Does it look like a catch?

[Will]

Sorry if this was already posted couldn't find it. This was a critical call in the game and this picture looks like Iglesias got his hands under the ball.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/photos?photoId=1698085&gameId=272720038

[BornandBred]

In the replay on FSN it looked like his left hand got hung up under the backside of the ball, his right hand made the catch, but the ball touched the ground. If the ref saw the ground as aiding in the catch, it should be overturned. I thought it was inconclusive, but the ball DID touch the ground. I just thought there wasn't proof it helped in the catch.

[oupride]

It was the best catch that never was.

[ougrad2008]

pretty clear it was a catch. but the way we played, we deserved to lose. the reggie smith, iglesias, kelly era teams have showed no heart. the defense of this era breaks down mentally constantly. im not sure why people here are so confident? maybe because of the KSU/TX game? i think KSU's defense is better than ours.

[Boomer.....]

I thought it was a catch, but Lord knows we don't get favorable calls by the home refs at away games.

[OKLA21FAN]

from that pic, he is not even touching the ball. how can that be a catch? :pop:

[Texas Golfer]

Had JI got up like he was confident and maybe spun the ball on the ground while pumping his fists, he might have pulled it off. But he got up and looked around sheepishly like, "Did I get away with it?" I think that had a lot to do with the replay official's determination.

[mikee likee]

This is the second time in 2 seasons we are moaning about a bad call costing the game. This was a mediocre CU team that OU should have whipped by 3 tds. It should not have come to this. There were far more issues with this game than 1 poor throw and a no catch.

I was sitting back with no worries when the call came down. Like everyone else I'm thinking make a 1st down or 2 game over. Wrong again as usual.

[ougrad2008]

i agree mikee. i had a feeling the call would come back reversed, but i thought we would step up on third down.....which bradford did....and was let down by a senior. actually, he was let down 4 or 5 times that day.

[sooneron]

The other non-catches were bigger factors IMO.

[MextheBulldog]

Thought the catch looked good too... Unrelated, but about this time in the game, we tried to smash mouth run over the left side 3-4 times behind our two monster lineman, and could...not...get...it...done... That was surprising too, but I guess if anyone's gonna be gassed, its Loadholt and Duke.

[FaninAma]

I think the replay crew figured that since Iglesias(and the other OU receivers) had dropped most of the other passes thrown their way that it was a pretty good bet that he didn't catch this one either.

OU's recievers caught 9 passes. They dropped 6. That's pathetic and the reason I won't blame Bradford for this fiasco.

[sooneron]

pretty clear it was a catch. but the way we played, we deserved to lose.
We didn't deserve to lose. We didn't trail the entire game. It's not like we were never in the game. This has nothing to do with deserving. We didn't close the game out and we made some mistakes early that could have gotten us a bigger lead. Knee jerk noobs like yourself shouldn't be allowed to register until a week or so after a loss. Instead, you show up and start bagging on the team.

[mojohornfan]

I really hate to admit it, but you guys got screwed. There was nothing conclusive to overturn that call.

[sooneron]

Yes, I pretty much agree with the whorn..









**** off whorn!! :D

[sanantoniosooner]

This is one of those deals like "I can make fun of my family, but you can't".......right?

We can shoot ourselves in the foot, but you cant.

[SoonerJack]

Muffing a punt when the other team has momentum = game suicide.

[sanantoniosooner]

Muffing a punt when the other team has momentum = game suicide.
I can think of one other game where muffing the punt when our own team had the momentum resulted in game suicide.

[fwsooner22]

We lost and played like crap for three quarters........Reggie Smith has to make plays.....if he is what he wants to be he makes the int. and scores.....he does not have to even field that punt it was close enough to the 10 to let go.....JJ has to make the tough catch.....the defense has to suck it up............BUT ya know what? We lost........Time to win is NOW and we all know it. 12 times we have lost the week before UT and we have lost 11 of those games to UT......Not this time......Not this time!!!

[MamaMia]

The only reason the ball touched the ground is because thats where it was the exact millisecond it was caught! What is wrong with these refs? When I get to Heaven, I want to be St. Peters 'Athletic Assistant', in charge of turning refs away. I have the list all ready.

[picasso]

the more important play was the definite drop by Reggie.

[sanantoniosooner]

The only reason the ball touched the ground is because thats where it was the exact millisecond it was caught! What is wrong with these refs? When I get to Heaven, I want to be St. Peters 'Athletic Assistant', in charge of turning refs away. I have the list all ready.
There is a Foot Locker in Hades for all refs to work at.

[ougrad2008]

We didn't deserve to lose. We didn't trail the entire game. It's not like we were never in the game. This has nothing to do with deserving. We didn't close the game out and we made some mistakes early that could have gotten us a bigger lead. Knee jerk noobs like yourself shouldn't be allowed to register until a week or so after a loss. Instead, you show up and start bagging on the team.first of all, get over yourself. you think you are cool because you have posted on a message board for longer than me? stfu. im entitled to post here, just as you are. im also entitled to my own opinion, and just because i dont drink the same crimson kool aid as you do, you have to bash me. i want my school to win just as bad as anyone else here, but i also call it like i see it.

[picasso]

pretty clear it was a catch. but the way we played, we deserved to lose. the reggie smith, iglesias, kelly era teams have showed no heart. the defense of this era breaks down mentally constantly. im not sure why people here are so confident? maybe because of the KSU/TX game? i think KSU's defense is better than ours.
yes, our team showed zero heart last season. none, notta.

[MiccoMacey]

I thought two things:

1) It was a catch.

2) Even if it appeared close to not being a catch, there definitely wasn't enough conclusive evidence to overturn the decision on the field.

Shows you what I know about football.

[sooneron]

first of all, get over yourself. you think you are cool because you have posted on a message board for longer than me? stfu. im entitled to post here, just as you are. im also entitled to my own opinion, and just because i dont drink the same crimson kool aid as you do, you have to bash me. i want my school to win just as bad as anyone else here, but i also call it like i see it.
The timing of your joining SF.com is suspect. I've seen it a bajillion times. I'm not drinking kool aid, I have pointed out many issues thus far this year. YOu should know that, oh yeah, you wouldn't, b/c you joined immediately after a loss to rag on the team. So don't tell me to stfu. Bash you? You haven't seen anything, I pointed you out for what you were. A knee jerk that decided to join up for the sake of negativity from where I'm sitting. Which is, pretty pathetic.

[Sooner_Bob]

:pop:

[MiccoMacey]

Where you are sitting is pretty pathetic? Why not move? ;)

[sooneron]

Where you are sitting is pretty pathetic? Why not move? ;)
Heh, I have a plasma where I'm sitting.

[ougrad2008]

The timing of your joining SF.com is suspect. I've seen it a bajillion times. I'm not drinking kool aid, I have pointed out many issues thus far this year. YOu should know that, oh yeah, you wouldn't, b/c you joined immediately after a loss to rag on the team. So don't tell me to stfu. Bash you? You haven't seen anything, I pointed you out for what you were. A knee jerk that decided to join up for the sake of negativity from where I'm sitting. Which is, pretty pathetic.i believe you are the pathetic one. notice how NOONE else came after me for saying my opinion. i didnt come on here and say, "stoops, venables, etc should be fired." read my other posts tough guy. i see a team who was probably reading their own press clippings, was looking ahead, and the coaches came in too vanilla. the defense looks soft...just like the past few years. there are no excuses...we are the better team, and made stupid self inflicted mistakes to lose the game.

[picasso]

I thought two things:

1) It was a catch.

2) Even if it appeared close to not being a catch, there definitely wasn't enough conclusive evidence to overturn the decision on the field.

Shows you what I know about football.
I was honestly surprised they reversed it and seeing that pumpkin pie haircutted coach get his way sucked even more.

[soonerlaw]

IMO, it was a catch.. not that my opinion counts.

But all I know is FSN's cameras were awful during that game. They always seemed one step behind where the ball was. It was frustrating to watch. I am surprised they even caught the play on film.

[ougrad2008]

IMO, it was a catch.. not that my opinion counts.

But all I know is FSN's cameras were awful during that game. They always seemed one step behind where the ball was. It was frustrating to watch. I am surprised they even caught the play on film.i noticed this too. but they certainly kept finding the crying kid after the game winning fg, yet they couldnt find a good enough angle to show iglesias really caught that pass :mad:

[sooneron]

IMO, it was a catch.. not that my opinion counts.

But all I know is FSN's cameras were awful during that game. They always seemed one step behind where the ball was. It was frustrating to watch. I am surprised they even caught the play on film.
Especially since they were shooting hd video. :D

[FaninAma]

Especially since they were shooting hd video. :D

They were too busy trying to find a good candidate for the prerequisite" kid crying in the crowd after a tough loss" shot at the end of the game.

[SoonerGM]

you know, i would have been ****ed about the bad replay call if we had won the game. yes we shot ourselves in the foot and ultimatly cost ourselves the game, and there are plenty of threads discussing that. that does not give the refs and booth officials a free pass at doing a crappy job, and it doesnt mean that we cant complain about it. and thats basically what is said anytime someone mentions the bad calls.

the call the upsets me that everyone is forgetting about was the interception by Ryan Walters in the 3rd qtr. im certain that ball hit the ground and it would be great if someone could find a picture of it. thanks to that, our already tiring defense only recieved a 48 sec(game time) break and were out on the field again. the result: CU drives down the field for a touchdown. guess who wins without that touchdown...

[soonerlaw]

Here's another call that I was confused about. We got called for a 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty, supposedly for pulling that Hawaiian guy's hair. (Alas, the HD FSN cameras didn't catch it...).

Anyone know what happened. I thought the hair was part of the jersey a la Larry Johnson and Troy Palamalu, or is that just an NFL Rule?

[StoopTroup]

i believe you are the pathetic one. notice how NOONE else came after me for saying my opinion. i didnt come on here and say, "stoops, venables, etc should be fired." read my other posts tough guy. i see a team who was probably reading their own press clippings, was looking ahead, and the coaches came in too vanilla. the defense looks soft...just like the past few years. there are no excuses...we are the better team, and made stupid self inflicted mistakes to lose the game.
I think Ron's right.

:pop:

[Fiatil]

Here's another call that I was confused about. We got called for a 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty, supposedly for pulling that Hawaiian guy's hair. (Alas, the HD FSN cameras didn't catch it...).

Anyone know what happened. I thought the hair was part of the jersey a la Larry Johnson and Troy Palamalu, or is that just an NFL Rule?


I believe it's an NFL only rule.

[sooner518]

I believe it's an NFL only rule.
so could a player have butt-length hair and anytime someone wraps him up or tackles him from behind, it is a penalty?

The ref called facemask on that play and I sure didnt see anything remotely resembling a facemask on the jumbotron.

[colleyvillesooner]

Here's video of the catch/no catch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otg1FNOLmPY

Please show me where there was enough video evidence to overrule it.

I would of loved for cameras to be in the booth with the replay guy like they were in the WV/S FLorida game...

[Desert Sapper]

Here's video of the catch/no catch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otg1FNOLmPY

Please show me where there was enough video evidence to overrule it.

I would of loved for cameras to be in the booth with the replay guy like they were in the WV/S FLorida game...

Thanks. I really wanted to watch Dan 'Nostradamus smug ****er' jump around like a gorilla on crack again. And yes, I think the refs overturning the reception was bull****.

[aurorasooner]

That no catch call was a spineless give-up/make-up call by the replay official. If I remember correctly the Buffs had a couple of accurate holding calls costing them good gains & were still going crazy because of Iggy's taunting in the endzone, where the board replay showed he stepped on the goal-line (even though the ball hadn't crossed). It makes no difference, we had plenty of chances to put that game away, and just blew it, irregardless of the screw-up homer call of the replay official reversing the 2 on-the-field refs call of Iggy's catch.

[StoopTroup]

FSN shouldn't be allowed to cover games until they improve the camera crew and the guys in the truck.

I can always turn the guys in the booth down with the remote.

[StoopTroup]

After watching this....

The FG (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du53ffOndNc&mode=related&search=)

Does it look like our guys were waiting for the refs to respond to our TO?

I mean...it doesn't look like we even reacted until the CU kicker was kicking the ball.

[tulsaoilerfan]

I thought two things:

1) It was a catch.

2) Even if it appeared close to not being a catch, there definitely wasn't enough conclusive evidence to overturn the decision on the field.

Shows you what I know about football.
I'm just wondering what angle they had that wasn't shown on Fox; i always thought that you had to have conclusive evidence to overturn, but i guess the only evidence they needed was that the game was in Boulder. :pop:

[sooner518]

Here's video of the catch/no catch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otg1FNOLmPY

Please show me where there was enough video evidence to overrule it.

I would of loved for cameras to be in the booth with the replay guy like they were in the WV/S FLorida game...
wow thats my first time seeing it in replay. that is just unbelievable. i hate to say it cost us the game, but how would things have worked out had we not gotten the screwjob once more by replay.


I'm just wondering what angle they had that wasn't shown on Fox; i always thought that you had to have conclusive evidence to overturn, but i guess the only evidence they needed was that the game was in Boulder. :pop:

I'm pretty sure that all video feeds that the replay operator gets are from the TV network, so Im assuming they showed us all the angles they had. There were at least 4 of them. You cant really blame FSN on this. The endzone cam they had was blocked by players. However, you CAN blame the replay operator who blatantly ignored the rules of instant replay. Watch that video at the 2:39 mark and tell me that ball hits the ground. You'd have to be a PAC-10 ref to say that there is conclusive evidence that it hit the ground.

[aurorasooner]

You've got 2 on-the-field refs, one from Iggy's (Wics-whatever) right side and one looking directly at him from the LOS, both with completely unobstructed clear views and both calling it a catch. Then from every angle on the replay, nothing that I've seen, definitive enough to call it a non-catch. Obvious homer replay official blown call screw-job, unless there is a replay that shows it hit the ground, that wasn't shown on the broadcast. Just pitiful.

[colleyvillesooner]

After watching this....

The FG (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du53ffOndNc&mode=related&search=)

Does it look like our guys were waiting for the refs to respond to our TO?

I mean...it doesn't look like we even reacted until the CU kicker was kicking the ball.

Boy, they just couldn't get enough of that crying kid could they. ****ers.

[r5TPsooner]

I was 99% sure that they would not over rule the call on the field. I should have known better after last year.

[Texas Golfer]

That no catch call was a spineless give-up/make-up call by the replay official. If I remember correctly the Buffs had a couple of accurate holding calls costing them good gains & were still going crazy because of Iggy's taunting in the endzone, where the board replay showed he stepped on the goal-line (even though the ball hadn't crossed). It makes no difference, we had plenty of chances to put that game away, and just blew it, irregardless of the screw-up homer call of the replay official reversing the 2 on-the-field refs call of Iggy's catch.

It does make a difference. There was a series of events that had to occur for Colorado to have the opportunity to kick that game winner and Iggy's "non-catch" was one of those plays. Had we'd be granted that catch, we maintain possession and use up more of the clock. Colorado needed every second they got to win. That catch would have prevented them that needed time.

[tulsaoilerfan]

It does make a difference. There was a series of events that had to occur for Colorado to have the opportunity to kick that game winner and Iggy's "non-catch" was one of those plays. Had we'd be granted that catch, we maintain possession and use up more of the clock. Colorado needed every second they got to win. That catch would have prevented them that needed time.
I agree, but unfortunately it's history, which makes the 3rd year in a row on the road we've had a questionable replay go against us; the NCAA still has a hard on for us because of the TV lawsuit back around 82

[TrophyCollector]

Clearly if we had IR in 84 RRSO, the call would have been, "There is indisputable video evidence that the defender was out of bounds prior to intercepting the pass."

IR is a joke and clearly Oklahoma is the punch line.

[aurorasooner]

Geez. I just read this on another board.
From the NCAA rulebook:
Kicker A1, in a scrimmage kick formation, moves laterally two or three
steps to recover a faulty snap, or recovers a snap that went over his
head and then kicks the ball. He is contacted by B2 in an unsuccessful
attempt to block the kick. RULING: A1 does not automatically lose his
protection in either case. A1 is entitled to protection as in any other
kicking situation. When it becomes obvious that A1 intends to kick (in
a normal punting position), defensive players must avoid him. Anyone know if this is correct? I guess the Fox announcer on the replay was just blowing it out his azz.
From the official forum
w Full Version : roughing?--ncaa rules
curly
Fri Oct 29, 2004, 10:52am
Punter in scrimmage kick formation. Low snap, punter moves two steps right, retrieves ball, and begins punting motion (ie steps forward and releases ball to kick). BEFORE he kicks the ball, he is smashed in chest by team B player. As he falls backward, he kicks ball backward into endzone, where it is covered by team B. Player who hit him did not hit ball. Touchdown, or roughing?

Approved rulings provide contradictory DICTA (sorry--I'm a lawyer)--Approved ruling #I contains this language: "There is no kicker until the ball is actually kicked"

Approved ruling VI contains this language: "When it becomes obvious that A1 intends to kick (in a normal punting position), defensive players must avoid him."

Neither approved ruling applies directly to what happened, although VI is closer.

In short, taking out the bobble, if a punter is in scrimmage kick formation, preparing to punt, can he be hit, tackled, etc., BEFORE he kicks the ball, or is he entitled to protection since he is trying to punt?
MJT
Fri Oct 29, 2004, 11:13am
The point is "until he kicks it, he is not a kicker" he is a runner. No roughing. The part about "being protected after it is obvious he intends to kick" is about not being protected even after he kicks it if he is "on the run."
mcrowder
Fri Oct 29, 2004, 01:25pm
Agreed - no roughing if he's hit before he can actually kick the ball.http://forum.officiating.com/archive/index.php/t-16186.html