Duke 44 Indiana 41 OT

[newarkcatholicfan]

A great game brought to an end on what looked like a good 38 yard field goal being good, called no good by the zebra's.

 

On the replay I thought it was good, even after playing it back frame by frame.

[newarkcatholicfan]

Even Mark May thought the kick was good.

[mcpapa]

Looked good to this old set of eyeballs.

[mcpapa]

Am I correct in saying that it was not reviewable because the ball was above the goalpost?

 

I can see the reasoning - no telling if a ball that close would have hit the post if it was kicked a little lower. However, it looked good.

[newarkcatholicfan]

You are correct.

[OlDog75]

To me, it looked like the ball went directly over top of the upright but not between the posts. Heck, it was an entertaining game and it was so darn close; maybe less than inches; to being good I would have just called it good and had another OT possession for each.

[5 STAR]

IU had a chance to win at the end of regulation. The holder didn't spin the laces away from the kicker, and therefore kicked the laces. The kicker gave his holder an ear full after the kick was no good. It would have been a 52 to 54 yard field goal, but within the range of the kicker.

[Wireman]

[Wireman]

[oldrambler]

Looked good to me ..... Having said that I must admit that vs. IU in any sport would probably be the only time that I would ever want Duke to win a game in any sport. Outside of my personal favorite teams, my other favorite in any sport is whoever may be playing Indiana on that particular date.

[PurplePride92]

One angle it didn't look good. Another angle it did look good.

 

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I don't understand the point of replay if everything can't be reviewed. Football also needs to look at installing lasers on the goalposts or something like that. The fact that we can travel in space but can't distinguish between a made or a missed FG is embarrassing.

[PurplePride92]

Even Mark May thought the kick was good.

 

That settles it. The FG wasn't any good.

[nees1212]

[ATTACH]54013[/ATTACH]

 

This tells me nothing based on the angle of the camera.

From another camera, it looked like it went directly over the post, which is apparently what the referee saw.

[Bluegrasscard]

This tells me nothing based on the angle of the camera.

From another camera, it looked like it went directly over the post, which is apparently what the referee saw.

 

This is why officials get under each post. If the guy underneath the left post did not have a stiff neck he should have had the best angle of anyone or any camera.