Quote:
Originally Posted by HRBAKER
Can't comment, I didn't see them.
I'm just going on the fact that the in-house guru called exactly what was going to happen before the refs came back. And that is exactly what they did.
Didn't mean to be a smart ass.
|
Okay, I'm sorry Jeff. I'm a bit over-emotional at the moment, as I really prefer to see the game played on the field, not behind a review curtain.
Also, I have to admit that I heard the in-house guy say the same thing that you mentioned. I disagreed with him, but there is some legitimacy to the call because at least he called it prior to the review. The three steps Bryant took after the catch sealed it for me. I don't think the announcers or the official considered those steps.
Regarding the first call, which most definitely was botched, the in-house guy also called that a clear catch and said that the receiver clearly had his hands under the ball. I could easily see from the first replay (the same one the in-house guru saw) that the ball was on the ground, not within his hands. I outwardly vocalized that the in-house guy was a moron. They then showed a back angle and the two in-house guys said that "maybe" it wasn't a catch. The back-view actually showed the tip of the ball bounce on the ground. At that point my thinking was that both of the in-house guys were morons.
The review official then ruled it a catch. I can let the in-house guys off, since they aren't officials and have the right to be as stupid as anyone else watching the game, but the official is paid to know the rules. No excuses for him other than intoxicants or bribery.
So even if Bryant's catch could be called "questionable", the first call was not questionable at all.