God, I hope not.

I mean, fans are sheep and they're not all that bright, usually, but surely someone points that out to you within a couple of weeks of your first football game, right?

Excuse me, but this is cr@p. Who really cares what 4 talking heads think on a show that generates ratings by helping to create controversies? Even if one of them is Bob Costas. The only thing that matters is Coleman thought it was enough and Pereira thought it was enough. I think I'll take their informed opinions over everyone else's because only their opinions matter.

Thanks for the explanation. I wasn't sure if this is the case. But now on Friday when this occurs I can give the usual sly response, "Only on Sunday..." :)

Right. I threw this out as a possible explanation since the NFL sometimes takes into account the location of the player, not the ball. But now we know otherwise.

Don't you remember? Everybody on ESPN thought the Washington touchdown unsportsmanlike thing early in the season was unwarranted, therefore it was!

Ohhh....the Huskies I know are still bitter over this one. And they have mountains of evidence in the form of the Theisman's of the world to back them up!

Of course, I still have the (Cr)Apple Cup to shut them up if they get too unruly....

You might try asking in Usenet group rec.sport.officiating, where IIRC Mike Scott has actually officiated NFL games. I've had cases where he's infuriated me and a bunch of other participants in a thread, but turned out to be right.

High schools, having the most game plays, have the greatest call for officials. However, many also officiate in minor league adult games, which minor leagues frequently use the previous season's NFL rules or modified NFL rules.

The various North American codes have diverged enormously regarding treatment of kicks and end zones, but not regarding the scoring of touchdowns. AFAIK if an airborne player catches the ball while moving backward, once the necessary part(s) of the player's body touch(es) the ground in bounds, possession is ruled retroactive to where the player gained control of the ball, which in this case was ruled as having been in the end zone. I too was shocked that the call of no touchdown was overruled.

Robert

Last night's "Inside the NFL" featured several views of this play, and the results looked pretty evident. The camera angle along the goal line showed the ball beyond the goal line plane when the receiver gained possession. He then fell back into the field of play.

It is what it is, TD.

Mike Pereria reviewed it on Wednesday night's Total Access and the camera angle was perfect, the entire ball crossed the plane in possession of the receiver.

It was interesting to note the official on the opposite side of the field was screened by a player.

This was a Las Vegas call
 

The official on the field who made the call spotted the ball just short of the goal line. There was no way Coleman should of overturned that call. Earlier in the game there was a challenge on the spotting of the ball that was called a Steeler first down the replay CLEARLY showed the ball carrier did not get to the 30 yard line in fact his helmet didn't even get the first down marker it was a good one half yard or more short but Coleman comes out of replay and says the call on the field stands WHAT? There was no way. If he blew that call that was so clear then there is NO WAY he can overturn that last call. But HE DID. Walt Coleman should be FIRED his is flat out Pathetic!!. I think the Las Vegas boy's lined ole Walter's pockets with some CASH.

These are tough calls, as are pileups at the GL because of being screened.

I too, think the camera angle was perfect. If someone had used the telestrater to draw a line along the first edge of the GL, it would have crossed over the ball: TD

I know that's hard for some people to accept, but it was a TD. Case closed.

If you want to disagree with the call or post some other type of intelligent comment about it, please do, but please do not use the forum to defame people.

Last resort of the fanboy. Must be on the take. Oh, my.

TonyB, what's pathetic is a grown man acting like a spoiled child and throwing a hissy-fit because he's not getting his way. Walt Coleman got to be, where he is, because he's good at what he does, and he's stayed there, for as long as he has, by keeping up his level of performance.

Simply put, you are just not competent to comment on his being where he is, doing what he does. One of the best ways to avoid being considered a complete jerk, is simply stop saying really stupid things and acting like you know a lot more about what you're talking about, than you obviously do.

The difference with this forum, is that most participants are not biased fans of any of the teams that might be discussed. We may well be fans, but our primary interest is in the impartial management of the game itself and the relationship between the rules of the game and how they are actually administered.

Given the replays, that everyone subsequently knows were available, that Coleman had access to, he obviously concluded the ball broke the plane of the goal line while the receiver had possession and his both feet were touching the ground. Those 3 requirements being met equate to TD. That's it, it's over, move on.

If you are actually an official, you are pathetic.

Agreed.

OH, Mike and Mike both agreed with the touchdown call. Does that mean it's right? :D