re: Best picture of PP Interception

quote:

---

If someone touches the ball who is out of bounds, it can't be intercepted by an opposing player.

---

Quit making up rules. That rule, even if it exists, would not extend to an interception. That makes no sense. Penalizing the defensive team for an interception because the offensive player commits a penalty? That is beyond absurd.

quote:

---

ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds during a
down shall touch a legal forward pass in the field of play or end zones or while
airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R. 7-3-4-I-III).

---

Skimmed over that little word there, eh?

quote:

---

There's several pictures and videos. Which one shows Julio touching the ball out of bounds while PP has possession in bounds?

---

Doesn't matter. That means that if Jones caught the ball it would be ruled incomplete. Since PP intercepted, it should not have mattered.

Jones never touched it. Peterson was in front of him and reached forward and grabbed the ball of out midair and immediately secured it - the ball never moved out of his hands. Jones was in back of him and to the left.

Back and to the left.

Back and to the left.

The angle from the grassy knoll, er, stands clearly shows Peterson reaching out and securing the ball while Jones is falling away behind him . . .

Back and to the left.

Say it with me, "Back and to the left."

quote:

---

All that said, it's pretty clear he didn't touch it,

---

To you, it looks like he didn't. To me, I'm unsure, at best, and they're needs to be conclusive evidence to overturn.

quote:

---

not to mention that was not the call.

---

Did the official or the SEC ever say that wasn't the reason? I don't think so. It's assumed that that wasn't it, but it very well could have been. And even if it wasn't, the result stays the same if it's called that way as the way it was originally called.

quote:

---

s it ever illegal touching when a guy runs an out route and catches it while out of bounds? No, it's just an incompletion.

---

The ball was still in bounds and in play while Julio, who was out, tried to make a play on it... Catching the ball out of bounds and going out of bounds only to make a play on the ball that is still in play are two different animals... But Julio didn't touch the ball so it doesn't matter anyway.. If the refs saw Julio touch the ball, they damn sure would have seen Peterson intercept it in bounds...


Eligibility Lost by Going Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 4. No eligible offensive receiver who goes out of bounds during a
down shall touch a legal forward pass in the field of play or end zones or while
airborne until it has been touched by an opponent or official (A.R. 7-3-4-I-III).
[Exception: This does not apply to an eligible offensive player who attempts
to return inbounds immediately after going out of bounds due to contact by an
opponent (A.R. 7-3-4-IV)].

quote:

---

Quit making up rules. That rule, even if it exists, would not extend to an interception. That makes no sense. Penalizing the defensive team for an interception because the offensive player commits a penalty? That is beyond absurd.

---

quote:

---

Ball Out of Bounds
ARTICLE 3. a. A ball not in player possession, other than a kick that scores a field goal, is out of bounds when it touches the ground, a player, a game official or anything else that is on or outside a boundary line.

---

Julio is out of bounds when he touches the ball simultaneously with Peterson. Even before Peterson could tuck the ball, the ball was dead. All of the photos trying to show possession fro Peterson are after Julio momentum takes him further out of bounds. This is why the video is more conclusive than a still frame.

asswragler Jones never touched the ball.

quote:

---

thebearisdead I don't care who you are. That is one funny board name!

---