Explaining the call on the ball that hit the goal line. Guess the call was correct.
But where is the statement admitting the fumble review was BS?
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
I don't understand their explanation. They said it ht th goal line but didn't go in to the endzone. Isn't the white line considered the endzone? Isn't hitting the white the endzone?
That's why it's laughable that we're accepting an "official big east statement". Oooooh. Very formal. They are making up the rule. SHOW ME THE LANGUAGEI don't understand their explanation. They said it ht th goal line but didn't go in to the endzone. Isn't the white line considered the endzone? Isn't hitting the white the endzone?
Explaining the call on the ball that hit the goal line. Guess the call was correct.
But where is the statement admitting the fumble review was BS?
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
I don't understand their explanation. They said it ht th goal line but didn't go in to the endzone. Isn't the white line considered the endzone? Isn't hitting the white the endzone?
That's why it's laughable that we're accepting an "official big east statement". Oooooh. Very formal. They are making up the rule. SHOW ME THE LANGUAGE
This is not rocket science.
Explaining the call on the ball that hit the goal line. Guess the call was correct.
But where is the statement admitting the fumble review was BS?
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
I think the statement was made b/c there was confusion over what the actual rule is.
With the play in the 1st quarter, everyone knows the rule, it's just a matter of judgment. It certainly looked like a fumble. The only thing I could think of for why they upheld the call is that there was a minor facemask on the play, and they didn't want to call that so they simply ruled it down by contact. But they gave no explanation.
The "facemask" should have ZERO to do with whether or not it was a live ball. Not really sure what you are saying here.
Explaining the call on the ball that hit the goal line. Guess the call was correct.
But where is the statement admitting the fumble review was BS?
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
Look, the call was absolutely balogne (not Doug's kind). The ball was loose and landed on the goal line. That is a touchback resulting from the offensive player fumbling the ball. This is not rocket science.
They are trying to cover their asses.
Oh bite me poppy. LolSECTION 6. Touchback
When Declared
ARTICLE 1. It is a touchback when:
a. The ball becomes dead out of bounds behind a goal line, except from an
incomplete forward pass, or becomes dead in the possession of a player on,
above or behind his own goal line and the attacking team is responsible for
the ball being there (Rules 7-2-4-a and b) (A.R. 7-2-4-I, A.R. 8-6-1-I and II,
and A.R. 10-2-2-XVI).
Oh bite me poppy. Lol
Sorry, but you asked for the rule.