Re: The INT that wasn't
 

It was clear it hit the ground on one angel they showed. It was the right call as much as I hate to admit it.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

It was the right call by the refs, great effort by Rocky.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[QUOTE=firstdown;380343]The point of the ball clearly hit the ground and he still did not have total control of the ball as he rolled over. I think the two ints that we missed cost us more.[/QUOTE]

Ditto. Thanks to HDTV, the video was very hard to dispute. Unfortunate for us, but good idea to challenge the call and overturn the on-field ruling. And yes, the two INT's we couldn't capitalize on could have buried the the Cowpokes. Somehow we just can't seem to reel these in even when they are practically thrown right to our LB's and DB's gut. Is it luck, or lack of athleticism?

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

it was the right call but the skins always get screwed in one way or another when they play the cowboys in dallas do'nt they?i hate those jamfs,i'd love to piss on the cowboy helment at midfield!

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

It was amazing how fast that replay showed up on the screen. I mean the ref didn't even blow his whistle and there were already 3 replays running. It wasn't a pick but at least let the play end first.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

It was a huge game changer but the minute I saw the replay I knew it would be over-ruled. His hands were not below the ball. Its too bad because I think had that play held-up the Skins would have won the game.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

A TD after the INT that was reversed and we would have been up 17-7. It's tough to think about what could have been. Sigh.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[quote=firstdown;380402]Missing a int shows how good a player is getting. LOL[/quote]

Boy did you miss the point. Did you see the read and reaction as he read Romo and dove in front of the receiver? Impressive.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

There are some people pointing to the fact that the ball wasn't secure when Rocky hit the ground. From my understanding, that is not reason alone to overturn the call. If the ball doesn't hit the ground, whether it moves or not is irrelevant. The ball can either touch the ground, but be secure -- in which case it's a pick. Or, it can avoid touching the ground and be insecure -- in which case it's also a pick.

Am I wrong?

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[quote=firstdown;380402]Missing a int shows how good a player is getting. LOL[/quote]

Dude made a great play on the ball and very nearly had the game changing play. He came off of his man, dove, and undercut the ball. Amazing play...well, very very good, almost amazing. Better be careful FD, if you bring more of this negativity I'm going to have to call for you to turn in your fan card...:)

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;380506]There are some people pointing to the fact that the ball wasn't secure when Rocky hit the ground. From my understanding, that is not reason alone to overturn the call. If the ball doesn't hit the ground, whether it moves or not is irrelevant. The ball can either touch the ground, but be secure -- in which case it's a pick. Or, it can avoid touching the ground and be insecure -- in which case it's also a pick.

Am I wrong?[/quote]

I think that's right. But in Rocky's case, it touched the ground and when he rolled over we saw it was insecure. So it was both in the same play, which means incomplete.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;380334]What did you guys think of the call to overturn the INT by McIntosh, which regardless was a great read and reaction by him.

I'm still not convinced there was indisputable visual evidence to overturn that call.[/QUOTE]

from what i saw it was a interception ..there wasn,t enough i thought to overturn the call but we are talking about dallas here too.yes i,m still a bit miffed over that one.

replays showed the ball didn,t touch the ground but i guess that blind hog we call an official saw his shadow yesterday in dallas.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[quote=Schneed10;380498]Boy did you miss the point. Did you see the read and reaction as he read Romo and dove in front of the receiver? Impressive.[/quote]
If you noticed I put the "LOL" after it as I was joking. I knew what you were saying.

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

[QUOTE=birdz4gibbs;380528]from what i saw it was a interception ..there wasn,t enough i thought to overturn the call but we are talking about dallas here too.yes i,m still a bit miffed over that one.

replays showed the ball didn,t touch the ground but i guess that blind hog we call an official saw his shadow yesterday in dallas.[/QUOTE]

I don't want to distract from the thread, or nitpick, but I am curious why you substitute commas for apostrophes. Is it habit? Did somebody swap the comma and apostrophe keys on your keyboard? Inquiring minds want to know. ;)

Re: The INT that wasn't
 

It looked like an interception to me. I did not see enough evidence in the video replay to overturn the call. But then again, I am biased.