• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

UC Catch Replay

Status
Not open for further replies.

grzz

Well-known member
DONOR
Anyone have a clip of the catch in the back of the endzone by UC Davis in the 4th quarter?

I have read several people on here say it looked good on TV. I sit in the front row of the North Endzone and I didn't think he controlled the catch until he was out of bounds, but that was live and I am obviously biased.
 
Receiver bobbled it several times. Wasn't a catch. Probably had both feet out by the time he controlled it. Replay isn't necessary to know this. The ref should be suspended for life. He was right there in position.
 
No kidding even Grady said the receiver caught the ball and got not one but two feet in bounds, you would have to be somewhat silly to not think that was not a catch.
 
I hope you get to see the play on video and judge for yourself. If you have a gogriz.com subscription, the game is available for replay. From the limited replay they showed live, I thought it was a catch. The announce team also seemed to be leaning that way too, after seeing the replay.
 
Big G said:
No kidding even Grady said the receiver caught the ball and got not one but two feet in bounds, you would have to be somewhat silly to not think that was not a catch.

Don't you have a fence to stretch or something. It's pretty obvious you are not a Montana fan so why bother? Unless you enjoy being.....well...you :lol:
 
CatzWillRise said:
Obviously you've never reffed the game.

Hahah. This is a perfect response.

And Big G, whoever peed in your cheerios, I promise it wasn't me. He obviously must have had a replay because there is no way from the TV booth he could have possibly even seen the receivers hands and feet, in addition to the end line...He may have said that, and he is probably right, but he probably saw a replay...which is what I would like to see.
 
I have been a fan of Montana since I got my dergree there in the early 60s. A fan since before you were born fella. Son played there and 3 relatives you are barking up the wrong tree trying to be a troll and label me.
 
I watched on TV, the receiver only needed one foot in bounds after the catch...he had two. Plain as day when they replayed it in slow motion. Even the great griz homer Grady Bennett said it was a catch after the review. Enough said.
 
Big g fly away.....I was born before your 1960 horseshit! Become a fan elsewhere we don't need you or your kids!
 
Not interested in being pulled into a squabble between posters, but I watched this play live from directly to the side and the receiver did bobble the ball several times and didn't control it in bounds. I agree with PR on this one.

I just watched the replay on KPAX sports and it appears to be a catch from the back side of the player because you can't see ball control. The back judge was directly in front of it, but didn't see if the receiver's foot was in bounds. He hesitated and looked to the side judge. The side judge didn't see it so the back judge called it good without further conference. It appeared to be a horrible call.

I assume all the people calling it a catch watched the TV feed from an angle behind the receiver where they could not see the bobbling.
 
go96griz said:
Not interested in being pulled into a squabble between posters, but I watched this play live from directly to the side and the receiver did bobble the ball several times and didn't control it in bounds. I agree with PR on this one.

I just watched the replay on KPAX sports and it appears to be a catch from the back side of the player because you can't see ball control. The back judge was directly in front of it, but didn't see if the receiver's foot was in bounds. He hesitated and looked to the side judge. The side judge didn't see it so the back judge called it good without further conference. It appeared to be a horrible call.

I assume all the people calling it a catch watched the TV feed from an angle behind the receiver where they could not see the bobbling.

Geeeeeeeezus. The kid caught the damn ball, the griz won the game. :roll:
Only a dipshit like PR would nit pick that shit. Don't dumb yourself down to his level.
 
IroneagleXP said:
go96griz said:
Not interested in being pulled into a squabble between posters, but I watched this play live from directly to the side and the receiver did bobble the ball several times and didn't control it in bounds. I agree with PR on this one.

I just watched the replay on KPAX sports and it appears to be a catch from the back side of the player because you can't see ball control. The back judge was directly in front of it, but didn't see if the receiver's foot was in bounds. He hesitated and looked to the side judge. The side judge didn't see it so the back judge called it good without further conference. It appeared to be a horrible call.

I assume all the people calling it a catch watched the TV feed from an angle behind the receiver where they could not see the bobbling.

Geeeeeeeezus. The kid caught the damn ball, the griz won the game. :roll:

Thanks, douche! For the record, it wasn't even really close to a catch in bounds.
 
go96griz said:
IroneagleXP said:
go96griz said:
Not interested in being pulled into a squabble between posters, but I watched this play live from directly to the side and the receiver did bobble the ball several times and didn't control it in bounds. I agree with PR on this one.

I just watched the replay on KPAX sports and it appears to be a catch from the back side of the player because you can't see ball control. The back judge was directly in front of it, but didn't see if the receiver's foot was in bounds. He hesitated and looked to the side judge. The side judge didn't see it so the back judge called it good without further conference. It appeared to be a horrible call.

I assume all the people calling it a catch watched the TV feed from an angle behind the receiver where they could not see the bobbling.

Geeeeeeeezus. The kid caught the damn ball, the griz won the game. :roll:

Thanks, douche! For the record, it wasn't even really close to a catch in bounds.
I hope you are actually retarded, otherwise you're just a huge f'ing dipshit. Take your griz douche glasses off, rewind the play, and try watching it NOT as a complete fuktard. Thankyou. Stop typing now. Dip shit.
 
go96griz said:
I assume all the people calling it a catch watched the TV feed from an angle behind the receiver where they could not see the bobbling.

Nope. I saw the bobble all the way. On tv. I don't know how anybody else could see anything different. It was pretty obvious. He was still trying to control the ball against his helmet as he stepped out. It didn't happen.
 
Looked like he bobbled it on Griz vision. Watched it on TV back at my folks house, the TV had a much better angle, caught, both feet, ball looks secure the whole way, touchdown.
 
Sorry, but it was questionable although I would have called it a TD on the field and after replay. I didn't see the "bobble." He kind of had a weird grasp on the ball and certainly hadn't tucked it in but it would be hard to argue that he didn't have control of the ball.
 
As much as I hate to admit it, after watching the replay on the watch big sky app, it looked like a pretty clear catch. Looked like a terrible call live, but seems like it was the right one.
 
BWahlberg said:
Looked like he bobbled it on Griz vision. Watched it on TV back at my folks house, the TV had a much better angle, caught, both feet, ball looks secure the whole way, touchdown.

Thanks for clearing that up. The replay in the stadium sure did look like he bobbled it. Delaney didn't look too pleased either on the sidelines after it (probably due to seeing that replay).

I forgot to record the game though so I couldn't check it when I got home. Glad to hear the refs got it right actually. Unlike the UC-Davis TD catch against the Cats last weak where they ruled it incomplete.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top