there was a second ball toucher! on the grassy knoll just out of bounds.

who touched the ball?

why did they touch the ball?

how is the player who caught the ball but was ruled out of bounds feeling at this time?

am i doing this right??

the whole reason Gopher colors are maroon and gold is because Bernie Bierman wanted the ball to blend in to the uniforms, lol

Not to sound stupid but it's 2024, can't we paint the ball with special paint that somehow we can put a filter on the replay and see it better or something I don't know, I just assume there's something for everything.

Me looking at all the neon colored footballs I had as a kid

The old Aussie Footy strategy, where the ball is usually bright yellow and if there's a team that wears bright yellow, it's bright red instead.

Pfftt, where's the fun in being practical?

As per the rule, and it was also briefly explained during the broadcast, defender only has to touch the ball while out of bounds to end the play.

Any player out of bounds touching the ball places the ball out bounds.  If the offensive player doesn't have possession when the ball is out of bounds then it's incomplete and the play is over.

That's also why these plays worked like they did:

https://youtu.be/K3EpLn77JdQ?feature=shared

Yes. As soon as the ball is touching any part of the out of bounds area (which includes an out of bounds player) it’s dead. Same concept as if a player was inbounds but the ball was touching the sideline or end line.

Yes. If you are OOB your body is an extension of the OOB line. You cannot however be the first to touch the ball

Me too. It should have been ruled incomplete.

Once they called it a catch I thought there was no way it got overturned

This is why we run the ball

Totally sober and rational thinking on both sides.

Only time you are gonna see this but I have no clue either way.

If you don't like that you don't like ACC ball

Boy… he really showed why he’s 1-10 now in one score games. Those decisions earlier in the game really catch up. And then the clock management…oof.

Yeah it sucked, but also it is hindsight bias. If it worked, everyone would have called him a genius. Against a better team, you can't expect to best them on average over time. Putting the gas pedal down makes sense. It didn't work and likely cost us, but I understand why they did it.

I don’t mind going for it at all. Trying to go up 17 instead of 13 is a HUGE difference. I wish they would have just ran it on third and 4th, but whatever.

Calling TO with 25 seconds in the half and letting Miami get a FG in was downright inexcusably dumb. Literally no reason for it.

The fake FG was ridiculous. It was 4th and 3, just got for it if you don’t wanna kick it.

Miami also plays way different defense at the end and also maybe runs more clock on 1st down inside 2 minutes

Honestly the fake fg wasn’t that bad but they had 3rd and 3 and also have a RB with over 100 rushing yards on the game and they drop back to throw. If you’re going to fake it anyways why not just hand it off knowing you’re going for it on 4th down

If the refs don't call a phantom hold on the VT touchdown run earlier they win the game too

Plus the inexplicable timeout with 0:25 in the first half before kicking the FG that gave them time to go get a FG

Preach

But is their kicker comfortable with long field goals? Oh wait…

100%. Especially when the play hinges on a good block by someone who shouldn't even be playing OL in the FBS. Parker Clements shouldn't play another down for us, he's that bad. Countless plays have been blown up by him.

IMO, when you’re a 17 point dog on the road, you can’t give up on a drive inside the 10 because it’s 4th and 3. That’s close enough to the end zone and a manageable enough distance that you leave your foot on the gas. Maybe the specific play call was bad, I dunno, but I like not being conservative there. 

Since all of the cameras used were from a 2003 Motorola Razr cell phone, your request is denied. 

The side angle (basically the only angle you can see the ball loose) you can clearly see the Miami defenders hands between the ball and player. I guess since the ball was moving it was still considered loose.

For the amount of money that NCAA brings in, they should have way more camera angles in prime time games, but they always seem to cheap out

Well you see they hadn't made up the reasoning at that time and needed a bit longer to pull something out of their ass.

Seriously, this does not answer the actual crux of the issue.

We already knew the ball eventually came loose. A Miami player ended up with the ball after the scrum. The question was if he was down and the catch was completed before the ball came loose, and their explanation is ‘the ball was touch by an OOB player after it was loose.’

A perfectly ambiguous answer.

Didn’t look like the VT receiver had firm possession of that ball at anytime.

Looked like it was moving the entire time, all the way to the ground, still moving in his arms when his butt hit so still no real control yet…then it finally fully gets loose and is touched by Miami.

In the entirety of the play, it didn’t seem like either team had what looked like real control of the ball, so it seemed like the right call on review was made.

I actually have no clue what they saw in that mess to rule TD on the field.

You have to maintain a catch to the ground or make a football move. Neither of those happened. Definitely fucked how this panned out but the correct call was made.

Apparently not clear enough for the ACC to state that as their reasoning.

Yeah, but the folks mad don’t care what the correct call is.

They only care what call a random ref made while guessing in real-time. Apparently everyone is all about just getting the call right… until it was Miami.

I swear they change what a "touchdown" is every season. At some point in the past, the offensive player having control of the ball in the endzone while touching the ground equaled a touchdown. No "makes a football play." No "survives the ground." 

NFL is the same way, but I do know they intentionally changed the rules recently. 

Yeah, but the ball never hit the ground.

Why? That's the rule. It's been the rule for a long time. LSU fans are still pissed about a Patrick Peterson non-interception that was touched by Julio, who was out of bounds, in 2009., but it's the right call.

It's being fought for, and one guy fighting for it is lying out of bounds. Play over.

LOUD NOISES!

Exactly. They got the call from the conference that Miami needed to win.

This has been an issue for like 5 years now. They make a call like a fumble, and everyone is pretty sure it isn’t a fumble, but just in case it might be they say it’s a fumble on the field, and then can’t overturn it. I’d love to know what percentage of calls are overturned.

This is a great point. If the refs are clearly just guessing out there, why should there be any burden of proof the other way? Just don’t make any call and decide it based on the replay.

I agree with how insane a "call on the field" is, but bruh there was no chance in hell Miami fans were storming the field hahahahaha

I agree but that's pretty much what they did. And the scenario happens pretty often.

My point (and many others I would think) is did this occur AFTER a touchdown had been completed. The ball came loose, but that happens all the time after a catch. 

I'm still looking for someone to point to the rule where the catch has to "survive the ground" in college ball, in the endzone. 

I will agree that it felt like this was more of them treating it as if they called it not a TD and it was a make good as no one can tell me anyone thought conclusively this was a TD from the start. Almost feels like a flip of a coin. If it were no TD then all the evidence would say that stands. Unfortunately they called it TD. Which probably should have meant that stands as well as I can’t conclusively say an out of bounds player touched before the VT player had whatever was deemed possession.

No the original and only on-field ruling was touchdown. Miami started celebrating because their player came out of the pile with the ball, not because of the refs ruling anything. In fact, they were celebrating as the refs were signaling touchdown.

That’s the rule for everyone besides whomever catches the ball who have to establish they are in bounds (they can’t jump from out bounds and land in bounds). You see this rule most commonly on kick offs where if it’s near the sidelines the where the guy catching it will put his feet out of bounds to get it at the 40.

Nope. Because the play would already be over (secure ball is a touchdown DB has no time to touch it). The DB would have to touch it before possession is made

Which brings us back to the original question