Hawaii/USC - knee down or TD?

[NTXRef]

Couldn't find any discussion on the play right before half where Hawaii player was ruled down at 1, reviewed and upheld.   This was confounded by R, after review, holding arms out indicating how far he was from GL and Hawaii crowd thinking he signalled TD.  From what I saw, his knee never touched and he was on top of USC players when ball went across GL.   I'm sure TxMike has video, but what does the masses think on that play?

[JasonTX]

I'm not sure about his knee being down, but to me it appeared his forward progress was stopped well before he stuck the ball across. 

[texref]

It also appeared that his forearm was down prior.

[NTXRef]

Maybe forearm (although his elbow never got there making that a tough call), but you can't say foreword progress when the ball never stopped going forward until after it cross GL.

[TXMike]

It looked like a good call to me.  Forearm seemed to be down.  Not sure how the covering official would have seen that but apparently he did.

The R signal of how far was left for the TD was confusing.  Don't think I have ever seen anyone signal the distance up that high. Plus I don't think they had near that far to go for the TD.

[yt=425,350]-nkZDjxsGYk[/yt]

[JasonTX]

Maybe forearm (although his elbow never got there making that a tough call), but you can't say foreword progress when the ball never stopped going forward until after it cross GL.

I am thinking of a different game now that I see the video.  I must have been thinking of a high school game that was on TV where there was a pile of several players.

[NTXRef]

Of course, none of the replays show the angle down the GL that is needed to know for sure.   It is awful close.   So, if you have the forearm down, the ball is no more than a couple of inches short (if short at all) from GL.   Certainly, not the distance that they ended up with.

[JugglingReferee]

Why isn't this a TD?  No knee hit the ground.  No elbow hit the ground.  And A was on top of B all the while moving forward.  Sumstine's Fed videos says that we keep giving progress on this play.  Is the NCAA interp different?

This is a TD in Canada.  In a game without IR, I dunno what I rule.  I do know that we don't signal anything until we have a reason to.  From the calling official's view, I don't see how he has the runner down except mistakenly.

[TXMike]

Elbow does not need to be down if the forearm is.

[Sonofanump]

It appears to me that the video shows the forearm is down prior to the ball being extended, therefore the sidejudge made the correct call.

The rule states any part except foot or hand.

[JugglingReferee]

It appears to me that the video shows the forearm is down prior to the ball being extended, therefore the sidejudge made the correct call.

The rule states any part except foot or hand.

I agree.  Good call by the SJ.  The was "high" when showing how short the player was to the GL.  I would have been more at chest level if I used that mechanic.

[AlUpstateNY]

2 pretty simple questions should settle this discussion; was the camera shot from the right perspective along the goal line? (NO), was the wing official in perfect position to observe what happened and did he react instantly and decidely? (YES).

What's the problem?

[TXMike]

There is no "problem" Al.  It is just a play to highlight several things that we all need to be aware of, i.e. a player on top of another player is not necessarily "down", a player who's forearm hits the ground IS down, and how a R's signals can be easily misconstrued.  Maybe not a big deal on a HS field in front of 250 fans but can be significant on a college field in front of 50,000.

[Grant - AR]

a college field in front of 50,000.

Only 50,000?  Where is the other half of the crowd? 

[TXMike]

Wellllllllll.....since this game was in Honolulu I assume everyone else was at the beach  (attendance was only 42,000)