(12-16-2019 06:35 AM)Hammersmith Wrote: (12-15-2019 09:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote: Yeah I asked because not only was the call on the field that cost IS a touchdown wrong, there was no replay review at all. The ball was set and the next play run with no delay.
The IS coach should have challenged it, if he could have.
The CAA officials in that game weren't the best we've seen(some extremely questionable DPI no-calls going both ways), but they got the play in question correct from what I've been told by a college official. My understanding of what he told me is that the decision is effectively broken down into three categories(I'm paraphrasing a bunch but keeping the spirit). There are cases where the ball is clearly going forward(no doubt at all), clearly going backwards, and cases where it's not completely clear which way it's going, especially because of the angle of the cameras or inadequate video quality.
In the first two cases, the call is easy. But what happens in the third case? TV announcers(a.k.a. idiots) would have you believe the ball must be clearly going forwards or it's a fumble. It's actually the other way around in practice. College officials will default to it being a forward pass unless it's clearly moving backwards.
The other problem, of course, is that everyone watches the center of the players' bodies in cases like these instead of watching the ball. Announcers are the worst for this, and they were particularly bad in this case. They didn't know what the hell they were talking about.
I've watched the replay of this play at least a few dozen times and tried to be as honest as I could. I think the ball moved backwards very slightly, but I wouldn't swear on it. The pass traveled horizontally about 20 yards, and it maybe moved vertically 1-3 inches. It was just too close to be certain considering the camera angle and the perspective distortions that came with it.
The QB's back foot was almost touching the front side of the 45, and his throwing arm(and the ball) was slightly behind that. The receiver's forward foot was touching the back side of the 45, his feet were very close together, he was leaning slightly forwards, and the ball hit him in the gut. That's about as perfectly horizontal of a throw as you're going to get.
Put that together with what the official told me about the officiating philosophy in cases like this, and it means the call on the field was correct. And that's why the replay official in the booth chose to not look at it closer.
I appreciate your explanation of the rule. But my initial reaction to your post was that the ball doesn't have to be going backwards a lot to be a fumble. Just any amount at all, even one to three inches as you seem to think.
But upon my "further review", meaning googling for the rule, the NCAA rule says that a 'vertical' pass, like in the NFL, is a fumble. It does have to be going forward to be a forward pass. From the NCAA rules:
"A pass is forward if the ball first strikes the ground, a player, an official or anything else beyond the spot where the ball is released. All other passes are backward passes. When in question a pass thrown in or behind the neutral zone is forward rather than a backward pass.(Exception: Games using Instant Replay)."
So a "tie", so to speak, is a fumble, not a forward pass.
More specifically to this case, I like your three categories of analysis, and I agree that this was a "category 3" case. Like you, I think it was a backwards pass and thus a fumble, but by a very small margin, one that begged for a second or third look. It was a close call.
But I can't agree with your conclusion that it was the right call not to review it, because to me, that is precisely the case that calls out for review. RR is mostly useful for close calls, and this one, as we both agree, was close. Sure, one reason we have RR is to correct badly blown calls, but the main reason we have it is to get close calls right.
And that speaks to your issue of "officiating philosophy" you mention above. Yes, as per the quote above, the rule states that if it is close, if it is category three, the officials are supposed to presume it is a forward pass *except* if the game has video replay. That clearly means that if replay is in effect, close calls that are normally, in non-replay games, regarded as forward passes are to be reviewed to see exactly what they are.
So to me, this means that the one thing about this close play that is clear is that it absolutely should have been reviewed. Whether out of incompetence or 'home cooking' for NDS I don't know, but the RR official blew it by not reviewing it.
/
North Dakota State vs Illinois State
North Dakota State vs Illinois State 
