10-03-2021, 04:32 PM
(10-03-2021, 02:12 PM)CTcard Wrote:(10-03-2021, 11:47 AM)BostonCard Wrote: ... the fumble against Oregon that was overturned on video review, even though there was no clear video evidence to overturn it; here was a case where the Duck was probably down, but through a fair number of camera angles there was no clear view of when the ball came out and thus the call on the field should have stood).
My best guess after watching the many replays many times, is that it was probably a fumble - though like the refs I couldn't see anything to be sure.
What is weird is that the ruling on the field was of a fumble, so no matter what "it looked like", there needed to be irrefutable video evidence. I'm not sure what the guys in the replay booth saw that they felt was irrefutable, but certainly on my screen it didn't look like there was anything anywhere near certain, and the ABC guys showed a ton of angles trying to see it. There was just no clear view of when the ball came out. The last you see of the ball secure, he was clearly not down yet, and the first time you clearly see the ball out, he is down. But there was no way (at least from the replays I saw) to establish when he lost control versus when a part of the player touched the ground.
The ruling on the field should have stood.
BC