Michigan @ Iowa - last drive

[AIAFA171]

I do not have videos, but what about the last few downs of the game:
1) catch / no catch at the back of the end zone ?
2) DPI on the last play.

The incomplete call has been confirmed by video check, but it really seems that Wolverine player has control of the ball, knee in the end zone and maintains firm control through the process.

On the DPI ... as a part time deep official, I would have called it.
There is contact before ball arrives, Hawkey plays it through the back and also it seems a bit of "hook & turn".

[Wingman]

just saw a few videos of the two plays.
1) no catch..   close, but no
2) I agree this is DPI.

[golfingref]

The video is pretty conclusive. I understand that if he loses control of the ball on the way to the ground it is no catch. My question is, when is the catch completed? His knee clearly landed in the end zone. He maintained control all the way to the ground. His lands with his arms and torso out of bounds.

[mbyron]

I thought it was DPI when I saw the play run. In replay, it seemed to me that the WR drove through the CB, who was using inside technique. That might have made it seem to be playing through.

At least until I get another look, I think it was a good no call.

[mbyron]

The goal-line plays start at about 3:00.

http://youtu.be/K0DndD0UnG8

[Atlanta Blue]

1.  No catch.  No control through the ground.
2.  Sure looks like DPI.  Receiver tries to turn at the goal line, DB restricts progress.  But it's going to take a felony, not a misdemeanor, to get that call.

Yes, I understand it should be called the same way in the 2nd qtr as the 4th, same at the 50 or in the end zone.  But these are humans, and that doesn't always happen. 

[AIAFA171]

Atlanta, you are more that right.
But comparing the poise with which Michigan HC meet Iowa HC and walked off field with the reaction several Soccer "so colled managers" have here in Italy (and in Europe in general) is really interesting.

On that play I believe that a DPI would have been supported.

Ciao

[Curious]

1.  No catch.  No control through the ground.
2.  Sure looks like DPI.  Receiver tries to turn at the goal line, DB restricts progress.  But it's going to take a felony, not a misdemeanor, to get that call.

Yes, I understand it should be called the same way in the 2nd qtr as the 4th, same at the 50 or in the end zone.  But these are humans, and that doesn't always happen.

Re: The catch/no catch call: Admittedly I'm biased; but, again, help me understand this NCAA "process".  I respect you and THeisey, but as "golfingref" points out, where does the receiver NOT maintain "control through the ground"?  Unless the deep wing official or IR official thinks he trapped the ball against the ground, although his arms we clearly underneath the ball, I just don't see how this is no catch.  It also appeared as the B saw it the other way but was talked out of it....

Re; DPI: Sure looked like it to me!

Also, earlier in the game there was a clear (to me) DPI v an Iowa DB that was called - then reversed.  Can anybody 'splain this one to me?  Uncatchable....

[Sonofanump]

I could not tell if it was DPI in the last play, not saying it was not, the video I saw would not lend me an opinion. 

Being a deep wing, I think that his angle to view the contact might have not been good, he might have been straight lined.  Hate when that happens.

[TXMike]

Michigan is asking for explanation.  Perhaps someone should refer them here.


http://www.toledoblade.com/Michigan/2011/11/07/Hoke-seeks-explanation-of-call-that-stripped-UM-of-touchdown-against-Iowa.html