Controversial Play in MN 3A title game

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

If you think its initial direction wasn't forward, what do you think produced such a strong change in direction while the ball was in the air? Wind?

I wouldn't think wind velocity was a necessary calculation, all you have to do is look at the video and see which way he threw the ball, which was ABSOLUTELY NOT towards his opponents end line. What direction the ball was thrown is the salient factor, not where it might have eventually been caught.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I wouldn't think wind velocity was a necessary calculation, all you have to do is look at the video and see which way he threw the ball, which was ABSOLUTELY NOT towards his opponents end line. What direction the ball was thrown is the salient factor, not where it might have eventually been caught.

Sure it was. Maybe not at a 90 degree angle, but it was.

I'm not sure why this is such a hard call. Get an approximate yard line of the throw and the catch, discuss it afterwards, and drop a flag.

Using physics or differential calculus to make a call in a HS FB game is silly.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

Sure it was. Maybe not at a 90 degree angle, but it was.

I'm not sure why this is such a hard call. Get an approximate yard line of the throw and the catch, discuss it afterwards, and drop a flag.

I know exactly why it's a hard call in NCAA, where the rule invokes those 2 points (and would be even harder in Fed): because unless you have the high vantage point like the camera or are close to those yard lines yourself, it's hard to get those points. In Fed theoretically you'd have to be either be practically on the yard line of the passer at the time of release, or practically in line with the pass's initial direction. I bet that in Fed in close cases they actually use NCAA's determination and then allow for the possibility of windage. Even if the ball crosses one of the solid stripes, it's hard to tell which sides it was released from & touched on if it's close and you don't have one of those good vantage points.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I know exactly why it's a hard call in NCAA, where the rule invokes those 2 points (and would be even harder in Fed): because unless you have the high vantage point like the camera or are close to those yard lines yourself, it's hard to get those points. In Fed theoretically you'd have to be either be practically on the yard line of the passer at the time of release, or practically in line with the pass's initial direction. I bet that in Fed in close cases they actually use NCAA's determination and then allow for the possibility of windage. Even if the ball crosses one of the solid stripes, it's hard to tell which sides it was released from & touched on if it's close and you don't have one of those good vantage points.

It's the same prinicpal as getting a spot on a pass beyond the line or the spot for intentional grounding -- find the feet and come up to the spot. It's not that hard.

[chapmaja]

One thing nobody is mentioning in this discussion is the actions of the defensive player and his potential impact (from an officials point of view) on the play. I watched the video several times to see if the ball was deflected as it was thrown. People have asked about a force imparted on the ball. The official in question may have, as I suspected then watched to disprove, that the runner was throwing it backwards but it was deflected forward by the defensive player swiping at the ball. As I said I watched several times to see if that happened, but I wasn't running at speed watching the play live either.

I do think it was a missed call, but I can see why it was not called also.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I wouldn't think wind velocity was a necessary calculation, all you have to do is look at the video and see which way he threw the ball, which was ABSOLUTELY NOT towards his opponents end line. What direction the ball was thrown is the salient factor, not where it might have eventually been caught.

The direction the ball was thrown was pretty clearly forward from the sideline shot, and remarkably clearly forward from the end zone shot. The cameras had the advantage of high vantage points that the officials couldn't have, but they didn't create an optical illusion of forward motion that wasn't there.

The passer's arms may have been pointing backward, but the motion of the ball in his hands as he propelled it and just after he let go of it was forward. With that much forward momentum from his run, it would've taken a lot more backswinging of his arms to kill the forward motion of the ball.