Florida TD Reviewed
 

On the TD Florida scored that was reviewed, why was the TD not reversed? It appeared the ball had not broken the plane of the GL when the runner's knee was down, but it was impossible, from the angles provided on TV, to judge where the ball was exactly in relation to the GL. Is that the reason for not reversing this score? Inconclusive video replay?

I was quite surprised there was no camera on the GL for normal TV coverage of a high profile game like this.

I believe the only view that could have been used was the shot that was from the sideline but players were blocking the view of the runners knee so you couldn't tell when it touched in relation to the ball breaking the plane. The other shots showed his knee touching but the location of the ball wasn't definitive so you have to stay with the ruling on the field.

I always wonder if the Referee is allowed to say "inconclusive evidence" in college. I can't remember a time when they've said that. It sure would make me more comfortable to hear them say the call on the field stands because of inconclusive evidence than to come back and say, "After further review, TD!" - that makes it seem as if they saw something conclusive to confirm the ruling on the field. When obviously there was nothing there (speaking of the reviewed Florida TD), that was conclusive.

Just a rant.

I don't recall hearing anything like that in NFL or NCAA. (Can you imagine the crowd reaction if the R came out and said "After review, we don't have a dang clue what happened, so the play stands as called.) FWIW, in NCAA replay, the field officials do NOT see the replay, so it might be harder for them to explain what's going on.

That said, I was watching a Big East game a few weeks back (pretty sure it was Louisville @ WVU) where, on two separate replays, the R announced that replay "confirmed the ruling on the field." To me, it looked like the replays were both inconclusive.

They don't need to view the play nor explain what was going on. Those replay people are former officials and they know what's going on.

Rule 12-6 spells out what the Referee is supposed to say. Check it out, the book is on-line at the NCAA web site.

I remember watching a play last year in an Oklahoma game where there was a question as to whether the runner's knee was down prior to the ball breaking the plane. They ruled TD on the field and reviewed it. One angle showed when the ball broke the plane but didn't show the knee as there was another player in the way. Another angle showed exactly when the knee was down but since it was an endzone shot there was no way to determine where the ball was. The couldn't overturn the call because they had no evidence.

All I know is that all video footage should have a time code imbedded in it and if all angles are linked together and started at the exact same point in time then one angle could show when the knee was down and then some other angle would show the location of the ball. This would solve the problem of not being able to see everything from one angle. This should be possible though I'm not sure of the cost of it.

The only thing definitive and conclusive was that the Bucks got smoked! Ouch, from a Buckeye Fan!