Virginia Tech just got totally shafted in OT. yuck total BS

[mauconnfan]

Here's my view on this. Just because a ball shifts a little does not conclusively establish that the player did not have control of it. You can have control of the ball and it can still move slightly in your grasp. Like holding your dog on a leash. You have control of the dog, even though it's moving around, pulling you. If "control" must mean complete lack of any movement at all - not even an ounce of movement - then yeah, the ball shifted a tiny bit. But that is not the definition of control, and one can have control with some degree of movement. That is the distinction that you are making, and I don't believe it's a valid distinction. The catch was called a catch, and there was not enough there to overturn it unless "control" is defined as the "complete lack of any movement," or if "firmly in the grasp" means "complete" lack of any movement. Not enough to overturn, imo, and football now has too many replays because of these types of hyper-technical dissections of every fractional movement of body parts and footballs.

Simply put this cannot be overturned.........the ground MAY have helped but the call on the field does not allow that to be the end result. Looks to me like noone can tell me for sure if the ground was the only reason for a catch?? I mean the ball moves also when you hit the ground and you most definitely have possession right? Awful call...........again call "on the field" is why. If it was the other way then that should stand also!!

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Simply put this cannot be overturned.........the ground MAY have helped but the call on the field does not allow that to be the end result. Looks to me like noone can tell me for sure if the ground was the only reason for a catch?? I mean the ball moves also when you hit the ground and you most definitely have possession right? Awful call...........again call "on the field" is why. If it was the other way then that should stand also!!

The rule is that the ground cannot help the catch, not that the ground has to be completely responsible for the catch. Regardless, I think everyone understands the rule now and the difference is just a matter of perception that is not likely to change.

 

[Excalibur]

Here's my view on this. Just because a ball shifts a little does not conclusively establish that the player did not have control of it.

Not according to the rule. Don't like the call? Change the rule, just like the NFL's tuck rule. Otherwise, it was correctly interpreted and enforced. It was an easy call according to the rule and the officials got it right.

 

[DieHardHusky]

Michigan did just enough to win and the end result is all that matters. VT was using their 3rd string kicker too and their playcalling didn't help them/lack of execution at times hurt them. One thing Michigan and UConn have in common, clutch kickers.