steelers@ravens winning touchdown

[Suudy]

Personally, I don't see how the replay provided enough evidence to overturn the official on the field. I'd love to be a fly on the wall in the replay booth and in the official's locker room afterward.

I'm not fond of the aquarium analogy either. I think you only have to go to the definitions. A ball in possession of a player in the opponents EZ is always a TD. In this case, the ball was in possession of a player, but the ball was not in the EZ. No TD.

Or as my buddy and I discussed, in the case of passes to the side or back of the EZ, the ball did break the plane when it was thrown. A player gained possession while in the EZ, so TD. This idea is also flawed (think of a pass that enters the EZ, is batted/deflected back into the field, then caught outside of the EZ). I think if one sticks with the definitions, you are fine.

Now, I don't know NFL interpretations. Doesn't the NFL have some different interpretation of batting kicks away from the goal that the players feet have to be out of the EZ? Perhaps a similar principal applies. But you'd think the same principal would apply to the running game as well.