Mich St/ Mich

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by LDUB

No, the pylon is an object which marks the intersection of the goal line and sideline. It is not part of the goal line. What happens when a player or ball touches the pylon depends on the situation.

The pylon is considered out of bounds and in the end zone. I cannot think of a time that you hit the pylon (on the goal line) where you are not considered in the end zone. The issue is whether there is a touchdown, touchback or safety or down short of the end zone based on what touches the pylon.

Peace

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The pylon is considered out of bounds and in the end zone. I cannot think of a time that you hit the pylon (on the goal line) where you are not considered in the end zone. The issue is whether there is a touchdown, touchback or safety or down short of the end zone based on what touches the pylon.

Peace

That is the point. To say that the pylon is part of the goal line is confusing. The goal line is painted on the field and is in bounds. The pylon is out of bounds.

[Bad Mood Risin]

It was called no catch on the field. Other than hitting the pylon, nothing came down in bounds. I was rooting for Michigan and I couldnt believe it was being reviewed because it wasn't close. I was stunned by the overturn.

The sideline reporter asked MSU's coach at halftime what the explaination was from the referee and the coach said all the R told him was to please remember no official on the field called it a TD and no one on the field was responsible for that ruling. If that's true, it's quite and indictment.

[STEVED21]

Originally Posted by Bad Mood Risin

It was called no catch on the field. Other than hitting the pylon, nothing came down in bounds. I was rooting for Michigan and I couldnt believe it was being reviewed because it wasn't close. I was stunned by the overturn.

The sideline reporter asked MSU's coach at halftime what the explaination was from the referee and the coach said all the R told him was to please remember no official on the field called it a TD and no one on the field was responsible for that ruling. If that's true, it's quite and indictment.

That's why I asked the question. I too was stunned at the reversal.

[jimpiano]

Originally Posted by STEVED21

That's why I asked the question. I too was stunned at the reversal.

I thought instant replay was instituted to correct missed calls, not change correct calls.

Wonder what the conversation between the Referee and the Replay booth was like on that one?

[TXMike]

Only video I have found so far (might want to mute the volume)

YouTube - MSU vs Michigan (2008 rivalry!!) 35-21 MSU

[Brett]

Looked like his left toe tapped in but his right foot was already down OOB. Interesting overturn and more interesting explanation.

[Forksref]

That would be tough to be a WH and have your reputation affected by the decision of a hidden replay official.

At least in the NFL the WH gets to make his own decision.

[With_Two_Flakes]

We work NCAA Rules here in the UK.

My understanding is that,

If a runner with possession of the ball dives for the pylon and the ball hits the pylon - TD. The pylon is in the EZ and OOB. I guess the philosophy is that the ball breaks the plane of the GL before being OOB.

If a player gets the ball while he is airborne, then the catch is not complete until he comes down inbounds (and maintains possession of the ball). If the player comes down and first contact is with the pylon, then he is OOB. I guess the philosophy difference from the running play example is that the airborne receiver does not have possession when he breaks the plane.

I've watched the (poor quality YouTube) film and the FJ was in a good position to rule on it, and I think he got it right. Not sure what rationale the Reply booth might have had to overrule the FJ. Perhaps the BigTen will make a statement subsequently.