Patriots vs. Ravens Field Goal Endzone View

Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
115
Reaction score
3
Points
18
EDIT: The video has been removed by whoever uploaded it.

Make your own conclusions.

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6eju62GXyf8?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Found the same video, re-uploaded

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BWmyT2_Kv14?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Looks like 15 more feet of pole and it might have hit it. :zzz: Seems history repeats itself.....almost in a less important game.

Though the kick that tied the game at 10 was called good, several newspapers published photographs proving this was the incorrect call. It didn’t help that Chandler’s body language suggested the kick missed right. The ball traveled over the right field goal post which did not have a referee underneath (as there are two today). This miscall made the NFL extend the field goal posts with the “Baltimore Extension” and add an official under each field goal post for attempts. Here’s an article about the miscall and the referee in the Baltimore Examiner.
 
From the video, it looks like some of the crowd believe it didn't go in.

What does the NFL do now, have a camera hovering above the goal posts to determine if it was outside the post before it crossed the crossbar? Maybe use hawkeye like they do in Tennis? Maybe even extend the goal posts even higher?
 
What does the NFL do now, have a camera hovering above the goal posts to determine if it was outside the post before it crossed the crossbar? Maybe use hawkeye like they do in Tennis? Maybe even extend the goal posts even higher?

That would be the smart thing to do. I wouldn't count on it. FIFA won't use goal cameras and the NFL won't use goal post cameras too.
 
Even from this view, the kick was no good. If the person recording the play were standing 10-15 feet to his left to be in line with the kick, the ball would be seen to outside the post even more clearly.
 
ESPN2 will be looking at the FG at 10am today.

I hope someone can watch it.
 
that kick is a really good sales pitch for an electronic chip in the ball, with receivers at the goal line and goal posts. The chip wouldn't hellp so much for the goal line due to at what precise moment did the ball cross.
 
If the rule is that a football traveling directly over the upright is a FG, then why isn't it a FG when the ball hits an upright? Neither goes over the crossbar.
 
If the rule is that a football traveling directly over the upright is a FG, then why isn't it a FG when the ball hits an upright? Neither goes over the crossbar.

Because that's not the rule:shrug: The rule is that it must cross the plane/crossbar at some point before it goes over the the upright. If the ball hits the upright then crosses the plane it's good. The ball must go between the 2 uprights at some point in order to cross the plane. So if the ball sailed over the upright on the inside of one of the 2 uprights it would then be good and that play can not be reviewed. You can challenge if the ball crossed the plane though which would be why BB was livid.

~Dee~
 
I am in the video...of course I am 150 yards away but I am on the internet...I feel like Mike from Monsters Inc.

I didn't know you were a cyclops:coffee:

My granddaughter's favorite movie

~Dee~
 
Back
Top