How was that a TD by Gaffney?

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:29 am

Had volume shut off. What was the ruling?
No way did He have control.

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:32 am

After watching the Pitt. West Virginia.
Were they called 3 holding calls and not one was.

Now the non catch by Gaffney. It just makes you wonder.

BCS is other story. What a Joke.

bald is beautiful · Post by **bald is beautiful** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:33 am

Yes, he did. Just because he is tucking it away does not mean he lacks control it. He had it all the way.

If that call was overturned, instant replay would be becoming an abomination. When it first came in, the refs needed INDISPUTABLE evidence. Now they are simply using it to try and make the right call.

TexasHeat · Post by **TexasHeat** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:45 am

Originally posted by bald is beautiful:
Yes, he did. Just because he is tucking it away does not mean he lacks control it. He had it all the way.

If that call was overturned, instant replay would be becoming an abomination. When it first came in, the refs needed INDISPUTABLE evidence. Now they are simply using it to try and make the right call. You are 100% correct, he caught the ball and was in the process of tucking it. Easy call.

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:48 am

Were back to the TUCK Rule. :rolleyes:

If it was Mason, it would have been No control.
But whatever.

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:53 am

lol ... you can see the frozen shot of the foot out of bounds and the ball NOT tucked away. If by having control ... you mean "he was going to get control" ... he had control.

Get serious. No chance that was a catch. The ball is floating out of his hand and his foot is clearly out of bounds.

Unless juggling is now considered under control.

Unbelievable!!!

I can't believe this is not a bigger story.

williamhare · Post by **williamhare** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:28 am

Agree with Q and Raiders here..... and I hate the Ravens and Billick (and own Brady).
That was no catch. Pats would have scored anyway. After the 35 yards in penalties the ball would have been spotted at the 2 with 1st and Goal.HMan83

boutrous11 · Post by **boutrous11** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:06 am

I gotta say when I first saw the replay with the good view of Gafney, I thought, there's no way that's a catch.

RiFF · Post by **RiFF** » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:20 am

Although I believe Gaffney should have been credited with the catch, the way its been called the last few years in the NFL I thought it would be ruled incomplete when I initially saw the replay. The ball certainly appeared to still be "moving" after he was last established in-bounds. I've seen instances when its been called incomplete when a receiver appeared to have more "control" than Gaffney had.
Although I was glad to see Arizona win, I thought the worse call was Winslow's catch not being called a force out.(Understanding a force out isn't reviewable)

Sound Advice · Post by **Sound Advice** » Wed Dec 05, 2007 2:57 am

No catch.
Easy call.
He turned his body completely away from the ref.
Not the ref's fault. But he didn't have control at that time, and the replay should have caught it.