Overturned TD

it was the proper call.

check this out. Lane Kiflin is trending for the all the wrong reasons.

Twitter Link

Lane does not disappoint

Live it looked like a catch, and that was the call on field.
Replay looked more like an incompletion, but it honestly was inconclusive. Ball definitely touched the ground, but hands were on the ball. Had it been called incomplete on the field & LSU challenged, you would also not have enough evidence to overturn that call either.
One of the announcers stated the same, & even quoted the rule about irrefutable video evidence to overturn and how there were no angles to clearly show he did not have control to be able to overturn it. He even sarcastically stated how the refs are basically leaving that last part out and going off what they think versus what the video actually shows.

The angle from behind clearly showed the nose of the football hit the ground and the ball spin about 90 degrees.

Yes, Anderson was wide open but TV replay showed Nuss was under pressure and had to rush his decision. The throw he made was still incredible and though tough and ever so slightly tipped by the db should have been caught.

point of the ball hit the ground. correct call.

It probably was not a catch. But as the announcers said, there was no “indisputable video evidence” to overturn the call on the field, as required by the rule. They need to rephrase the rule because in practice, indisputable evidence is no longer required.

The NCAA Football Instant Replay Coaches Manual sets forth the basic standard for reversing on-field calls: "There must be indisputable video evidence for an on-field call to be changed by the Instant Replay Official."

The word "indisputable" is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as "[t]hat [which] cannot be disputed; unquestionable."

If 10 people from Montana who didn’t give a shite about Ole Miss or LSU watched the video, would they all immediately agree it was not a catch? No? Then the call on the field stands.

Refs screw this up every game. They should be required to announce video overturn decisions with the preface, “After review, there is indisputable video evidence that the call on the field was incorrect.” Maybe that would remind them of the rule and lead to better application.