|
Replies: 27
| visibility 4859
|
Clemson Icon [27586]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 18498
Joined: 2024
|
Catch or not catch?
3
Sep 27, 2024, 11:38 PM
|
|
What say you?
|
|
|
|
 |
Clemson Icon [27586]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 18498
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
4
Sep 27, 2024, 11:39 PM
|
|
Forgot to add.....I think it was a catch and would have remained a catch had the game been in Blacksburg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22878]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 13401
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
4
Sep 27, 2024, 11:40 PM
|
|
ESPN would have still made the same call...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2572]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
7
7
Sep 27, 2024, 11:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: Catch or not catch? ] |
|
Ruled a catch on field. Nothing on the review conclusively said it wasn’t, so play stands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [-99]
TigerPulse: 44%
-1
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
2
3
Sep 27, 2024, 11:40 PM
|
|
It can’t be a catch when there was no possession of the ball. People on here just want to see UM lose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1607]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
8
8
Sep 27, 2024, 11:42 PM
|
|
You can see where the VT WR goes to the ground with it and then it’s ripped out.
Regardless it was a TD called on the field and there wasn’t enough to make a call one way or the other, which is textbook that it stays as called on the field.
The ACC just couldn’t afford to have a Top 10 team lose to an unranked team at home and made the call. That’s the truth of what happened.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2091]
TigerPulse: 61%
31
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
2
Sep 27, 2024, 11:43 PM
[ in reply to Re: Catch or not catch? ] |
|
We’re Clemson fans and Miami is highly overrated. What else do you expect sniffer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2572]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
3
Sep 27, 2024, 11:45 PM
[ in reply to Re: Catch or not catch? ] |
|
Pulse looks to be about right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solid Orange [1395]
TigerPulse: 96%
28
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
2
Sep 27, 2024, 11:45 PM
[ in reply to Re: Catch or not catch? ] |
|
You’re right and that’s exactly what it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8280]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
5
5
Sep 27, 2024, 11:53 PM
[ in reply to Re: Catch or not catch? ] |
|
No dog troll just wants to be contrary. He had the ball to the ground. As soon as your rump hits the ground, it is a catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [550]
TigerPulse: 95%
20
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
4
Sep 28, 2024, 7:43 AM
[ in reply to Re: Catch or not catch? ] |
|
Ruled a catch on field moron. Have to have indisputable evidence to overturn call. Your ignorance shines through again
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [-99]
TigerPulse: 44%
-1
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
1
Sep 28, 2024, 9:05 AM
|
|
It doesn’t matter that it was ruled a catch ya big dummy…If the video evidence shows it was NOT a catch, the call is reversed. In this case, there WAS indisputable evidence to overturn the call. You said it yourself lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1756]
TigerPulse: 82%
31
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
3
Sep 27, 2024, 11:40 PM
|
|
Not a catch. Ball was moving like a toddler in a carseat on a long roadtrip
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [550]
TigerPulse: 95%
20
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
2
Sep 28, 2024, 7:44 AM
|
|
Still ruled a catch on field
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [-99]
TigerPulse: 44%
-1
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
Sep 28, 2024, 9:06 AM
|
|
You don’t understand the rule
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2878]
TigerPulse: 100%
33
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
1
4
Sep 27, 2024, 11:43 PM
|
|
Not a catch, front view shows ball was loose coming down. Just a good example of folks buying whatever the commentators say and what they’d like to be true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valley Protector [1436]
TigerPulse: 99%
29
|
Catch
4
Sep 27, 2024, 11:43 PM
|
|
He nor the ball went out of bounds until he held it — even if for a fraction of a second while in the endzone. It was either an interception or catch and ruled a TD. At the very least not overturn-able.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1689]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
6
6
Sep 27, 2024, 11:43 PM
|
|
To me it should have been the call on the field either way. If they called incomplete should have been incomplete. Since they called complete should have been play stands. Was too close either way for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [726]
TigerPulse: 100%
22
|
Opinion in a vacuum
1
4
Sep 27, 2024, 11:45 PM
|
|
Not a catch. However, given call on the field was a TD, and VT wears football-colored gloves, I have no clue how you overturn that call. ACC officiating in a nutshell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [4080]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Either way - it gives new meaning to the saying - it is going to be a LONG
3
Sep 27, 2024, 11:47 PM
|
|
…ride home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Phenom [14641]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 23711
Joined: 2004
|
Not a catch
5
5
Sep 27, 2024, 11:55 PM
|
|
Also not enough evidence to overturn once ruled a catch..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22331]
TigerPulse: 86%
53
Posts: 18677
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
1
3
Sep 27, 2024, 11:57 PM
|
|
100% not a catch and it was clear.
Clearly the ball was moving (no possession by anyone)
Both players were touching out of bounds.
By rule that’s an out of bounds ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [550]
TigerPulse: 95%
20
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
2
Sep 28, 2024, 7:46 AM
|
|
But was ruled a catch on field
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22331]
TigerPulse: 86%
53
Posts: 18677
Joined: 2007
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
2
Sep 28, 2024, 7:59 AM
|
|
What was ruled on the field is irrelevant when there’s clear and convincing evidence in reply that the ball was moving. Once you can say clearly the ball is moving then no player has possession. Both the ball moving and then players touching out of bounds were clear and convincing evidence of incompletion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Offensive Star [-99]
TigerPulse: 44%
-1
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
Sep 28, 2024, 9:56 AM
|
|
Amen. Please make her understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playmaker [386]
TigerPulse: 97%
16
|
incomplete. defensive player was out of bounds
1
2
Sep 28, 2024, 12:01 AM
|
|
At the end with possession this incomplete
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1548]
TigerPulse: 100%
30
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
3
Sep 28, 2024, 7:15 AM
|
|
Catch. Receiver had it in his grasp as he hit the ground. The DB then ripped it from him. Original call was correct and there was no reason to overturn it based on the slow-mo replays. VA Tech got screwed...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [864]
TigerPulse: 65%
23
|
Re: Catch or not catch?
Sep 28, 2024, 12:36 PM
|
|
The ACC didn't want Miami down the pecking order in the playoff to play an upper level team. They took the rightful win away from Tech. That one angle clearly showed it was a catch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 27
| visibility 4859
|
|
|
50
