Gotham Cronie
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2006
- Runs
- 14,599
So if the ex head of officials knows all the calls then why wasn't the Ballard TD catch overturned? He clearly said that Ballard was inbounds.
HIS TAKE: I love when the ruling on the field stands, even though I originally thought Ballard might have gotten one knee down in bounds, which is the same as getting two feet down. Sometimes you fall victim to a frozen piece of video, which really doesn’t paint the whole picture. I get mad at myself when I look at a still frame and try to draw a conclusion based on that alone. I have said it so many times before — I’m OK when a referee lets the ruling on the field stand. At least the referee gets a second look at the play. Referee Jeff Triplette was right for staying with this call. There was just not indisputable visual evidence to overturn the ruling on the field. My bad.
Jennings never had control of the ball in the endzone. Aikman, who is as anti-Giants as one can be, even said it wasn't a TD.
HIS TAKE: This one was all about control. A word I never use when determining control is, move. The ball always moves. In this case, Jennings did not have possession, but then did appear to have control with his left hand and then got two feet down before the defender stripped out the ball. It was one of those plays where you could have made a case either way. Since it was ruled a catch and a touchdown, referee Jeff Triplette announced that the ruling on the field stood as called. That means, there would not have been enough evidence to overturn the call, no matter which way it was ruled.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/...w-Jared-Allen-ground-cant-cause-fumble-120411