Bad Call: Hogs did not fumble through end zone for touchback. See added video.

[ryanbush]

It doesn't matter if the ball crosses the goal line inbounds or out of bounds, it only matters where the ball lands...

the call was the correct one

[Libertarian Hog]

It doesn't matter if the ball crosses the goal line inbounds or out of bounds, it only matters where the ball lands...

the call was the correct one

I don't know if this statement, "It doesn't matter if the ball crosses the goal line inbounds or out of bounds, it only matters where the ball lands" is supposed to be a joke or if this guy actually believes it; but it is certainly wrong.  Just looking at where the ball landed out of bounds does not tell you if it is a touchback or not since you don't know how it got there.  To know whether it is a touchback or not it is essential to know where it it went out of bounds.  You must know whether it went out of bounds on the side lines between the two goal lines or that it went out of bound from the end zone.  Furthermore there is no such thing as crossing the goal line from out of bounds.  The goal line extends from side line to side line.  The goal line doesn't extend to the out of bounds area.

[PorkSoda]

I don't know if this statement, "It doesn't matter if the ball crosses the goal line inbounds or out of bounds, it only matters where the ball lands" is supposed to be a joke or if this guy actually believes it; but it is certainly wrong.  Just looking at where the ball landed out of bounds does not tell you if it is a touchback or not since you don't know how it got there.  To know whether it is a touchback or not it is essential to know where it it went out of bounds.  You must know whether it went out of bounds on the side lines between the two goal lines or that it went out of bound from the end zone.  Furthermore there is no such thing as crossing the goal line from out of bounds.  The goal line extends from side line to side line.  The goal line doesn't extend to the out of bounds area.

so when a guy makes a reaching TD catch and keeps his feet in bounds, it should be counted as out of bounds?

if the ball touched out of bounds before the goal line then its out of bounds, but if it passes the goal line at all before going out of bounds, its a touch back.

however they originally called it out at the one. so its kind of weird that they changed it to a Touchback

[1highhog]

Unless you know how high the ball is in that photo there is no way of knowing whether it went inside or outside the pylon. 

I watched it while the game was going on and wewatched it several times in slomotion right as it happened, and I still have the game on DVR, it hit the ground outside of the pylon and should have been our about the 2 1/2 yd. line, I was shouting at the refs but it's hard for them to hear when I'm over a 1,000 miles away and through my TV.  Most biased commentator as well I've seen.

[PorkSoda]

I watched it while the game was going on and wewatched it several times in slomotion right as it happened, and I still have the game on DVR, it hit the ground outside of the pylon and should have been our about the 2 1/2 yd. line, I was shouting at the refs but it's hard for them to hear when I'm over a 1,000 miles away and through my TV.  Most biased commentator as well I've seen.

it doesn't matter if it landed outside the pylon.  it didn't touch the ground outside out of bounds before crossing the plane.  it was obviously a touchback, as much as I dont want to admit it.

think about a kick off.  if it lands out of bounds in the endzone its still a touch back rather than a penalty.

[LZH]

The goal line doesn't extend to the out of bounds area.

Actually, it does. It extends all the way around the planet if you want to put it that way. You can run into the end zone and hold the ball as far out of bounds as you can but as long as your feet are in bounds and you cross the goal line and the ball crosses that plane even though it is technically out of the field of play it is still a touchdown.

[MemphisBossHog]

I knew we were fricked when Morgan fumbled going towards the end zone. I thought if we answered right back we would be OK.

If we score, its 31-7 and the game is just different from that point.  But if "ifs and buts were candy and nuts,........."  We just have to be better.  Honestly,when I saw we were going to be matched up with Va Tech in the game, I figured we would lose mainly because I think Tech is a good good team and they had played Clemson really tough in the ACC Championship game.  For us to come out and to have possibly gone up 31-7 answering their TD that was a gift from our turnover would have shown Va Tech that we werent going anywhere and we were going to keep scoring.  Its just a shame that we imploded the way we did.  Once it started, its like no one could stop it and Va Tech was the beneficiary of all of our mistakes.

Hogs just have to be stronger, tougher, better. 

[PonderinHog]

Actually, it does. It extends all the way around the planet if you want to put it that way. You can run into the end zone and hold the ball as far out of bounds as you can but as long as your feet are in bounds and you cross the goal line and the ball crosses that plane even though it is technically out of the field of play it is still a touchdown.

But you have control of the ball in that situation.  Maybe that is the rule, but it doesn't make sense to me.  If the ball is fumbled outside the pylon and never crosses the goal line inbounds, it shouldn't matter where it lands.  I want to understand.  Help me understand!

[Iwastherein1969]

But you have control of the ball in that situation.  Maybe that is the rule, but it doesn't make sense to me.  If the ball is fumbled outside the pylon and never crosses the goal line inbounds, it shouldn't matter where it lands.  I want to understand.  Help me understand!

punt a ball and have it land short of the pylon but out of bounds and see where they mark it...it will be marked at the point the ball crossed the out of bounds plane....and this crap about a runner can have the ball in his right hand and it crosses the imaginary out of bounds line which goes upward theoretically to infinity, the play WILL NOT be deemed a TD because the ball didn't break the plane of the goal line inside the field of play....I don't understand what makes this concept so difficult...we got hosed, but we are Arkansas and we deserve to be hosed at each and every opportunity

[LZH]

But you have control of the ball in that situation.  Maybe that is the rule, but it doesn't make sense to me.  If the ball is fumbled outside the pylon and never crosses the goal line inbounds, it shouldn't matter where it lands.  I want to understand.  Help me understand!

I wasn't really referring to that play. I think it should have been our ball inside the 1-yard line. What I was talking about is as long as your feet are in bounds and you have control of the ball, the ball does not have to cross the white line inside the pylon to be a touchdown.

[(notOM)Rebel123]

punt a ball and have it land short of the pylon but out of bounds and see where they mark it...it will be marked at the point the ball crossed the out of bounds plane....and this crap about a runner can have the ball in his right hand and it crosses the imaginary out of bounds line which goes upward theoretically to infinity, the play WILL NOT be deemed a TD because the ball didn't break the plane of the goal line inside the field of play....I don't understand what makes this concept so difficult...we got hosed, but we are Arkansas and we deserve to be hosed at each and every opportunity

The rules pertaining to spotting punts that go out of bounds, as well as, the position of the ball on a scoring play are different than the rules pertaining to balls fumbled into the end zone.

[ricepig]

The rules pertaining to spotting punts that go out of bounds, as well as, the position of the ball on a scoring play are different than the rules pertaining to balls fumbled into the end zone.

Upon further review, the call on the field is confirmed......

[PonderinHog]

I wasn't really referring to that play. I think it should have been our ball inside the 1-yard line. What I was talking about is as long as your feet are in bounds and you have control of the ball, the ball does not have to cross the white line inside the pylon to be a touchdown.

Well, don't confuse me, dammit!    

What's interesting though is a player run or dive out of bounds but can break the plane of the goal line with the ball in his hand and it is a touchdown.

[PorkSoda]

and this crap about a runner can have the ball in his right hand and it crosses the imaginary out of bounds line which goes upward theoretically to infinity, the play WILL NOT be deemed a TD because the ball didn't break the plane of the goal line inside the field of play

I'd have to see something to confirm that.  otherwise I'd have to assume you are JMSU

[(notOM)Rebel123]

Upon further review, the call on the field is confirmed......

Yes.

[PorkSoda]

Well, don't confuse me, dammit!    

What's interesting though is a player run or dive out of bounds but can break the plane of the goal line with the ball in his hand and it is a touchdown.

the ball never touched the ground out of bounds until it was already in the end zone.  there is nothing to confuse.  it was a touchback.

[LZH]

The first time I ever heard about that rule was around 15 years ago and Michael Vick was running down the left sideline close to the end zone with the ball in his left hand. A DB tried to shove him out of bounds but Vick turned his shoulders parallel to the sideline and was sidestepping trying to stay in bounds. The ball crossed the goal line well outside the pylon but he somehow kept his feet in bounds. I remember one of the commentators (Madden?) explained that rule and it stuck with me.

And I have seen someone else, I think it was Percy Harvin, do the same thing a few years ago.

[LZH]

the ball never touched the ground out of bounds until it was already in the end zone.  there is nothing to confuse.  it was a touchback.

Looks to me like the ball went out of bounds just before the pylon, which should have been Arkansas' ball inside the one. If the ball had crossed the goal line behind the pylon, then it would have been a turnover.

[(notOM)Rebel123]

the ball never touched the ground out of bounds until it was already in the end zone.  there is nothing to confuse.  it was a touchback.

^^^^^^

[KennyForAD]

Looks to me like the ball went out of bounds just before the pylon, which should have been Arkansas' ball inside the one. If the ball had crossed the goal line behind the pylon, then it would have been a turnover.

This is the question.  It looks to me like the ball crossed the goal line just inside and above the pylon.  Crappy deal, but touchback.

I think this is a bad rule.  If you fumble out of bounds anywhere else on the field it is not a turnover.  If you fumble into the endzone, why should it be any different?  Just place the ball at the spot of the fumble and play the next down.   But... its the rule, and I don't think they called it wrong.

[LZH]

This is the question.  It looks to me like the ball crossed the goal line just inside and above the pylon.  Crappy deal, but touchback.

I think this is a bad rule.  If you fumble out of bounds anywhere else on the field it is not a turnover.  If you fumble into the endzone, why should it be any different?  Just place the ball at the spot of the fumble and play the next down.   But... its the rule, and I don't think they called it wrong.

Well if it did cross over the top of the pylon or just inside of it, then you're right. Touchback. Frankly I didn't see the play live because I was a few doors down sampling my neighbor's grilled salmon at the time.

I thought we were sufficiently whipping their ass so I walked down there for a few minutes. Came back to a whole new ballgame.

[RebelliousHog]

So where is the added video?

[PonderinHog]

Well if it did cross over the top of the pylon or just inside of it, then you're right. Touchback. Frankly I didn't see the play live because I was a few doors down sampling my neighbor's grilled salmon at the time.

I thought we were sufficiently whipping their ass so I walked down there for a few minutes. Came back to a whole new ballgame.

No, it was a repeat of the Mizzou game.  Ouch!   

[PorkSoda]

Looks to me like the ball went out of bounds just before the pylon, which should have been Arkansas' ball inside the one. If the ball had crossed the goal line behind the pylon, then it would have been a turnover.

it didn't actually touch the ground out of bounds so it was not out of bounds.  again there is no room for confusion. 

[PonderinHog]

it didn't actually touch the ground out of bounds so it was not out of bounds.  again there is no room for confusion.

The hell you say!

[PorkSoda]

I think this is a bad rule.  If you fumble out of bounds anywhere else on the field it is not a turnover.  If you fumble into the endzone, why should it be any different?  Just place the ball at the spot of the fumble and play the next down.   But... its the rule, and I don't think they called it wrong.

this is a decent point.  I wonder how it goes along with advancing a fumble rules.

[(notOM)Rebel123]

Just curious, has anyone seen or heard anything from the Hog coaching staff, credible TV & radio analysts, print media, league office, etc. who have given any indication that the call was incorrect?

[PonderinHog]

Just curious, has anyone seen or heard anything from the Hog coaching staff, credible TV & radio analysts, print media, league office, etc. who have given any indication that the call was incorrect?

I thought Hogville had already established that they are all clueless.   

[(notOM)Rebel123]

I thought Hogville had already established that they are all clueless.   

How could I forget that?

[LZH]

it didn't actually touch the ground out of bounds so it was not out of bounds.  again there is no room for confusion. 

Yeah it did. It first hit the thick white line a good foot from the endzone.

[KennyForAD]

So where is the added video?

@17:20

[rljjr]

All of the other stuff notwithstanding, the official trailing the play put his foot down just inside the one where he thought the ball went out. The other Big12 officials changed that to a touchback from across the field. Had they kept it inside the one and had to replay it would have been hard to overturn based on the video evidence, but they could have (just like they overturned an obvious targeting). As it is, it sure looked like a touchback because I thought the ball went over the pylon. It's over. It was a touchback.

[PonderinHog]

All of the other stuff notwithstanding, the official trailing the play put his foot down just inside the one where he thought the ball went out. The other Big12 officials changed that to a touchback from across the field. Had they kept it inside the one and had to replay it would have been hard to overturn based on the video evidence, but they could have (just like they overturned an obvious targeting). As it is, it sure looked like a touchback because I thought the ball went over the pylon. It's over. It was a touchback.

Actually, it wasn't.  There was a penalty on Va Tech and we kept the ball back at the other end of the field.

[lasthog]

Nm

[FLhogzfan]

Actually, it does. It extends all the way around the planet if you want to put it that way. You can run into the end zone and hold the ball as far out of bounds as you can but as long as your feet are in bounds and you cross the goal line and the ball crosses that plane even though it is technically out of the field of play it is still a touchdown.

This is not correct...the pylon is part of the goal line...a player running or diving or reaching, with control of the ball, into the end zone close to the pylon near the sideline has to have the ball touch or go over or inside the pylon to get the touchdown.  In the judgement of the official IF ANY part of the ball crosses over the pylon it is a TD.  It doesn't matter where his feet are (unless his feet are out of bounds) as long as any part of the ball touches, goes over or inside the pylon...it is a TD.  Now...if the ball is fumbled, as this one was, unfortunately...while the player is reaching or diving inside the field of play AND in the officials judgement any part of the ball either goes over or inside or touches the pylon...it is a touchback IF the ball touches out of bounds, anywhere outside the end zone after it touches, goes over or passes inside the pylon.  If the fumbled ball goes into the end zone after it goes over, touches, or inside the pylon...and stays in the end zone (I.e., doesn't go out of bounds) it is a live ball until recovered by a player.  If recovered by the offensive player it is a score...if the defenders control the fumble in the end zone it is a touchback or if they pick it up they can try to run it out. 
IMO it looks like Drew lost control of the ball about the 3 yard line and part of the fumbled ball could have went over the top of the pylon...after going over the pylon the ball touched out of bounds on the right side of the end zone then rolled back into the end zone.  This was a touchback in this situation.  However,   I thought the official was going to mark it inside the one because he placed his foot there as if it went out of bounds at that point, but after the group conference it must have been decided...in their judgement...that part of the ball passed over the pylon and then hit outside the end zone...which would have been a touchback...if it weren't for the penalty.

[1highhog]

it doesn't matter if it landed outside the pylon.  it didn't touch the ground outside out of bounds before crossing the plane.  it was obviously a touchback, as much as I dont want to admit it.

think about a kick off.  if it lands out of bounds in the endzone its still a touch back rather than a penalty.

I don't guess I follow you, it hit the ground where he fumbled the ball out of bounds, I just re-watched it again.  It then took an odd bounce as a football will do because it's not shaped like a basketball and went back into the endzone and rolled out the back.  The refs didn't miss it, they just blew the call.

[flynhog]

Reminds me of the "Pass interference my ass" call.

[EastexHawg]

@17:20

How can anyone watch that, see where Morgan was when he fumbled the ball, see where the ball lands, and conclude that the call is definitely wrong?  It looks to me like if you drew a line from where the ball came out of his hands to where it landed that line would cross over the end zone as it extends upward into infinity.

[Pork Twain]

punt a ball and have it land short of the pylon but out of bounds and see where they mark it...it will be marked at the point the ball crossed the out of bounds plane....and this crap about a runner can have the ball in his right hand and it crosses the imaginary out of bounds line which goes upward theoretically to infinity, the play WILL NOT be deemed a TD because the ball didn't break the plane of the goal line inside the field of play....I don't understand what makes this concept so difficult...we got hosed, but we are Arkansas and we deserve to be hosed at each and every opportunity

If you do not understand the point someone is making, just say so.  No need to write a long post to misrepresent what was said, to show us.

[Pork Twain]

This is the question.  It looks to me like the ball crossed the goal line just inside and above the pylon.  Crappy deal, but touchback.

I think this is a bad rule.  If you fumble out of bounds anywhere else on the field it is not a turnover.  If you fumble into the endzone, why should it be any different?  Just place the ball at the spot of the fumble and play the next down.   But... its the rule, and I don't think they called it wrong.

This is true but they usually spot the ball where it went out of bounds.  If the ball is deemed to go out of bounds while it was in the end zone (which the ref, announcers and our coaches deemed was the case) then in is a touchback, just like a kickoff or punt that goes out of bounds in the back of the endzone.

[sshawg]

From the video , in slow motion, It looks like it actually hits the ground TWICE , out of bounds , before it came back in bounds in the end zone and went out the back of the end zone.  The video is on the front page, first post.

[Pork Twain]

This is not correct...the pylon is part of the goal line...a player running or diving or reaching, with control of the ball, into the end zone close to the pylon near the sideline has to have the ball touch or go over or inside the pylon to get the touchdown.  In the judgement of the official IF ANY part of the ball crosses over the pylon it is a TD.  It doesn't matter where his feet are (unless his feet are out of bounds) as long as any part of the ball touches, goes over or inside the pylon...it is a TD.  Now...if the ball is fumbled, as this one was, unfortunately...while the player is reaching or diving inside the field of play AND in the officials judgement any part of the ball either goes over or inside or touches the pylon...it is a touchback IF the ball touches out of bounds, anywhere outside the end zone after it touches, goes over or passes inside the pylon.  If the fumbled ball goes into the end zone after it goes over, touches, or inside the pylon...and stays in the end zone (I.e., doesn't go out of bounds) it is a live ball until recovered by a player.  If recovered by the offensive player it is a score...if the defenders control the fumble in the end zone it is a touchback or if they pick it up they can try to run it out. 
IMO it looks like Drew lost control of the ball about the 3 yard line and part of the fumbled ball could have went over the top of the pylon...after going over the pylon the ball touched out of bounds on the right side of the end zone then rolled back into the end zone.  This was a touchback in this situation.  However,   I thought the official was going to mark it inside the one because he placed his foot there as if it went out of bounds at that point, but after the group conference it must have been decided...in their judgement...that part of the ball passed over the pylon and then hit outside the end zone...which would have been a touchback...if it weren't for the penalty.

Agreed...I did think it was odd that the official that was right there, looked ready to spot it at about the 1, but I guess after a conference, someone told him he was wrong.  I am not sure why some fans wish to still argue this, when it is obvious that nobody else involved wanted too.

Here is my low-tech analysis

Frame one, note where his hips land and this will help you judge where the ball was lost at in frame 2
Frame two, the ball comes out right below his helmet.
Frame three, approximate location based on where his hips were when he landed and when the ball came out.  The ball came out when his right foot was on the 3-yard line, about a foot from out of bounds.  The ball was a little inside the 1yard line but still well within bounds.
Frame four, where the ball touched down
Frame five, point A to point B and I used points that should be in our favor, but note his helmet is up against the pylon and if it and the ball were traveling at a similar trajectory and speed, they would likely cross very similar points along the way.
Frame six, keep in mind that the pylon is placement (it is not on the inside corner of the endzone) and remember that any portion of the ball just has to pass over this.

God I have such a boring job...  All that needs to be said is that the ball lands out of bounds at the side of the endzone.  Does not matter what it crossed where.  This is just for those that are too stubborn to accept that it only matters where the ball landed.  For you thick skulled people I have shown you that it also crossed the pylon.  That should help you sleep at night.

The ball does not have to land in or touch the endzone at any point.  It merely has to pass over the pylon or goal line.

[RazorChuck]

The ball was CLEARLY out of bounds, it did not cross the goal line, this was a terrible call.
I do not get the know it all answers here, the replay does not lie.

[BaconAteHer]

Mind boggling to read this thread and see the number of people here who don't know much about football. I hope some of you are joking just to muddy the water and cause complete chaos.

[Biggus Piggus]

The problem was that Morgan was reaching for the goal line trying to score, and he ended up tossing the ball. The ball isn't out of bounds just because it crossed the sideline in the air. The ball is not out of bounds until it hits something that is out of bounds. The ball didn't hit the ground until it was past the goal line.

[code red]

Yes it should've been challenged by the head coach.

This....that way we would have only gotten beat by one score lol.

[Soooie21]

The ball should be placed on one foot line period. exclamation point!! hashtag #, tweet.   No argument period!!

The ball went out of bounds in the air at around the 1...ball should have been placed there..not a touchback...went to the right of the pylon, not the left......

[Hawgphish]

It is amazing how many people are adamantly arguing that this was a bad call.  You simply do not know or understand the rules.  The ball leaves his hands and flies inside the pylon and out of bounds.  By rule that is a touchback. And even more Drew knew it.  Watch his reaction.  The call was correct.  Live with it.  It is over.

[Corkscrew Johnson]

Nope, we stayed where he caught the pass, from my seat.

This is true.  Refs reviewed the hit and did NOT give the 15 penalty.  It might have been the turning point of the game.  Instead of having the ball at the 48 first down, we had it at the 33.  Keep in mind that at this point in the game, the only thing that had really stopped our offense was Morgan fumbling (twice). 

Given how the refs have called that penalty all year long, it was astounding they didn't toss Edmunds.  Whether or not you agree with that rule (which I do), if the action causes the result, regardless of your intent, they have been ejecting players.  Cut and dried. 

[PossumFan]

It is amazing how many people are adamantly arguing that this was a bad call.  You simply do not know or understand the rules.  The ball leaves his hands and flies inside the pylon and out of bounds.  By rule that is a touchback. And even more Drew knew it.  Watch his reaction.  The call was correct.  Live with it.  It is over.

The ball flew outside the pylon, not inside.