Inconclusive video evidence.
The ruling on the field stands.

(09-09-2013 12:05 AM)Inigo Wrote:  Inconclusive video evidence.
The ruling on the field stands.

this. not sure how you could argue otherwise other than just being a complete homer. The picture you post doesn't clearly show anything. If they called him out on the field I think that call would have stood too.

Exactly. Now if the ball carrier were actually the guy in white to his right who is trying to tackle him, then it would be an egregious error worth making a thread about. This one, is one that could easily go either way.

(09-09-2013 10:36 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  Exactly. Now if the ball carrier were actually the guy in white to his right who is trying to tackle him, then it would be an egregious error worth making a thread about. This one, is one that could easily go either way.

Agree, now that I know that they didnt have the other angles available.

Past that I grade blown calls on how egregious they are. Even if there were other angles, that looks like a close call. It can suck if it doesn't go your way, but that's the game. It is the blown egregious calls that ate fair game. A bisci misapplication of the rules (see Green Bay the last two years) or just a blatantly bad call, such as if the guy were six inches out of bounds. Outside of that, I don't complain about calls too much.

But yes it is important to realize that lower profile games have many fewer camera angles to judge replays by then national TV games. Even in NFL games, which have more cameras, you'd be surprised at how many blown calls are discovered by reviewing film from NFL Films, which is used to make the coach's tape.