That was a touchdown

[hawknation2015]

It looks like he got his left toe down fractions of a second before his left hand and shin hit out of bounds. I don't envy the referees having to make that call in real time, given that it happened instantaneously as he was sandwiched between two defenders. But it was close enough that we should have challenged it.

 

[falcongoggles]

^^^I have to see more angles and slow mo to make an absolute determination. That said, from the angles posted in this thread, it's a touchdown.

 

[seahawksteve]

Being at the game and with that endzone to my immediate left. I thought that he caught it for the TD, but they never showed a replay of the catch on the jumbotron.

I watched Pete the entire time, you could see he was looking for that replay as well as communicating from the booth, yet no challenge

 

[JustTheTip]

It looks like he got his left toe down fractions of a second before his left hand and shin hit out of bounds. I don't envy the referees having to make that call in real time, given that it happened instantaneously as he was sandwiched between two defenders. But it was close enough that we should have challenged it.

Actually, should have been called a TD and let the automatic challenge on scoring plays handle it.

 

[Hawks46]

It looks like he got his left toe down fractions of a second before his left hand and shin hit out of bounds. I don't envy the referees having to make that call in real time, given that it happened instantaneously as he was sandwiched between two defenders. But it was close enough that we should have challenged it.

Oh I totally agree. I'm not saying in any way it's the ref's fault, or they suck. I'd hate to have to make that call in real time.

That said: upon review, you can clearly see the rubber from the field turf flying up a good foot from the sidelines. It would be obvious upon review, but I'm guessing they didn't review it because it wasn't a turn over or scoring play.

 

[Cartire]

It looks like he got his left toe down fractions of a second before his left hand and shin hit out of bounds. I don't envy the referees having to make that call in real time, given that it happened instantaneously as he was sandwiched between two defenders. But it was close enough that we should have challenged it.

Actually, should have been called a TD and let the automatic challenge on scoring plays handle it.

EXACTLY. If its not one, replay will show it and we can continue on. If its close enough, then I think refs got to say TD and just take a closer look. No harm, no foul.

 

[253hawk]

Only thing you can't see is if he "completed the catch", doesn't show if he bobbled it going to the ground.

This is as good as it gets because FOX had their stupid ticker in the way during the replay.

http://gfycat.com/PeriodicPinkDalmatian

 

[Cartire]

Only thing you can't see is if he "completed the catch", doesn't show if he bobbled it going to the ground.

This is as good as it gets because FOX had their stupid ticker in the way during the replay.

http://gfycat.com/PeriodicPinkDalmatian

That glove looks like its firmly under to me. You can see where he tucks it in with the hand deep and low. And we he rolls up, that hand is in the exact same spot. No ball movement.

 

[253hawk]

And the side judge made the immediate call 'out of bounds' instead of juggling the ball/incomplete process.

 

[Cartire]

And the ref made the immediate call 'out of bounds' instead of juggling the ball/incomplete process.

This as well.

 

[hawknation2015]

It looks like he got his left toe down fractions of a second before his left hand and shin hit out of bounds. I don't envy the referees having to make that call in real time, given that it happened instantaneously as he was sandwiched between two defenders. But it was close enough that we should have challenged it.

Actually, should have been called a TD and let the automatic challenge on scoring plays handle it.

It should have been . . . but it wasn't because obviously the ref thought he saw something else happen.

At that point, it's on our guys to indicate to Carroll that we should challenge.

 

[hawkfan68]

That's what I thought too. I'm surprised they didn't challenge that but they scored the TD on the next play I believe.

 

[Spiderdan]

They didn't challenge because they would've lost. On borderline calls they're not gonna overturn it.

 

[hawknation2015]

They didn't challenge because they would've lost. On borderline calls they're not gonna overturn it.

I disagree. The call was that he was out of bounds. On review, they would have slowed it down and freeze framed it to show that he got that left foot down in bounds. If they missed that, with the benefit of video review, it would have been a huge blunder by the crew in New York.

 

[Smellyman]

I'd really like a quick look at Beckham's gloves. Not trying to knock him much - he does get his body into a position for some of the amazing catches he's made.....but there's no way some of those one handed grabs happen without a little extra help.

They had a great segment on MNF last night on the gloves receivers were these day. Took some non players, bare hands, tossed some balls, no one handed catches. Put on the gloves and like magic, one handed catches. Def not fair. :les: Now get off my lawn!

I always thought it odd old 'stickem' was banned but gloves are ok.

 

[dumbrabbit]

Hey guys, look on the bright side. The Seahawks didn't challenge the call and we didn't have to hear any Mike Carey BS.

 

[mikeak]

You can't argue that the refs should call something to then lean on replay. If they don't have conclusive evidence the ruling stands so they really need to call what they see.

Seahawks should have challenged

 

[Year of The Hawk]

I was wondering if the guys (Seahawks coaching) upstairs for the hawks have different camera angles to see during game time. If they saw the same TV angle we did I would have not challenged as well.

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

I really don't get how Beckham's catch was even a catch. Your aloud to grab the ball, hands on top of the football, push the ball to the ground and slide it on said ground for 3 yards?

I thought this was using the ground to catch the ball. Not sure how the rule interprets it.

As long as you demonstrate control before the ball hits the ground and the ball doesn't move after hitting the ground, it's a catch.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

Thanks for sharing OP.

That was an amazing catch. Even more amazing since on first watch I thought it was close but not really that close. I figured he was a good 2 feet out. I almost don't blame the refs because it's that extraordinary of a catch. Still a shame Baldwin can't count that as one of his greatest touchdown.