Ball caught, one foot down, never lost control, looked like an obvious TD.

Somehow that is not a TD and UH did not get the first down last week....WTF???

They got it wrong in my opinion.

"Indisputable" to overturn the play is the only thing I can think of.

Interpretation of when he had "control" is my guess.

halfastros81 said:

---

Interpretation of when he had "control" is my guess.

---

But if that's true, any quick catch by the sideline or endline could be called incomplete.

They reviewed the color of the jersey, saw it was A&M, so no touchdown.

My guess is a sip was in the replay booth.

Ok, but every review is independent of the other.

Onionman said:

---

Ball caught, one foot down, never lost control, looked like an obvious TD.

Somehow that is not a TD and UH did not get the first down last week....WTF???

---

Called incomplete on the field so there has to be incontrovertible evidence to overrule the official in the field. Only in slow motion did the catch look stable without movement before the trailing toe crossed the boundary.

When the booth guys say it should be a TD you can bet the farm the replay guy disagrees. Every time

If you watch real close, at least at the game they showed frame by frame. At one point the ball doesn't keep up the same speed as his hands, which would indicate he lost his grip

There was no grass kicked up by his right foot to prove it was down

Refs were in on the fix so A&M wouldn't cover the 14 points

Bond must have been in on that too

I didn't think they would overturn it. It was extremely close and difficult to tell when he actually gained full possession of the ball. If the call had been a catch on the field, they wouldn't have overturned it either.

I Concur with that opinion.

halfastros81 said:

---

I Concur with that opinion.

---

I think your opinion's walking not running…

Not enough evidence to overturn lack of control of ball

Dr Lane Trowlan said:

---

There was no grass kicked up by his right foot to prove it was down

---

I agree no grass was kicked up. But his foot literally folded partially over when it hit the ground. No other explanation for it to fold like that unless you say it hit the ground.

Rigged

It was an obvious TD. If the replay official couldn't see that he should be fired for incompetence.

It was a TD. SEC is just screwing around with us because they can. It's only going to get worse as time goes on.

Onionman said:

---

halfastros81 said:

---

Interpretation of when he had "control" is my guess.

---

But if that's true, any quick catch by the sideline or endline could be called incomplete.

---

Butterteeth is saying the same thing right now.

Emilio Fantastico said:

---

My guess is a sip was in the replay booth.

---

Yeah, his name is John Bible.

I have been pretty negative about Max Wright's career at A&M. Lots of missed blocks and stupid penalties.

BUT that was an unbelievable catch and the young man deserved to be rewarded with a TD. It seems like every incompetent referee decision goes against us.

Refs were protecting our streak of 8 consecutive second half quarters without a TD.

I can only assume there wasn't concrete evidence. Had it been called a TD on the field I hope it wouldn't have been over turned.

Obvious TD.

Once the ball contacted his hand and the foot was down, the ball never moved again relative to his hand. That's called control.

The "Indisputable Evidence" rule to overturn an official's call is flawed IMO. It's rare, but on side line receiver catch plays, there is no way the Back or Side official can observe at the same time whether the player's foot was in bounds (in College only one foot required), was the other foot OOB on the ground or not, and then did the receiver have control of the ball and follow through to landing on the ground. The different replay views certainly pointed to a catch. If the official had initially called the play a reception, the play would have stood as a reception on replay. So on these type plays, replay should decide the call. I'm sure some would argue other type plays that could be considered, resulting in too many exceptions, but the sideline receiver catch play is one that there is only one official that is positioned close enough to see and he can't observe 2-3 things in a split second.

Gamblers be mad Ags didn't cover. LOL.

Not too much different than Greg Porter…

Yes, his foot was down.

Yes, he completed the catch.

But the instant his foot is clearly down, you can't tell if the ball is clearly in hand. And when you can tell the ball is clearly in hand, you can't tell if the foot is still clearly down.

That's why the call STOOD.