"In disputable video evidence" redefined

#251
#251
volmoon said:
Until tonight, the rule for overturning a call on the field required "indisputable video evidence." Tonight, the call was reversed without video evidence of THE BALL advancing for a first down. There was no video evidence of the ball crossing the first down line.
Click to expand...

if you go read the rule it doesn't reference the ball advancing for a first down. Indisputable evidence could be the player holding the ball's advancement past the first down marker.

it just says indisputable evidence.. does not reference the ball as part of indisputable evidence.
 
#252
#252
LWSVOL said:
if you go read the rule it doesn't reference the ball advancing for a first down. Indisputable evidence could be the player holding the ball's advancement past the first down marker.

it just says indisputable evidence.. does not reference the ball as part of indisputable evidence.
Click to expand...

Just so we can end this once and for all, do you have a link to this?
 
#253
#253
volfanbill said:
Just so we can end this once and for all, do you have a link to this?
Click to expand...

I will link the NCAA case study PDF file. I can't find the rule book online but can purchase one. I don't wish to purchase one. :)

this is the purpose and "philosophy: from the NCAA case study document:

Purpose

ARTICLE 1. Instant replay is a process whereby video review is used to confirm, reverse or let stand certain on-field decisions (Rule 12-3) made bygame officials.

Philosophy

ARTICLE 2. The instant replay process operates under the fundamental assumption that the ruling on the field is correct. The replay official may reverse a ruling if and only if the video evidence convinces him beyond all
doubt that the ruling was incorrect. Without such indisputable video evidence, the replay official must allow the ruling to stand.

the link to this document:

http://tbfoc.org/2013_14_InstantReplay_Case_Book.pdf

The replay official only has to be convinced by the evidence to over turn. No where does it reference the ball in the first down sections.
 
#254
#254
it's a little ridiculous to think someone can move the spot of the ball a few inches without ever seeing the actual ball
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#255
#255
utvolpj said:
it's a little ridiculous to think someone can move the spot of the ball a few inches without ever seeing the actual ball
Click to expand...

I'd be okay with a rule modification that places the ball at the spot on the field, but awards a first down when it's obvious.
 
#256
#256
utvolpj said:
it's a little ridiculous to think someone can move the spot of the ball a few inches without ever seeing the actual ball
Click to expand...

Think about it, that happens a lot! A fullback takes the handoff and runs into a pike of people at the LOS. Does the ref actually see the ball? No. If it's not on the ground, and no other player has it, then the ball carrier MUST still have possession of it.

In this case, no other person had the ball so it MUST have been in the ball carriers possession and his body was past the mark needed for a 1st down.
 
#257
#257
Boca Vol said:
Think about it, that happens a lot! A fullback takes the handoff and runs into a pike of people at the LOS. Does the ref actually see the ball? No. If it's not on the ground, and no other player has it, then the ball carrier MUST still have possession of it.

In this case, no other person had the ball so it MUST have been in the ball carriers possession and his body was past the mark needed for a 1st down.
Click to expand...

big difference since the ref on the field has to make a call like that. The one in the booth operates under different rules
 
#258
#258
Boca Vol said:
Think about it, that happens a lot! A fullback takes the handoff and runs into a pike of people at the LOS. Does the ref actually see the ball? No. If it's not on the ground, and no other player has it, then the ball carrier MUST still have possession of it.

In this case, no other person had the ball so it MUST have been in the ball carriers possession and his body was past the mark needed for a 1st down.
Click to expand...
So where do you spot the ball when you can't see it? At what point of a player's body moving past a marker do you consider it being indisputable without being able to see the ball?
 
#259
#259
utvolpj said:
it's a little ridiculous to think someone can move the spot of the ball a few inches without ever seeing the actual ball
Click to expand...

I think on almost every play the ball gets spotted a "few inches" from where the ball actually was when the player went down.. just watch..
 
#261
#261
bamawriter said:
This is absolutely true.
Click to expand...
and irrelevant

LWSVOL said:
I think on almost every play the ball gets spotted a "few inches" from where the ball actually was when the player went down.. just watch..
Click to expand...

which is a requirement of being an on the field ref. They have to make that call while the video guys do not and operate under a different set of rules. It's not the same thing at all
 
#262
#262
utvolpj said:
big difference since the ref on the field has to make a call like that. The one in the booth operates under different rules
Click to expand...

Here it is from the NCAA....

The replay official may reverse a ruling if and only if the video evidence convinces him beyond all doubt that the ruling was incorrect.

The replay official simply needs to be convinced beyond all doubt. My only conclusion is that since the QB had to have the ball and his body was past the spot needed, the booth ref was convinced beyond all doubt he had the 1st down.
 
#263
#263
Boca Vol said:
Here it is from the NCAA....

The replay official may reverse a ruling if and only if the video evidence convinces him beyond all doubt that the ruling was incorrect.

The replay official simply needs to be convinced beyond all doubt. My only conclusion is that since the QB had to have the ball and his body was past the spot needed, the booth ref was convinced beyond all doubt he had the 1st down.
Click to expand...

if the player is at the line and the location of the ball can't be determined then that is not "beyond all doubt"
 
#264
#264
utvolpj said:
if the player is at the line and the location of the ball can't be determined then that is not "beyond all doubt"
Click to expand...

The player's entire upper body was beyond the marker. He would have had to be carrying the ball below his groin for it to have not reached the marker.
 
#265
#265
bamawriter said:
The player's entire upper body was beyond the marker. He would have had to be carrying the ball below his groin for it to have not reached the marker.
Click to expand...

so where was he carrying it? Screenshot or a video that shows the ball's location will work
 
#266
#266
bamawriter said:
The player's entire upper body was beyond the marker. He would have had to be carrying the ball below his groin for it to have not reached the marker.
Click to expand...

To play a little devil's advocate, are you referring to the "unofficial" yellow line.
 
#268
#268
utvolpj said:
if the player is at the line and the location of the ball can't be determined then that is not "beyond all doubt"
Click to expand...

Thats the way I see it.

If the ball is pertinent to the spot thats the most important piece of evidence in any replay regarding the spot of the ball. If you can't see the football that removes "beyond all doubt".

If you think "beyond all doubt" should be removed from the rule and it geared more toward probability thats worth a discussion to me.
 
#269
#269
utvolpj said:
so where was he carrying it? Screenshot or a video that shows the ball's location will work
Click to expand...

There is no video that shows the ball, at least that I can find. But ACS's arms appear bent as he goes into the pile, so him holding it around mid-thigh seems impossible.
 
#270
#270
bamawriter said:
The player's entire upper body was beyond the marker. He would have had to be carrying the ball below his groin for it to have not reached the marker.
Click to expand...

This has been posted several times on this board. Are you saying its not possible for the ball to be located near his wast or groin?
 
#272
#272
BeecherVol said:
This has been posted several times on this board. Are you saying its not possible for the ball to be located near his wast or groin?
Click to expand...

If you look at the replay, you can clearly see where the ball is NOT. It is not:

1) between his legs, or
2) behind him

So if his body is past the point needed for the 1st down and he didn't fumble it, then the ball had to also be beyond the point needed for a 1st down.
 
#273
#273
bamawriter said:
There is no video that shows the ball, at least that I can find. But ACS's arms appear bent as he goes into the pile, so him holding it around mid-thigh seems impossible.
Click to expand...

That kicks out "beyond all doubt" unless we re gonna redefine it.
 
#274
#274
BeecherVol said:
That kicks out "beyond all doubt" unless we re gonna redefine it.
Click to expand...

Well, it's possible that the ball entered a parallel dimension between the moment when ACS entered the pile and when he came up out of the pile. So I guess nothing is ever beyond all doubt.
 
#275
#275
bamawriter said:
Nope. Referring to the sticks.
Click to expand...

Ok I didn't notice them in relation to the player when I watched the game, but then again I haven't found a good video of it except for the full game online and I didn't want to search through it to find the exact spot.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top