Anyone see the play in the Cowboys/Giants game where Barber was tackled behind the line as he was lunging for the goal line? Just before the ball hit the ground, his knee hit. The ball appeared to be partially across and partially on the goal line. The announcers kept harping on how the ball "barely broke the plane" of the goal line (this part I agree with - maybe even half of the ball got out) and was therefore not a safety (nonsense).

The officials initially ruled the ball a fumble and a Dallas TD - but the review showed that A) his knee hit before the ball did and B) the ball was in his possession when his knee hit. What struck me was that the officials seemed more worried about whether the ball was loose or not than where the ball was when he was tackled - and they ruled Barber was simply down out of the EZ and let NYG punt.

It should have been a safety.

This seemed to be a horrible call - but no comment of that sort was made by the announcers (who had no clue) and I see nothing in the paper or online about it. Am I completely mistaken here?

Mcrowder,

I don't expect that thae announcers have any clue what the rules are. I think they even used the old "ground can't cause a fumble" line on that play. On the replay it appeared the ball could have been completely out of the EZ.

mc,

I didn't see the play, but according to STEVE, the ball was or mostly was out of the end zone. On that play, I will give the benefit of the doubt to A who's trying to get the ball into the field of play.

On the review, all I can think is that the coach challenged the possession or loss of possession, not the spot.

I can understand giving "benefit of the doubt" when making a ruling on the field - especially in this case where the action wasn't clearly seen by the official. But on an instant replay - you can't really do that. You rule on what you see.

Also - it was NYG that challenged the ruling of TD - there was no spot to challenge, and as the Giants you certainly couldn't challenge just the fumble and not accept the spot of the ball when he was tackled if there was no fumble.

To Steve's point - that would be the only rationale that makes sense - but I didn't see it that way. On the multiple replays, the ball was kind of diagonal, and you could see a sliver of green between the ball and the endline - just a sliver. Given the shape of the ball, I can't see how you could just see a sliver from the angle we had unless at least 1/3 of the ball was still over the goal line.

Add in that he was lunging at the time his knee hit, and his knee hit before the ball - so it was travelling at least somewhat forward AFTER he was down. There's no way the ball was completely across the goalline when the knee hit - to me it was fairly obvious and should have been so to the official.

Although that's what Giant's challenged, it is my understanding that the entire play is reviewable.

I saw that play. To me, it looked very much like the whole ball was out of the EZ. In my mind, proper use of IR, proper call made in the end.

Actually, Mike Carey's original call was that the runner got the ball out of the EZ, fumbled and recovered for a TD by the Cowboys. So the review had to show that the ball clearly DIDN"T leave the EZ.

BTW, Mcrowder, are you an official or just a fan?

Were we watching the same game?!?!?!?!? I saw the ball clearly out of the EZ when the knee hit ground. I am a diehard Cowboy fan but I knew that TD call was not gonna stand as they were showing the replays.

I knew it wasn't a TD too... but when his knee hit, there is no way the ball was out of the EZ - COMPLETELY out of the EZ. I don't even think it was out when the BALL hit the ground, but understand that is borderline - but add in that he was lunging forward and that his knee hit before the ball did, I can't see how the ball was completely out.

I agree with mcrowder, there is no way the entire ball was out of the EZ. In fact, from the replay I saw, only the nose of the the ball made it out. I say no fumble, 2 points for Dallas.