the rule....(to me it seemed the ball did not cross the goal line)

 

[Maniac]

I see this ha already been answered - cheers guys