Blanc "incompletion" (pic)

#29
#29
lilesrt said:
Someone needs to post the picture of M. North's one handed grab in the last minutes of the game. It was one handed because Marquez had no other choice but to catch it one handed. The SC defender had his right arm lassoed, and you guessed it!! No PI call. If North doesn't catch that ball, that would have been a bad deal.
Click to expand...

The ref was watching it very close, would imagine the flag is thrown if he doesnt hold onto it. No reason to throw the flag if it is irrelevant.
 
#30
#30
CourtJester said:
Sorry for beating what is likely a dead horse at this point, but I'm still kind of pissed the replay refs sometimes can't manage to properly interpret slow motion video any better than the refs on the field can judge a bang/bang play in real time. This is not the best quality image (it's a pic of an image from my computer monitor), but it does show the last moment Blanc's left foot was on the turf, as well as him having the ball secured with both hands. I understand that you probably can't tell either of these definitively from this image, but if you go back and watch the video you will see that this is after the bobble between his legs, and from this point on he clearly goes to the turf with the ball securely held with his hands in the exact same positions they are here.

Please note I am NOT saying the replay ref should have reversed the call on the field. You could make a good faith argument for that, but the securing of the ball and his left foot leaving the turf happened in very close proximity; I think he secured the ball a split second before his foot lost contact with the ground, or at worst at the same time, but I can see where reasonable minds could differ. My point is that the video is at worst inconclusive on this issue, and that the replay official should have said that the call on the field "stands" rather than "is confirmed." And that should have been the case if the ref on the field had called it a catch as well--the call should have stood.

IMO, this particular call is another good example of how psychology and knee-jerk reactions enter into the process. Because Blanc clearly bobbled the ball to begin with, the replay official (perhaps subconsciously) wasn't going to give him the benefit of the doubt on when he secured the ball relative to going out of bounds, even though the evidence is at worst inconclusive. I think the same thing happened with Pig's "fumble" against UGA. Because he clearly lost contact with the ball with his right hand before the goal line, the ref wasn't going to spend much time wondering if his left hand might have still maintained control of the rear of the ball at the time it broke the plane--and that ref reversed the call on the field. North's catch against UGA illustrates the same thing, i.e., his catch was upheld because he caught the ball cleanly (and did a hell of a layout to even make the play close), even though I'd bet a month's pay that he didn't have contact with the turf inbounds with control of the ball as long as Blanc did. But because the catch was clean and amazingly athletic, he got the benefit of the doubt.

IMO the video evidence of all three plays was inconclusive (although I would say the video evidence of Blanc's catch is actually the strongest of the three), and the call on the field should have stood in all three cases. But the replay official only thought one of them was inconclusive (North's). That's not much of a batting average when the standard is supposed to be something everyone would agree on. :banghead2:
Click to expand...

I agree and do believe it was a catch, but even more troubling was it was a really bad pass to a wide open receiver but he adjusts well and didnt initially catch it cleanly. A good pass and its a TD. But fortunately it didnt cost us the game and honestly the end of the game doesnt get much better. But also if he does have it called right then it changes everything about the game. From us kicking off and SCe possibly changing their field position. Truth be told it sucked at the time but hell we could score there and it effects every single aspect and play of the rest of the gsme. I like the final result and those are the best kind of wins!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#31
#31
dooley2 said:
All Worley has to do is get it there and it's 6. That's what is really being left out of this discussion. Oh, and Buck Fama! Vols, Butch!
Click to expand...

He did a good job considering the pressure in his face. Should have been caught.
 
#32
#32
No sense in debating it. He shouldve caught it flush. And worley shouldve thrown it out in front of him so he didn't have to stop and whirl around to catch it. It was a bad play by both. But for the first time I can remember...We caught the breaks we needed and won!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#34
#34
BanditVol said:
It was a catch, but it was called out of bounds, and the video evidence was not incontrovertible given that he did juggle the ball some. Had it been called a catch to begin with, and also without the juggling, it would have been a catch.


The juggling doesn't show up in that still....
Click to expand...

That still was taken after the juggle, when he GAINED POSSESSION with one foot in!

Its a lot more fun to argue this with a win in our pocket.
 
#36
#36
QuickSmurf said:
He did a good job considering the pressure in his face. Should have been caught.
Click to expand...

What? C'mon man, he made a bad throw. The reason he had a little pressure was because he did what he so often does, he hesitated.

It should have been caught cleanly but at least it was caught,.....with one foot in bounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#37
#37
I agree with the OP original point. Not necessarily that it should have been overturned, but that it should have been ruled "the ruling on the field stands" not confirmed. its only supposed to be confirmed or overturned if theres no argument to be made to the contrary. in this case, an argument can be made. The replay system has its pros and cons but they are not executing it the way it was written up, IMHO.
 
#38
#38
Its funny how people will still ***** about Worley...they blitzed and thats the play he hurt his hand on I believe...so he wad under pressure and short armed it bc of the pressure...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#39
#39
VolsSportsFan said:
You're right; it was clear he was still bobbling as he hit out of bounds.

I guess there's a lot of crazy people on VN then.
Click to expand...


At the point this pic was snapped, that ball never moved and both hands were on that ball. He had juggled and both hands pulled the ball into his stomach and it never moved after this point^^
 
#41
#41
BigOrangeTrain said:
Bingo. If this were the NFL then no catch. This is college, that was a catch.
Click to expand...

It's a judgment call. The ref ruled it an incompletion because Blanc did not maintain control of the ball as he went out of bounds.

Personally, I thought it was a catch. Unfortunately, my wardrobe does not include a black and white striped shirt.
 
#44
#44
BigOrangeCrush32 said:
Its funny how people will still ***** about Worley...they blitzed and thats the play he hurt his hand on I believe...so he wad under pressure and short armed it bc of the pressure...
Click to expand...

He holds the ball too long. The ball was already gone when he hit his thumb. Excuses, excuses,.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#48
#48
CourtJester said:
Sorry for beating what is likely a dead horse at this point, but I'm still kind of pissed the replay refs sometimes can't manage to properly interpret slow motion video any better than the refs on the field can judge a bang/bang play in real time. This is not the best quality image (it's a pic of an image from my computer monitor), but it does show the last moment Blanc's left foot was on the turf, as well as him having the ball secured with both hands. I understand that you probably can't tell either of these definitively from this image, but if you go back and watch the video you will see that this is after the bobble between his legs, and from this point on he clearly goes to the turf with the ball securely held with his hands in the exact same positions they are here.

Please note I am NOT saying the replay ref should have reversed the call on the field. You could make a good faith argument for that, but the securing of the ball and his left foot leaving the turf happened in very close proximity; I think he secured the ball a split second before his foot lost contact with the ground, or at worst at the same time, but I can see where reasonable minds could differ. My point is that the video is at worst inconclusive on this issue, and that the replay official should have said that the call on the field "stands" rather than "is confirmed." And that should have been the case if the ref on the field had called it a catch as well--the call should have stood.

IMO, this particular call is another good example of how psychology and knee-jerk reactions enter into the process. Because Blanc clearly bobbled the ball to begin with, the replay official (perhaps subconsciously) wasn't going to give him the benefit of the doubt on when he secured the ball relative to going out of bounds, even though the evidence is at worst inconclusive. I think the same thing happened with Pig's "fumble" against UGA. Because he clearly lost contact with the ball with his right hand before the goal line, the ref wasn't going to spend much time wondering if his left hand might have still maintained control of the rear of the ball at the time it broke the plane--and that ref reversed the call on the field. North's catch against UGA illustrates the same thing, i.e., his catch was upheld because he caught the ball cleanly (and did a hell of a layout to even make the play close), even though I'd bet a month's pay that he didn't have contact with the turf inbounds with control of the ball as long as Blanc did. But because the catch was clean and amazingly athletic, he got the benefit of the doubt.

IMO the video evidence of all three plays was inconclusive (although I would say the video evidence of Blanc's catch is actually the strongest of the three), and the call on the field should have stood in all three cases. But the replay official only thought one of them was inconclusive (North's). That's not much of a batting average when the standard is supposed to be something everyone would agree on. :banghead2:
Click to expand...


I have been wondering for years what the point of having replay is if the official reviewing the replay doesn't have the balls to overturn the call on the field, even in the face of bliant conclusive evidence. The NCAA should just abolish this current system because it doesn't work! Just my two cents!

Gunner
 
#49
#49
QuickSmurf said:
He did a good job considering the pressure in his face. Should have been caught.
Click to expand...

most of Worley passes on the long balls are not very good. The WRs either has to slow down and wait or turn their bodies around and adjust. Lets not make Worley out to be more than he really is. The kid is improving better but he is no where to being a great QB. There are WRs that are open and he is throwing it late or hitting LBs in the back of the helmet. I still think he will be ok but he is not where he needs to be. Im all for Worley but he is what he is and that's a decent game manager right now. I feel he will be a lot better at the end of the year. He still needs to keep the ball more on read option.
 
#50
#50
20 years ago, 90% of the incompletes of today's game were catches.
Today if your pinkie moves or you have a flapping bugger, it's incomplete.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top