Okay ... here are the closest .. hopefully this puts it to bed. (Credit to James Weber of NKY.com)

First (clear possession from my point of view)

 

 

Here is the 2nd .. where to me .. it looks like he is in the end zone. (But definitely looks like he is getting ready to lose the ball--but to me ... it has clearly crossed the plain).

 

These images to me, seem like it's good.

Zoom in on the football. You see his left hand facing his body, and against his chest. The only posestion he has is touching the ball with his right thumb. At midfield it would not have even been called a fumble. Great game both teems, now lets bring home some rings!

Beechwood kid drops the two point conversion,, ref syas he didn't, beechwood wins in double overtime.

 

 

Its wasn't like it was a close call kid just dropped the ball not even a hit on him

 

 

 

Okay I do not think I can trust your version. Not even a hit on him?????????????? Are you serious? Looks like a hit to me on the receiver.............................. Anyway whether he was in or not the title of "worst call in high school history" is not accurate. This looks like a very close bang bang play.......................The "worst call" should be way more obvious that it is the wrong call.

Yeah it's funny how people have looked at tape which they admit they had to rewind numerous times, we have still photos to sit and look at. We have people suggest to zoom in on the thumbs, we have some say the kid wasn't even hit, etc.....So imagine making this call in real time? As goaheadandjump stated it's a bang bang play. It's ludicrous to say "worst call in the history of high school football", or "the ref saw it but decided to make the wrong call anyway". Sour grapes and statements like the ones above discredit any discussion you may have. Good luck to all the teams in the playoffs!

As long as the ball crossed the plane of the goal line in possession of the receiver, it's a TD. It's clear that the player controlled the ball in the field of play and that he made a football move after he caught the ball. Once the ball crossed the goal line, the ball became dead by rule, TD.

As long as the ball crossed the plane of the goal line in possession of the receiver, it's a TD. It's clear that the player controlled the ball in the field of play and that he made a football move after he caught the ball. Once the ball crossed the goal line, the ball became dead by rule, TD.

 

Correct, but it isn't definitive whether he "had possession" as he crossed the line. This was a very tough call, NOBODY should dispute that. In Pic 2, the ball is out, so we know that he caught the ball,and the ball is out. We don't have the picture of when the ball came out, and never will, so we all have to live w/ it and move on.

Correct, but it isn't definitive whether he "had possession" as he crossed the line. This was a very tough call, NOBODY should dispute that. In Pic 2, the ball is out, so we know that he caught the ball,and the ball is out. We don't have the picture of when the ball came out, and never will, so we all have to live w/ it and move on.

 

No-the ball isn't "out" ... it is in the process of coming "out". If you expand the picture to the biggest size possible--he has two fingers from his right hand still on the ball.

 

However--that still makes your point pretty valid.

 

For people like me ... I feel like he is already across the plain ... so even if he was in the process of losing the ball ... he was already across the plain.

 

Mex--would you agree that this isn't as cut and dry as the original poster? Or--that it wasn't as bad a call as you first thought at the game?

That second picture is after the hit. It is possible vocke was further across the plane and in full control of the ball at that time. Based on the pictures you have to believe the ref right there made the correct call!

 

Play stands as called! PAT good!

 

No-the ball isn't "out" ... it is in the process of coming "out". If you expand the picture to the biggest size possible--he has two fingers from his right hand still on the ball.

 

However--that still makes your point pretty valid.

 

For people like me ... I feel like he is already across the plain ... so even if he was in the process of losing the ball ... he was already across the plain.

 

Mex--would you agree that this isn't as cut and dry as the original poster? Or--that it wasn't as bad a call as you first thought at the game?

 

Yep. Funny that you should say that it wasn't cut and dry. A wise man used that same term in post #18. It's one of those things that will remain a mystery like the Immaculate Reception. One side will hold to their view, and the other will hold to theirs. Either way, hopefully it is the catlyst for two state championship runs.

Once again I was six feet away and I still do not think he had control, the ball was moving as he was hit. Either way it was a very close call.

Once again I was six feet away and I still do not think he had control, the ball was moving as he was hit. Either way it was a very close call.

 

6 feet?

 

but still!

 

May have been a bad call, but there has to be a call in the playoffs where the game means more. It's hard to call it the worst call ever.

6 feet?

 

but still!

 

 

AKA 2 yards

so was he #15?