Postgame(Giants):No bridge-jumpers- Official NFC Norf Champs

[chuckleslove]

The fair catch on the kick netted like 10 yards. Ballard's play lost them 4 points.

I'm not saying I wholeheartedly disagreed with any of the calls, but all of them involving points that were borderline went our way.

But I think if you look at all those calls from an unbiased perspective you will find that they SHOULD have all gone our way given the evidence available both in real time and via replay. Just because all of the close calls went our way doesn't mean we got a break.

[Kerb Hohl]

I still haven't seen the angle where Driver's foot apparently touched on his catch, plus he still could have touched out of bounds in the back of the endzone before that. I think if Ballard's was called a TD it would have stood. Jennings' made sense to me, but it probably looked bad to the casual fan.

Let's not forget that very touchy illegal contact call where the guy hit Finley that kept one of our drives going (yes, I realize they missed a different illegal contact later in the drive) but we would have been punting from our own 15 and would maybe not have gotten that missed one later on.

I don't know, who's biased? The board where all of the Packers fans think it was "fair" that we got all of them or the same board that the angry divisional fans came in to trumpet that a few of them were controversial and written about in the media or that "About time Rodgers won the division."

I'd say the "unbiased perspective" is somewhere in the middle.

Like I said, I have no problems with any of them going our way because they were all so close and stood as they were called on the field, but I think if you removed the fact that they were called on the field that way from the beginning, we probably don't get all 3.

[Ayt]

I still haven't seen the angle where Driver's foot apparently touched on his catch, plus he still could have touched out of bounds in the back of the endzone before that. I think if Ballard's was called a TD it would have stood. Jennings' made sense to me, but it probably looked bad to the casual fan.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/09000d5d ... d-TD-catch

The last angle shows that his right toe does indeed make contact with the ground and his left foot is obviously in. I think he did step out of bounds at the back of the endzone, but that isn't reviewable and it is also easy to miss when it happens so quickly like that. The catch itself seems pretty obvious once you see his right foot from the back angle.

[Kerb Hohl]

Stepping out and being the first to touch it is definitely reviewable.

Also, that last angle makes it closer, but I STILL don't see it actually tap the ground. Every angle I see suggests that it might be kinda on top of his left foot.

I think they said "play stands" or whatever on that one which suggested there was nothing conclusive either way.

[Ayt]

Are you sure illegal touching like this is reviewable? If you are shoved OOB and you quickly reenter the field of play then you can be the first to touch the ball. How is a judgement call like that reviewable?

From wiki:

One concern about replay that was addressed some years ago was the situation where a coach would seek a review of a non-challengeable call (such as being forced out of bounds...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_re ... n_football

As far as I can tell, the only thing reviewable was whether his right foot came down, and I think it definitely did (as his feet separate).

[Kerb Hohl]

"Forced out of bounds" is not the same as an illegal touch. My only thought is that they are either talking about:

A. The old force out rule.
B. The guy was forced out for an illegal touch.

I've seen that reviewed and overturned a bunch.

[Ayt]

Saw your edit. You may be right about the forced OOB thing.

I honestly don't recall ever seeing a play like DD's being reviewed when the guy is shoved OOB and then comes back in to make a catch. I didn't think they let review officials review judgement calls like that.

[Reddeye]

Saw your edit. You may be right about the forced OOB thing.

I honestly don't recall ever seeing a play like DD's being reviewed when the guy is shoved OOB and then comes back in to make a catch. I didn't think they let review officials review judgement calls like that.

I am sure you can review an out of bounds call. Also it is not a judgement call. Either the guy was out or not. If he was shoved out a penalty should have been called for illegal contact, but I don't know if they can call a penalty after reviewing the play.

[Kerb Hohl]

Yeah if he's shoved out they cannot call illegal contact, though I believe they can just ignore the fact that he was out of bounds then.

[Reddeye]

Yeah if he's shoved out they cannot call illegal contact, though I believe they can just ignore the fact that he was out of bounds then.

I didn't think a player could be the first to touch the ball if he was previously out of bounds. It woudn't matter if he was pushed out or not.

[beyond_the_arc]

A player can re-establish himself as legal to catch the ball if they were forced out of bounds and then get both feet back in bounds as soon as possible. Step out of bounds on your own, and you cannot be the first to touch the ball upon re-entry to the field of play. And yes it is reviewable by the officials.

[trwi7]

Watching the replay on NFL Network on the Driver TD.

1. I still don't think he went out of bounds. At the very least it's inconclusive and since the call on the field was touchdown you can't overturn it.

2. Webster pushed him. So illegal contact or Driver being pushed out and re-establishing position right away.

[Ayt]

If the OOB rule is actually reviewable, it would have taken one look because it was obvious he only went OOB (if he even did) because of a shove and that he immediately came back into the field of a play. That would have taken less than 5 seconds to see. I still don't think that aspect of the play is reviewable.

I couldn't hear the audio because I was with a bunch of loudmouths, but did Pereira come on and make a comment about the out of bounds aspect or did he comment on DD's feet? It seems clear to me that DD's right foot drags as his feet separate. His ankle even starts to bend a bit after his foot plants.

[trwi7]

I don't know if they even brought Pereira in for that play. If they did I don't remember what he said. I think Aikman said the only reason the review is lasting this long is because they're checking to see if he stepped out of bounds.

As far as his foot not being down as he's going to the ground after the catch. Right as he catches the ball there's a view where you can see his toe pick the ground and then another view as he almost hits out of bounds of his foot dragging along the turf again.