Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Call on Champ's INT return....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Call on Champ's INT return....

    So when I was watching the call on Champ's INT return being reviewed, on whether the ball broke the plane of the pylon and if it should be a touchback... it looked extremely close to me. There was no definite angle to suggest either way. And this is why I guess the official let the call on the field stand.

    Now, I read many expert analysts state that the ball "clearly" crossed the plane of the pylon. I know we have decided to ignore what the stupid media says. But this is not a judgemental thing, not someone's opinion on the Broncos. This is just factual. Surely a sportswriter wouldn't say something factually incorrect.

    Hence, I was wondering if anyone has seen another angle where it shows that the ball did cross the plane of the pylon without any reasonable doubt. I want to know what is the basis for this feeling in the media.

    From what I saw on television replays, Bailey was at the 2 yard line when the ball was knocked loose. And the ball was a foot from the sideline. For the ball to conclusively break the pylon plane, it should have been knocked out in a trajectory almost parallel to the sideline. However, the trajectory seemed to be at a 45 degree angle coming out of Champ's hand.

    Can anyone with a better knowledge of football please provide some insights? What is the "clearly broke the pylon plane" angle that I am missing.
    [A HREF = 'http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/...williamsxt5.jpg'][/A]

  • #2
    Originally posted by atomicbloke
    So when I was watching the call on Champ's INT return being reviewed, on whether the ball broke the plane of the pylon and if it should be a touchback... it looked extremely close to me. There was no definite angle to suggest either way. And this is why I guess the official let the call on the field stand.

    Now, I read many expert analysts state that the ball "clearly" crossed the plane of the pylon. I know we have decided to ignore what the stupid media says. But this is not a judgemental thing, not someone's opinion on the Broncos. This is just factual. Surely a sportswriter wouldn't say something factually incorrect.

    Hence, I was wondering if anyone has seen another angle where it shows that the ball did cross the plane of the pylon without any reasonable doubt. I want to know what is the basis for this feeling in the media.

    From what I saw on television replays, Bailey was at the 2 yard line when the ball was knocked loose. And the ball was a foot from the sideline. For the ball to conclusively break the pylon plane, it should have been knocked out in a trajectory almost parallel to the sideline. However, the trajectory seemed to be at a 45 degree angle coming out of Champ's hand.

    Can anyone with a better knowledge of football please provide some insights? What is the "clearly broke the pylon plane" angle that I am missing.
    I don't think you're missing any angles, and you said it exactly right. Through Physics and the multiple camera angles it is possible to determine without a doubt whether or not it was a good call, and I don't know of anyone who has done that. As for the media saying it 'expert analysts state that the ball "clearly" crossed the plane ' anytime the gambling community gets it wrong and has to pay out money they didn't expect to the media steps in for "excuses for blowing the fix" 101.
    "An exemplar who knows what they know and knows what they do not know, truly is one who knows."

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by atomicbloke
      So when I was watching the call on Champ's INT return being reviewed, on whether the ball broke the plane of the pylon and if it should be a touchback... it looked extremely close to me. There was no definite angle to suggest either way. And this is why I guess the official let the call on the field stand.

      Now, I read many expert analysts state that the ball "clearly" crossed the plane of the pylon. I know we have decided to ignore what the stupid media says. But this is not a judgemental thing, not someone's opinion on the Broncos. This is just factual. Surely a sportswriter wouldn't say something factually incorrect.

      Hence, I was wondering if anyone has seen another angle where it shows that the ball did cross the plane of the pylon without any reasonable doubt. I want to know what is the basis for this feeling in the media.

      From what I saw on television replays, Bailey was at the 2 yard line when the ball was knocked loose. And the ball was a foot from the sideline. For the ball to conclusively break the pylon plane, it should have been knocked out in a trajectory almost parallel to the sideline. However, the trajectory seemed to be at a 45 degree angle coming out of Champ's hand.

      Can anyone with a better knowledge of football please provide some insights? What is the "clearly broke the pylon plane" angle that I am missing.
      Too clos to really tell and there's no evidence that it actually did. That's why the ruling wasn't overturned. Let's say that we didn't score that TD.. we would have still won the game by 7 so the whole point is moot in the end anyway.
      The new website is about as ugly as Paris Hilton. Put the blue back!

      Comment


      • #4
        the ball never went over the pylon....if anything it was already out of bounds....the only people that say it went into the end zone are Pat fans...sports writers included
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by isblis
          I don't think you're missing any angles, and you said it exactly right. Through Physics and the multiple camera angles it is possible to determine without a doubt whether or not it was a good call, and I don't know of anyone who has done that. As for the media saying it 'expert analysts state that the ball "clearly" crossed the plane ' anytime the gambling community gets it wrong and has to pay out money they didn't expect to the media steps in for "excuses for blowing the fix" 101.
          Denver was favored in this game by 3 1/2 in the Vegas line. Most sportswriters favored N.E. and Indy because they wanted a rematch of last year's AFC Championship game, to be followed by the "passing of the torch" from Brady to Peyton Manning.

          Having the Steelers upset the mighty Colts and then lose to the Broncos who go on to win the SB makes them all seem like a bunch of idiots. Which they are anyway, but they don't like it when the facts point that out.

          As Dr. Z pointed out, the columnists have been hyping the story of Indy v. N.E., how great the Chicago defense is, and whether Carson Palmer can bring the Bengals into the status of elite teams. That and Tony Dungee were the stories this year. And now all of that crap is worthless.

          Nobody was talking about either Pittsburgh or Denver and now they have to eat their own steaming bile.

          And they don't like it one bit which just makes my day. The worst example of being miffed about the Broncos winning is on ESPN where some idiot wrote an article saying that the Broncos were lucky to win and won't go any further. How he became the only person in the universe who knows the outcome of a game to be played next week is left unstated.

          The Broncos versus the Carolina Panthers is just not a "sexy" storyline enough for these fools. Thus, the complaining.
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cugel
            The Broncos versus the Carolina Panthers is just not a "sexy" storyline enough for these fools. Thus, the complaining.
            But it's plenty sexy for me. Especially if the Broncos win it all! (Boing.)

            Comment


            • #7
              Hell Plummer and the broncos have shown they can win...I remember week 2...on cold pizza the one guy said..Denver is not going to the playoffs....I been hearing for years..Jake can't win a playoff game....and Now theres only 1 more left..Jake will never take denver to the superbowl...Guess what...noone is saying that now
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                The Rule

                You must first remember that the goal line extends forever and I think that was the "angle" they were looking for.

                Referring to the pylon. If the ball touches the pylon or is above it it would be considered a touchdown assuming the player is in bounds of course. The ball is the key in any goal line play.

                Champ was in bounds when he was hit and the ball was knocked lose. If the ball did in fact fly over the pylon, it would have been considered a touchback. And yes, it was very very close and no replay showed "definative" evidence that the call should be reversed. We were kinda laughing at the time as the referees were at the other end of the field and how they had to run with Champ to make any call at the other end of the field. Looking at all of the replay angles, the ball did go out of bounds before the pylon IMO. It appeared that it did not go over the pylon.

                Coach Belichick has been attempting to get a camera on the pylon or looking down at the pylon. This was news prior to this game. After that situation and as commented on the news, we have the technology to do it, so why not?
                :usa: *** God Bless Our Military Men And Women*** :usa:

                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  It was legit. Great call.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It was close.

                    The angles CBS had during the transmision weren't conclusive, but if no decision was made, and you have to pick something (out of bounds or over the end-zone) probably I would have picked over the end zone.

                    Now, something funny, the NBC Boston channel has an angle from "behind" (I guess they were behind the opposite end-zone, probably towards the corner). In that angle the ball seems to fly out of bounds. Anyway, too close to call.

                    Any engineers or physicists with some time to spare willing to take a look at the possibilities?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I work on mathematical simulations like this at work so let me take a shot at understanding this.

                      The plane of the pylon is an imaginary wall on the goal-line. Imagine another wall running along the side-line. The corner where both walls meet is the pylon.

                      Now imagine you are in your room running towards the wall infront of you and another wall to your left side. You are running parallel to the wall to your left. Now if you lose the ball and it hits the wall infront of you or the corner of the room, it's a touchback. If it hits the wall to your side, it's out of bounds, like the call in the game. (If I understand the rule correctly).

                      Now BroncoManiac_69 mentioned the wall infront of you (the wall on the goal-line) extends forever. That is true but the point is moot. If the ball hits the wall on the side first, it's out of bounds. From all angles I have seen, none were conclusive which wall it hit first. But my point is, if the ball had to hit the wall infront of you, it would have to have a very straight trajectory, almost parallel to the side wall. It did not appear so on the replays.

                      That would be the physics explanation, but please correct me if I have misunderstood the football rules. I just can't see how anyone can confidently say it crossed the wall infront like the sportswriters are doing.
                      Last edited by atomicbloke; 01-17-2006, 02:01 PM.
                      [A HREF = 'http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/...williamsxt5.jpg'][/A]

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Well they are saying that it crossed becuase perhaps it did, they have had hours to watch the replay.

                        But the ref didnt have hours, he had minutes, and from the angles I saw I didnt see anything that would be conclusive evidence to overturn the play.
                        vvvv Palomar-Mnt. Southern California vvvv

                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by atomicbloke
                          I work on mathematical simulations like this at work so let me take a shot at understanding this.

                          The plane of the pylon is an imaginary wall on the goal-line. Imagine another wall running along the side-line. The corner where both walls meet is the pylon.

                          Now imagine you are in your room running towards the wall infront of you and another wall to your left side. You are running parallel to the wall to your left. Now if you lose the ball and it hits the wall infront of you or the corner of the room, it's a touchback. If it hits the wall to your side, it's out of bounds, like the call in the game. (If I understand the rule correctly).

                          Now BroncoManiac_69 mentioned the wall infront of you (the wall on the goal-line) extends forever. That is true but the point is moot. If the ball hits the wall on the side first, it's out of bounds. From all angles I have seen, none were conclusive which wall it hit first. But my point is, if the ball had to hit the wall infront of you, it would have to have a very straight trajectory, almost parallel to the side wall. It did not appear so on the replays.

                          That would be the physics explanation, but please correct me if I have misunderstood the football rules. I just can't see how anyone can confidently say it crossed the wall infront like the sportswriters are doing.

                          Exactly. You have Bailey running paralel to the wall on his left, about one foot away from it, then, when he's one or two yards from reaching the "front wall", Watson reaches him, much faster, in a I would say 60 degrees angle and hits him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cugel
                            Denver was favored in this game by 3 1/2 in the Vegas line. Most sportswriters favored N.E. and Indy because they wanted a rematch of last year's AFC Championship game, to be followed by the "passing of the torch" from Brady to Peyton Manning.

                            Having the Steelers upset the mighty Colts and then lose to the Broncos who go on to win the SB makes them all seem like a bunch of idiots. Which they are anyway, but they don't like it when the facts point that out.

                            As Dr. Z pointed out, the columnists have been hyping the story of Indy v. N.E., how great the Chicago defense is, and whether Carson Palmer can bring the Bengals into the status of elite teams. That and Tony Dungee were the stories this year. And now all of that crap is worthless.

                            Nobody was talking about either Pittsburgh or Denver and now they have to eat their own steaming bile.

                            And they don't like it one bit which just makes my day. The worst example of being miffed about the Broncos winning is on ESPN where some idiot wrote an article saying that the Broncos were lucky to win and won't go any further. How he became the only person in the universe who knows the outcome of a game to be played next week is left unstated.

                            The Broncos versus the Carolina Panthers is just not a "sexy" storyline enough for these fools. Thus, the complaining.

                            Absolutely, couldn't have said it any better myself.
                            Nice post!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              here's something to think over....

                              if the refs had called it a touchback instead of out at the one, do you think they would have overturned it or upheld it as a touchback?


                              Check out Goal Line Blitz

                              WINNER of Elevation INC's Pick Your 53 Challenge....Sig to come!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X