Fun game, looked like a touchdown to me on replay
Stanford got jobbed and robbed by the zebras. We haven’t heard the last of this one. Not only did the ball cross the line before the runner was down but even if he fumbled it was recovered by a Stanford player.
Ya, I thought that was weird, unless there is a rule that you can’t advance the football into the end zone by fumbling it (seems like the pros have something like that due to the Raiders or something)
Even so, I think he got it to cross the plane. ND will claim his forward progress was stopped but it wasn’t. He kept moving forward. In my estimation there was no reason to not rule it a touchdown except for the refs wanting to get out of the rain.
One of the great second efforts in college football will be lost and forgotten due to the refs.
He didn’t touch the ground and the ball clearly crossed the plane before he lost it, but his forward progress was kind of stalled as he was twisting sideways, that’s the only reason I can think to call him down.
I’m sure that’s the reasoning the refs will fall back on but he never stopped moving and no part his body other than his feet touched the field which means you can extend the ball. If his knee was on the ground it would be totally different but it wasn’t. Since when can’t a player do a spin move after he has been hit?
I know we are in agreement it just galls me that there is instant replay and they still can’t get it right.
I don’t know when the whistle blew. I know that if I were reffing, I’d have blown the play dead long before he twisted to get the ball over the goal line. He was stopped completely, then eventually wormed his way forward a bit. 90% of the time that’s going to be called dead due to stopping of forward progress.
My other thought, and I thought it before they ran that play, was that they shouldn’t run that play.
They should have run a counter or something to open things up a little bit, more chance to get that 1 yard.
Agreed. The play calling was pathetic. Everybody was stacked in the middle. You need some kind of misdirection. Stanford got enamored with the play that got them inside the 5.
I don’t think you would say that if it was a typical play, not a goal line situation. If he was just going for it on 4th down and not for a game changing touchdown the call, upon review, would have been different. It would have been first down.
Stanford got robbed. The guy never stopped moving. You often do hear announcers say “great second effort!”
Agreed. See my comment in the “Shithead” thread.
I’m not too burnt up about it as college football overtimes are pretty much a coin-toss anyway. If they overturned the call, it would have still been a tie.
I just hate to see Notre Dame win.
But maybe in a skewed way this will help The Trojans when we stomp ND into the turf later this season.
His knee may not have been, but what about his elbow? That’s the part that I kept noticing. As he’s reaching, his arm goes down and it may have touched the ground before the ball crossed the plane.
Now, frankly, I think the video evidence is inconclusive either way and thus, the correct call is to let the play stand as called on the field.
I believe you refer to the final play in a Raiders-Chargers game played in 1978. That play is called “The Holy Roller” if you’re a Raiders fan, and “The Immaculate Deception” if you’re a Chargers fan.
Since this thread is still alive…
-
There is a rule that the ball can’t be advanced by the offense on a fumble on 4th down.
-
That doesn’t matter because the Stanford player was down before the ball crossed the goal line. Check it. His elbow was on the ground.