gowazzu02
New member
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2014
- Messages
- 1,911
- Reaction score
- 0
Not that it matters but how's that not reviewed
253hawk":194mtscl said:You don't have to challenge it because you can't, all turnovers are supposed to be booth-reviewed.
Thanatos19":3izhx9li said:The booth looked at it and confirmed it was an INT.
The reason it's an INT is because they ruled Luke never had control of the ball. Otherwise it would be a fumble.
Hawkpower":2khb95ay said:Thanatos19":2khb95ay said:The booth looked at it and confirmed it was an INT.
The reason it's an INT is because they ruled Luke never had control of the ball. Otherwise it would be a fumble.
Where did you get this inside information?
He caught the ball, had control and then was down. So no, no fumble and the play should have been over.
Rat":2lnvjpsh said:Hawkpower":2lnvjpsh said:Thanatos19":2lnvjpsh said:The booth looked at it and confirmed it was an INT.
The reason it's an INT is because they ruled Luke never had control of the ball. Otherwise it would be a fumble.
Where did you get this inside information?
He caught the ball, had control and then was down. So no, no fumble and the play should have been over.
I don't know that it can be conclusively said that he had control, especially with league confusion of what really constitutes a catch. It's not like he ran around for a bit after the ball got to him.
MD5eahawks":1wjbjqb9 said:Ask yourself this...
When was the last time you were actually comfortable cheering for a big play immediately after it happened?
Sad situation really.
Hawkpower":av58w6h6 said:So with said confusion, and with it being a somewhat crucial play, you would think they could have spared a few extra seconds to take a look to make sure.
I think thats all anyone here would have appreciated.
Just seemed like such a rush and before you knew it, Atlanta was snapping the ball......
Absolutely Not True...Willson was down, the Defender had to rip at the ball TWICE before he got it RIPPED OUT of Willson's hands...Officials would have to be completely INEPT (and they were), to say that it was a legitimate interception....The fact that they did NOT show it on replay should tell you something was suspect.Thanatos19":3orjjv96 said:The booth looked at it and confirmed it was an INT.
The reason it's an INT is because they ruled Luke never had control of the ball. Otherwise it would be a fumble.