Outkast Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Branch's catch. You can assume it hit the turf but it wasn't clear that it did. I watched the darn thing over and over again. In HI-DEF no less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Branch's catch. You can assume it hit the turf but it wasn't clear that it did. I watched the darn thing over and over again. In HI-DEF no less. There just wasn't a good enough view of the ball to get the conclusive eveidence needed to overturn a call made on the field. If it had been called incomplete on the field, there wouldn't have been enough evidence to overturn that either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 There just wasn't a good enough view of the ball to get the conclusive eveidence needed to overturn a call made on the field. If it had been called incomplete on the field, there wouldn't have been enough evidence to overturn that either. 491319[/snapback] Yeah whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Seriously were you guys watching the game from the Good Year blimp or on a three inch screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Yeah whatever. So you think they should've overturned it, even though the ball and its relation to the ground were blocked by Branch's arm? Why? Just 'cause? I'm not saying it didn't hit the ground - it may have. But the view was not conclusive either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 So you think they should've overturned it, even though the ball and its relation to the ground were blocked by Branch's arm? Why? Just 'cause? 491324[/snapback] Blocked by his arm? The view? You're kidding right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Branch's catch. You can assume it hit the turf but it wasn't clear that it did. I watched the darn thing over and over again. In HI-DEF no less. 491315[/snapback] I don't know, on my 36 incher, it sure did look like the ball hit the ground. Maybe I needed the HDTV to have it go questionable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 He didn't even have control of it from start to finish. He was bobbling it the whole time anyway. Terrible call. Reminds me of the Henry Jones play. Anyone remember that bs call? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Blocked by his arm? Yeah. The view? Yeah. You're kidding right? Nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 1. It looked like a catch the first time so I think if i was a ref I would have called it a catch. 2. On the replay "I think" the ball hit the ground and it wasn't a catch. It sure looked like it wasn't a catch. 3. I don't think they should have overturned the play because the replay we saw was certainly not conclusive. Sothe officials made the right call from what we know. 4. It was inconceivable that on a nationally televised game, with at least 10 cameras, that there wasn't several other angles we should have seen that could have shown if it was a catch or not. We were only given one angle, which to me was inconclusive. 5. Perhaps Tedy Bruschi was playing in the game so all nine other cameras were on him on the sidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 5. Perhaps Tedy Bruschi was playing in the game so all nine other cameras were on him on the sidelines. 491335[/snapback] 8 on him 1 on his wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I don't think they should have overturned the play because the replay we saw was certainly not conclusive. Sothe officials made the right call from what we know. Yeah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Yeah. 491338[/snapback] We don't know if they made the right call though because on TV we were shown only the one angle, which sure looked incomplete was wasnt conclusive. The Refs spent a lot of time looking it over. Certainly there were other shots they didnt show us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 We don't know if they made the right call though because on TV we were shown only the one angle, which sure looked incomplete was wasnt conclusive. The Refs spent a lot of time looking it over. Certainly there were other shots they didnt show us. I believe the refs and the TV producers are working from the same set of angles. That, evidently, was the only one that produced a workable view of the play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATBNG Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Branch's catch. You can assume it hit the turf but it wasn't clear that it did. I watched the darn thing over and over again. In HI-DEF no less. 491315[/snapback] On the two controversial plays, I don't think that Branch caught the ball. It hit the ground as he rotated and he didn't have control. I was quite surprised it was upheld. Moulds though - I thought that he should have been flagged. There's a "right way" to push off, and he didn't do it - he extended his left arm into Samuel right in front of the ref and in the middle of the field. I like Moulds a lot (and he played a heck of a game), but I think he's enough of a veteran that he should know to be more subtle. Not a well played game by either team, truth be told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonBBnFL Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 So you think they should've overturned it, even though the ball and its relation to the ground were blocked by Branch's arm? Why? Just 'cause? I'm not saying it didn't hit the ground - it may have. But the view was not conclusive either way. 491324[/snapback] It was pretty damn conclusive to me! The Ball touched the ground before he had control of it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I believe the refs and the TV producers are working from the same set of angles. That, evidently, was the only one that produced a workable view of the play. 491345[/snapback] Nonsense. On every other play, even if it is not a good angle to be sure, they show the other angle(s). You really think that ref spent all two plus minutes watching the same replay over and over? There had to be other angles and we werent given them. On a play like that there are usually five or so on a national game. But again, Tedy Bruschi was on the sideline, so the cameras probably were actually taping the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outkast Posted October 31, 2005 Author Share Posted October 31, 2005 8 on him 1 on his wife. 491337[/snapback] Is it just me or does Tedy Bruschi's wife look like Terry Schiavo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunTheBall Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I can't believe people are even arguing this. The ball didn't just hit the ground, it friggin moved. You have to expect at least 1 of these calls playing against the Pats. It doesn't excuse the obligatory defensive collapse in the face of a little pressure. RTB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 He didn't even have control of it from start to finish. He was bobbling it the whole time anyway. Terrible call. 491331[/snapback] *sigh* The catch that wasn't. Sometimes life just isn't fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts