Controversy in Florida

[Ed Hickland]

Having become an "expert" on controversial plays I would call this an incomplete pass.

The referee is moving toward the runner/passer as he is still moving and appears he may have been shielded.

Remember, we are all watching from the comfort of our living room, office, den, etc. with stop motion video.

Got to love the comments "His hand was under the ball, so it was not a shovel pass."

[ajmc]

Unfortunately, the video doesn't provide a wide enough view of the play to make a solid judgment. It does clearly show the QB passed the ball underhanded, rather than fumbled. The pass was almost immediately deflected and it's path changed by the deflection.

Receiver #45 then comes into the picture from the direction the QB appears to have been aiming his underhand toss. There seems to be more than enough evidence to support the judgment that the toss of the ball was deliberate, thus being a forward pass, and that #45 was an eligible (assuming he lined up in an eligible position) receiver, who was the intended target of that pass.

This is a perfect example of the view presented by the camera not being wide enough to understand exactly what was hapening to make a solid conclusion.

[OverAndBack]

Again, punter.

I wouldn't expect a punter to be as skilled as a quarterback in making a throw of any kind, but, then again, I would also expect a punter to panic more and to be more likely to throw a ball away. But if there's a player in the area, you have an out. But unless I'm screened, if I see that arm movement (especially if the ball goes forward), I've got an incomplete pass.