- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:33 pm to TulaneLSU
AWESOME images! That's the angle I was hoping to see. It was the most conclusive in real time.
What I see in more pictures is the receiver for Ala. not having his right arm/hand on the ball at all when he nears the ground. Reid's left arm has secured the ball b/w he and the Ala. players mid-section and Reid's left leg prevents the Ala. receiver from landing on the ground w possession b/f Reid takes it away. Pretty cut and dry to me.
What I see in more pictures is the receiver for Ala. not having his right arm/hand on the ball at all when he nears the ground. Reid's left arm has secured the ball b/w he and the Ala. players mid-section and Reid's left leg prevents the Ala. receiver from landing on the ground w possession b/f Reid takes it away. Pretty cut and dry to me.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:38 pm to TigerMan327
quote:
the call was "CONFIRMED" meaning there was undisputable video evidence that he did intercept it.. Meaning if they had called it a complete pass and reviewed it, it would have been overturned
I disagree. If it had been ruled complete on the field the replay booth might have ruled "stands". You're assuming the replay guys are not influenced by what was called. I am sure it was an interception, but I would not want to relive this if the refs called it complete. Would you?
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:41 pm to dreaux
quote:
if a ball comes loose when a reciever hits the ground is that a complete or incomplete pass?
Incomplete! You're right. No way that's a completion.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:42 pm to CatsGoneWild
People need to admit that was the biggest defensive play of the year and maybe the best for the whole country this year. Unbelievable.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:47 pm to bcwarb
I don't get the "it was either a completion or incompletion" argument. The ball itself never touched the ground. It's either a "completion or an interception."
Posted on 11/9/11 at 4:59 pm to BayouWrangler
Seal the deal that it should be a completion to Bama?
Posted on 11/9/11 at 5:05 pm to The Mick
quote:
TBH these photos dont show me a clear interception.
i agree
Posted on 11/9/11 at 5:05 pm to dreaux
Posted on 11/9/11 at 5:09 pm to TulaneLSU
Thank ou TulaneLSU and thank you Times Picayune. Wow , I miss the Picayune way up here in Montana.

Posted on 11/9/11 at 5:10 pm to dreaux
quote:
if that wasn't call a interception on the field, we could very well be 8-1
false...it would've been overturned
Posted on 11/9/11 at 5:16 pm to Mike Linebacker
quote:
I don't get the "it was either a completion or incompletion" argument. The ball itself never touched the ground. It's either a "completion or an interception."
Not the point I was trying to make. If a reciever can hit the ground and it's an incomplete pass, the he can lose possession on the interception since some seem to think the TE had possession when he hit the ground
Posted on 11/9/11 at 5:26 pm to dreaux
quote:
f a reciever can hit the ground and it's an incomplete pass, the he can lose possession on the interception since some seem to think the TE had possession when he hit the ground
Some have brought up the argument that the ground can't cause a fumble (true)...but it can cause an incomplete pass. I really don't see where the argument is coming in when looking at the still shots. The ball is moving around and is up for grabs until the players are on the ground...when it's all over Reid has the ball and it has never touched the ground. Therefore it's an interception.
We were blessed that Reid went after that ball so strongly...if the TE had any fight in him he could have easily had the reception.
Great defensive play by Reid and Mingo. Poor execution by Maze and the TE. Hallelujah.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 6:13 pm to Camp Randall
Good post. Reid's want for the ball was greater than the tight end's. Desire in life often is much greater than natural gifts and those who want something, no matter the disadvantages they face, may be able to attain it even before others who have advantages they do not.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 6:14 pm to Camp Randall
From the interception that wasn't ('09) to the interception that was ('11) 
Posted on 11/9/11 at 6:20 pm to Carlos Santannaclaus
I'm not convinced these pictures prove anything, however I also don't give a damn because Peterson intercepted it in 09.
Posted on 11/9/11 at 6:26 pm to attheua
quote:
Here's a different angle, fwiw
Thanks for posting those, attheua, because they contain the first shot which is absolutely indisputable to me.
For the most part, however, the series has a terrible angle as the shots are to the receiver's back. However, in the shot where it looks like the receiver is almost sitting on the defensive player's leg, the ball is frozen in mid-air on two fingers on the receiver's left hand, and the receiver's right hand is empty. That is before the receiver touched the ground. That shot shows for certain that the receiver did not have possession right before he touched the ground. It was anybody's ball at that point. We know that the defender secured the ball immediately after that, although the following shots in the series you linked are all obscured by the receiver's back.
This post was edited on 11/9/11 at 6:29 pm
Posted on 11/9/11 at 6:27 pm to Beastfense
quote:
Money shot:
That's the shot that proves that the receiver did not have possession. Thanks for posting it Beastfense.
Popular
Back to top



1




