he bobbled the ball when he landed. there is another video out there that shows it pretty clearly. he didnt maintain possession when he landed. good call
Hmm... toe is clearly down. Now he did bobble it a little bit when he hit the ground. It was ruled a catch on the field, and that is not indisputable, so I say its a touch down. Thts not the only contreversal video replay in this game though.....
I've seen another angle where you can see him pull his leg up to steady the ball in his hands after he hit the ground. He didn't maintain control of the ball as he hit the ground, therefore, not a touchdown. That was probably what overturned the call.
Where the hell do they see his toe down? at 0:15 I see a shadow under his leg the WHOLE time. PLUS he bobbled it. And if you can't see that then I guess you can keep complaining about how the Hawkeyes got lucky and shouldn't have won. But in reality, Indiana still scored 3 points a play later and eventually lost by 17. So 4 points wouldn't have done much for them.
My God, there was actually another TD in this game that overturned on some BS. And I just love seeing all of these dumbass Iowa fans saying that this, which was CLEARLY a TD, is not a touchdown. Iowa got lucky all season.
@MrThatswhatshesaid12 im sorry iowa fans are probly having trouble hearing you we are flooded with oranges. but really on the four trophys we won last year do they say *got lucky
Theres another vid called "Indiana Iowa Reversed TD Call". It shows a view where the WR leaves a drag mark in the endzone grass with his foot as hes falling. If he leaves a drag mark before he lands out of bounds, then its obviously a TD
theres another vid called "Indiana Iowa Reversed TD Call". In that video, theres a view where you can see the WR leave a drag spot from his foot in the grass. If he leaves a drag spot. then he had to have touched his foot in the endzone. And lou is always right
Iowa was undefeated when this game was played. Indiana is a nobody in the Big Ten football scene. Even with indisputable evidence needed to overturn the call on the field the replay official took away an IU touchdown and left his mark on a game that Iowa was likely to win anyway. IU was screwed a number of times this season.
Listen here hawkmandude, before you just go on a swearing rampage because of the anger you have built up please just use whatever education you may have (all be it that might be very limited) and do some research. Look at more than one view and use some simple logic (I understand if this is asking too much of you). After you act like a rationale human being and come to realize the true facts I will forgive you for your complete and utter ignorance.
um yeah dude it definitely wasn't a touchdown. it was very close to being a touchdown, but his foot REALLY DIDN'T TOUCH THE GROUND. He just didn't drag his foot to get the touchdown so stop making excuses about it
pause at :15 uh oh guys i see a shadow for his whole leg, im sure were all smart enough to know thats not a touchdown. look at the shadow on the ground and you know its a touchdown.
you dumbass, dont you see the field turf coming up as his leg drags. plus, you can see the mark his leg made on the field after he dragged it. open your eyes
If you can't beat Indiana at home, how on earth did you expect to beat the SEC champ on a neutral field? You should be relieved you were beaten by a God awful Northwestern team.
lol.....ok antwaan, since iowa has done so terrible when they've played the SEC under Kirk Ferentz....3-1, and they got screwed totally in a seven point loss to florida in 06....theres about an 8 min vid under iowa vs. florida 2006....look it up and see for yourself....Iowa doesn't have trouble with the SEC like other big ten school apparently do....idk why
HAHAHAHAHAH i guess the fact iowa cheated a win out of indiana doesn't matter since you guys can't manipulate the game to give you a win against northwestern. now hopefully the bcs will give you a ranking you deserve
The toe never touched and it never slid the shadow shows that...but even if it did Iowa threw 5 Interceptions in the 3rd quarted while behind and still ends up winning so you can't blame this one play when indiana should have gotten 35 points off the interceptions and it's not like Hawks won buy 2 or 3 points
On a different angle you can see the receiver clearly bobbles the ball after hitting the ground. This is what the replay official said.
Nobody outside of Iowa wants the Hawks to win 'em all. The Big Ten would rather send PSu or tOSU to the Rose Bowl than Iowa, so there's no advantage to screwing Indiana.
Maybe if Indiana learned to play 60 minutes of football, they could have won.
how can you say his toe was never down? obviously you've never played a sport and you're speaking out of ignorance. the field is artificial turf and has tiny rubber beads inbeded in the turf. when he slides his two along the ground the beads clearly come up. explain to me how these beads are uprooted out of the turf if his foot never touched?
there are no visible rubber beads. and dont say they're only visible from another angle. Unless they are magic beads, they should be visible from any angle. No beads.
First of all, the replay official was right. Second of all, so what? We'll give Indiana the seven points. Is it Iowa's fault they missed the field goal? Is it Iowa's fault that Indiana turned the ball over in the fourth quarter? Is it Iowa's fault that Indiana's defense decided not to play the fourth quarter? Of course, it it makes Indiana feel better to think they were robbed instead of dealing with the fact that they blew another lead, we can let them have their illusions.
How can you say the replay official was right, there needs to be indisputable video evidence that there is no possible way his foot could have been down. Seeing as his foot slid along the turf and dislodged rubber footing there is no such video evidence. Second of all, you can't take a way a play from game an assume the rest of the game will be played exactly the same. There is an aspect of sports called momentum, I'm not saying Indiana would have won but its a blown call that killed momentum
I dont think his toe touched the fact that you can see the shadow consitently means his toe could have never touched and as far as "momentum" goes Ricky Stanzi must of had tons of "Momentum" after he threw 5 Picks in the 3rd quarter while behind...Thank god for the momentum he had during the fourth quarter when the very first time he touched the ball he threw a TD pass same with the second time he touched it in the fourth TD pass =)
if everyone wants to take their eyes off of the impossible job of telling if his foot was down or not, the ball slid down his chest...he didnt have it until right after he hit the ground...
I watched this game with 3 Iowa Hawkeyes fans, they all go to the university and they all love that they are no.4. Guess what? All 4 of us said that the call was rediculous. Indiana had the touchdown. Guaranteed. Don't know what that official was thinking..
Doesn't Indian get a field goal after this drive? Despite the fact that the replay official makes a good call, the TD is only worth 4 more points in this case. Iowa won by 18. The real complaining should be about Indiana's play in the 4th quarter.
That's my mistake then. Indiana's field goal came with 2:05 remaining in the 3rd. I think my overall point still remains valid. This is not a game that came down to one call. Iowa outscored Indiana 35-3 in the second half, and 28-0 in the 4th. I don't even mind if people think it was a bad call. It was very close, but it just wasn't detrimental when talking about winning vs. losing.
Ya know, I am a true black/gold Hawkeyes fan, and I can see the issue with the reversal. I mean hard to tell if foot down to reverse it. He did bobble the ball when he landed slightly, but still not grounds for reversal, BUT, it was reversed. I would not have reversed if I was replay ref. The issue is feel, is people blaming IOWA, dogging Iowa. It ISN'T Iowa's fault. They came out the 4th quarter and played hard and won. Give Indiana the extra 7 I say, still makes it 42 to 31.
Wow, a little butt hurt about the game there hoboman255? There is a shadow under his foot the entire way which means it wasn't ever touching, plus he bobbled the ball slightly before he had complete possession out of bounds. The refs in the booth saw it, and Iowa is 9-0.
Oh Oh want more evidence it was a TD look at 12 seconds pause it there. Look his toe is pointed down. Then 13 its still pointed down. OMFG what the fuck just happened at 14???????? O ya his fucking foot is sideways and parallel to the turf. Now why the fuck would a reciever turn his foot in the blink of an eye just parallel to the turf. Hmmmmmmmm I think it has something to do with his toe hitting the turf and turning the foot. Or maybe its the magical tree elves IDK which ones more logical!!!
ProproNJ look just before the guy freezes it. You can see his toe touch and bounce up again. I mean there is no way for a downward going foot to stay that low that long. It bounces up just watch closely and I agree you can see his foot drag in the other one much better.
Nobody has the angle that shows his toe dragging. It's a camera on the sideline at the goal line near where the players went out. There is a CLEAR line left on the field by his dragging toe. That particular replay was shown over and over and it amazingly wasn't noticed by the announcers. The guys in the replay booth had their blinders on, so they get a pass.
Hey Timmay1280 since you're obviously blind why dont you watch from 12-15 over and over again dumb fuck. his foot moves which means it hit the ground. Iowa will lose their next two games. You are just an ignorant prick you shouldn't talk about football ever again.
There is an obvious gap between his foot and the ground before his knee hit out of bounds. This is a no-brainer. Why is everyone thinking it was a touchdown? It clearly wasn't.
The Hawkeyes have proven time and time again that they can battle back from any deficit which is a good sign of a true championship contender! Everyone wants to doubt Iowa because they wish their team had half the heart that this Iowa team has.
For those of you that say "you can clearly see a shadow under the foot the whole time," I say, You can clearly see turf fly up after his foot touched the ground? If his foot touched down once, that's all it takes, regardless of if the foot remains in the air after the foot touched the turf.
wow... fine I'm in a generous mood GIVE EM THE FUCKING TOUCHDOWN. Iowa wins by 11. Oh i know, i know, the momentum... it "took the wind out of our sails" Really???? You looked like you had plenty of wind when IU got an INT the very next drive. Everyone is looking for an excuse to doubt the hawks....9-0 nuff said.
I agree with the replay official on that. I never see the toe touch the ground at all. I have looked at it both on this video and on the Slow Motion viedo posted by an Iowa fan.
I don't feel the toe is down and i'm not positive he maintained possession to the ground. It looks the ball may have been jostled a bit when he hit the ground and he regained possession.
The possession issue isn't enough to overturn the call, but I think the toe issue is.
Iowa fans are ridiculous. Indiana got robbed, and if you were an Indiana fan you would be complaining about this too. That win was the cheapest in the history of sports.
You can honestly say you think that foot was down? Are you retarded, or blind? I watched this game and I wanted Iowa to lose as my cousin is an o-lineman for Indiana. A big swing in this game came when Indiana finally started getting called for offensive holding in the fourth quarter... and they had been doing it ALL GAME! There isn't a conspiracy that is going to make Iowa win every game this year. Indiana pissed that one down there leg more than the officials. Blame them!
BOO to Lou Holtz who cheers for whoever Iowa is playing every week. I don't know if he was run out of the state by his boyfriend back in the day or what the problem is here? But he also claimed Iowa doesn't matter BUT be needs to realize that people looking for excuses to cry about losing or hoping Iowa loses are going to FEED off this. The Big Ten got the call correct... out of bounds AND a bobble that doesn't matter as he never caught the ball in bounds. BOO Lou! Poor Sport.
This is rediculous. First let me say I don't think it was a TD, but at the same time I don't think it should have been overturned. But this one event is in no way the only reason Indiana lost. After the following missed FG what happened? Stanzi INT. So any momentum was given right back. 6 turnovers (3 in deep Iowa territory) plus a 9 yard punt that gave them good field position. This call didn't make the game, Indiana not being able to take advantage of TOs did, get over it. Iowa 9-0!
I honestly dont see his toe hitting the ground when the freeze frame..I see his foot parrellel to the ground with a shadow under his foot every time I pause it....can anyone else see that? His toe isnt down!!! Am I blind or are the announcers stupid?
"the dude clearly bobbled the ball a bit when his back finally hit the ground"
Does not matter. he clearly had the ball controlled, both hands, with a toe in the end zone. It is a TD at that point, it does not matter that he bobbled he he hit the ground, that is after the play. I see nothing in this replay to overrule the call on the field.
Funny everyone whining about this call... even if it would have been ruled a touchdown Indiana still would have lost. Last time I checked a touchdown and point after does not add up to 18 points.
you don't know football.. it is called momentum. this was not the only momentum killer for IU. instead of 7 they get 3 on the board. and on Iowa's next possession on 3rd and long the ball clearly hit the ground but they got a first down and scored. Iowa is garage.. they would be better with someone else under center.
What the defenders of this call are doing is MISLEADING, and they know it. Look at 0:14, NOT 0:15. The toe is DOWN on 14, and conveniently, the poster doesn't show you the other [lateral endzone] angle where grass/dirt is CLEARLY coming up from the ground. This call was obviously a touchdown. Don't talk to me about shadows, a shadow doesn't bring up ground, and you are too afraid to show the other angle which clearly demonstrates his toe dragging ground. Indiana was jobbed in this game. Period.
Anyone at Kinnick saw the replay from a different perspective than that. It's not like after watching it, 70k fans thought that by booing they'd get the call overturned. Even in this video (despite Lou Holthz spot-on commentary, as usual), you cannot clearly see a toe on the ground until his leg is clearly on the line. Give me a break conspiracy theorists...
Toe was down, after his knee was out of bounds. Clearly it wasn't down when they zoomed in--did you even look at the video? After they zoomed in his foot only got further from the ground and then his knee hit--that is what I'm seeing at least.
The toe never touched inbounds. It was parallel to the ground and you can see lots of space between his leg and his shadow. No touchdown! The commentators were WRONG!
If you go to 15 seconds and pause it in full screen you'll see all kinds of air under his toe which is sideways he never actually puts his toe down but leaves it sideways about three inches above the ground his knee hits first out of bounds right call. Close but right
if u look closely the ball is moving around right as the Indiana player hits the ground out of bounds and as a result he didn't maintain possession all the way through the catch. Therefore the ruling was correct despite an incredibly close play. Indiana didn't show up in the forth quarter, thats what lost them the ballgame, not this play.
I don't think there was enough evidence to overturn the call; but it was probably the right one by the replay official.
It just isn't clear to me that he has possession of the ball all the way down. In the freeze-frame you can see that as his tow touches the ground his hands are about to catch the ball, they grab it and as he is hitting the ground OOB he is still trying to get possession. You need to maintain it all the way down for these types of catches to be ruled complete. Hard to say here.
Rule states that as soon as you have possession and one foot is down in the endzone its a TD, now you can argue what is and at what point a catch is a catch frame by frame all you want. The point is there was NOT "indisputable evidence" to overturn the call.
One call/play can change the outcome of the game, at that point IU would be up 28-14, which would change the way what defensive playes are called and what type of offensive styles are used ect. Not saying this call would have, but it can..
The rule states that once you "have possession" AND one foot is down its a TD. I was disputing the first prong of that disjunction.
Even so, I said that there was not enough evidence to overturn the call. I was just commenting on what looked like the right call to me (even if it shouldn't have been overturned).
I believe that this is a VERY important point! It's pretty damn hard to tell whether or not the toe is down, but the dude clearly bobbled the ball a bit when his back finally hit the ground, thus he didn't have full possession of the ball until after he finished landing, and at that point he was clearly out of bounds.\
I'm amazed that the announcers didn't mention that in this clip, although I haven't watched a lot of commentary on the play and thus maybe its been discussed later.
that may be so but in the end that call by the refs did not decide the outcome of the game, the outcome was decided by indiana giving up 4 touchdowns in the 4th quarter,
People don't realize that this one play called back changed the whole outcome of the game. Sure they lost by 18 now but instead of putting this game out of reach they gave Iowa all of the momentum, and that's what carried them to their win. How many times have you seen just one play change the outcome of the whole game?
Explain to me how it gave Indiana all the momentum. This is at roughly the 6 minute mark of the 3rd quarter. After the play, Stanzi would go on to throw another interception, Indiana would score again to take a 10 point lead, and Iowa wouldn't score their next touchdown until the 13 minute mark of the 4th quarter. Roughly 9 minutes of football until Iowa would score.
ESPN guys are morons -- they freeze-frame it and highlight it to prove a point and say that his toe is down, but the picture they used as their own evidence proves them wrong. The booth got the call right. The Hoo Hoo Hoosiers can quit their damn complaining and F off. And stop melting down at the end of football games. That's why IU lost. Like the refs made Chappell fumble told Sash to go return it 84 yds for a TD. Like they caused DJK and McNutt to catch huge TD passes. Go Hawks
no... on an earlier and less controversial review where they upheld that the IU receiver was bobbling the ball as he caught a pass in the back of the endzone, they scored the next play. Of all the other calls that there could possibly be a question about, they either ended up costing IU nothing or the call went to IU
There's effing SPACE below is foot and the end zone...I don't see how this is so complicated. Regardless, The replay officials didn't help Indiana Implode like they do every week...They did that on their own.
I'm an Iowa fan... I will go as far to agree that this shouldn't have been overturned because I don't see how that is indisputable. That said, I think this video probably provides more evidence against this being a TD than for it (both the shadow under the foot and what looks to be a bobbled ball).
But why is this getting so much attention? It cost IU 7... they lost by 18.
you dont think it might of been a different game if Indiana went up another TD? I think it would of been who says iowa would got 3td in the 4qt. Im sure indiana would ran more if they was up by another td and Iowa might of never got the INT at the goal line.
First of all, the call was in 3rd quarter. The 4th was controversy free. Sure, you could argue it would have been an alternate reality where anything can happen, but to claim one call that may/may not have been wrong cost 3 TDs?
Keep in mind, 3 plays later, Stanzi was intercepted and IU had the ball on the Iowa 24. And after another IU score, Stanzi was intercepted again. So it's not like this call gave Iowa any sort of momentum.
I completely agree. Replay official should be fired for sure......was there INDISPUTABLE video evidence? Absolutely not....in fact, it was INDISPUTABLE that the foot was in and he wasn't juggling the ball.
I disagree, but it just goes to show how two people can see different things....i got nothing at stake in this anyway, I live in Michigan and am a Wolverines fan lol....wish I had something to challenge on their game saturday
Toe was down at the :14 and :15 mark then it came up (where the boxed highlight is).
That was a TD.
mrbillablehours 1 month ago
he bobbled the ball when he landed. there is another video out there that shows it pretty clearly. he didnt maintain possession when he landed. good call
butterflyer01 4 months ago
you can obviously see that there was atleast an inch of air under his toe there....
satchyproductions 1 year ago
Hmm... toe is clearly down. Now he did bobble it a little bit when he hit the ground. It was ruled a catch on the field, and that is not indisputable, so I say its a touch down. Thts not the only contreversal video replay in this game though.....
farc300 1 year ago
I've seen another angle where you can see him pull his leg up to steady the ball in his hands after he hit the ground. He didn't maintain control of the ball as he hit the ground, therefore, not a touchdown. That was probably what overturned the call.
flipflopchick101 1 year ago
Where the hell do they see his toe down? at 0:15 I see a shadow under his leg the WHOLE time. PLUS he bobbled it. And if you can't see that then I guess you can keep complaining about how the Hawkeyes got lucky and shouldn't have won. But in reality, Indiana still scored 3 points a play later and eventually lost by 17. So 4 points wouldn't have done much for them.
Gookin52 1 year ago
i hate iowa but that wasnt a touchdown
VikingsOwn18 1 year ago
theres a constant shadow the whole time under his foot pause at :16 you can see his shadow from his knee to his foot. never touched the ground.
HereComeTheHawkeyes 1 year ago 2
My God, there was actually another TD in this game that overturned on some BS. And I just love seeing all of these dumbass Iowa fans saying that this, which was CLEARLY a TD, is not a touchdown. Iowa got lucky all season.
MrThatswhatshesaid12 1 year ago
@MrThatswhatshesaid12 im sorry iowa fans are probly having trouble hearing you we are flooded with oranges. but really on the four trophys we won last year do they say *got lucky
HereComeTheHawkeyes 1 year ago
@MrThatswhatshesaid12 2 touchdowns called back. 38-42. indiana still loses.
killpeople20 1 year ago
TOTAL ABSOLUTE FUCKING BULLSHIT CALL
ballsacman 2 years ago
Theres another vid called "Indiana Iowa Reversed TD Call". It shows a view where the WR leaves a drag mark in the endzone grass with his foot as hes falling. If he leaves a drag mark before he lands out of bounds, then its obviously a TD
tpauliscool 2 years ago
theres another vid called "Indiana Iowa Reversed TD Call". In that video, theres a view where you can see the WR leave a drag spot from his foot in the grass. If he leaves a drag spot. then he had to have touched his foot in the endzone. And lou is always right
tpauliscool 2 years ago
Iowa was undefeated when this game was played. Indiana is a nobody in the Big Ten football scene. Even with indisputable evidence needed to overturn the call on the field the replay official took away an IU touchdown and left his mark on a game that Iowa was likely to win anyway. IU was screwed a number of times this season.
Garycubfan 2 years ago
Listen here hawkmandude, before you just go on a swearing rampage because of the anger you have built up please just use whatever education you may have (all be it that might be very limited) and do some research. Look at more than one view and use some simple logic (I understand if this is asking too much of you). After you act like a rationale human being and come to realize the true facts I will forgive you for your complete and utter ignorance.
jlaguna04 2 years ago
um yeah dude it definitely wasn't a touchdown. it was very close to being a touchdown, but his foot REALLY DIDN'T TOUCH THE GROUND. He just didn't drag his foot to get the touchdown so stop making excuses about it
HawkeyeNation1 2 years ago
pause at :15 uh oh guys i see a shadow for his whole leg, im sure were all smart enough to know thats not a touchdown. look at the shadow on the ground and you know its a touchdown.
HereComeTheHawkeyes 2 years ago
you dumbass, dont you see the field turf coming up as his leg drags. plus, you can see the mark his leg made on the field after he dragged it. open your eyes
giantsfan729 2 years ago
no you really cant, all you can see is the defenders shadow and no rubber flys up
HereComeTheHawkeyes 2 years ago
If you can't beat Indiana at home, how on earth did you expect to beat the SEC champ on a neutral field? You should be relieved you were beaten by a God awful Northwestern team.
antwaan11 2 years ago
lol.....ok antwaan, since iowa has done so terrible when they've played the SEC under Kirk Ferentz....3-1, and they got screwed totally in a seven point loss to florida in 06....theres about an 8 min vid under iowa vs. florida 2006....look it up and see for yourself....Iowa doesn't have trouble with the SEC like other big ten school apparently do....idk why
redrox15 2 years ago
@antwaan11 the only loss kirk ferentz has to an sec team was a game that the refs won for florida
HereComeTheHawkeyes 2 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAH i guess the fact iowa cheated a win out of indiana doesn't matter since you guys can't manipulate the game to give you a win against northwestern. now hopefully the bcs will give you a ranking you deserve
jlaguna04 2 years ago
The toe never touched and it never slid the shadow shows that...but even if it did Iowa threw 5 Interceptions in the 3rd quarted while behind and still ends up winning so you can't blame this one play when indiana should have gotten 35 points off the interceptions and it's not like Hawks won buy 2 or 3 points
stopitching 2 years ago
What's in Lou Holtz's mouth?
myfirstutubeaccount 2 years ago
From the angle on the sideline, you can see a mark on the turf from where his foot slides.
MrDecoy82 2 years ago
On a different angle you can see the receiver clearly bobbles the ball after hitting the ground. This is what the replay official said.
Nobody outside of Iowa wants the Hawks to win 'em all. The Big Ten would rather send PSu or tOSU to the Rose Bowl than Iowa, so there's no advantage to screwing Indiana.
Maybe if Indiana learned to play 60 minutes of football, they could have won.
iowahawk127 2 years ago
The Big Ten could care less which TWO teams play in the BCS. As long as TWO teams make it.
antwaan11 2 years ago
toe was never down
hockeypuk23 2 years ago 4
how can you say his toe was never down? obviously you've never played a sport and you're speaking out of ignorance. the field is artificial turf and has tiny rubber beads inbeded in the turf. when he slides his two along the ground the beads clearly come up. explain to me how these beads are uprooted out of the turf if his foot never touched?
jlaguna04 2 years ago
there are no visible rubber beads. and dont say they're only visible from another angle. Unless they are magic beads, they should be visible from any angle. No beads.
myfirstutubeaccount 2 years ago
freeze it at :15 you can see the shadow of his whole leg, then his knee hit down first. his foot never hit turf
HereComeTheHawkeyes 2 years ago
First of all, the replay official was right. Second of all, so what? We'll give Indiana the seven points. Is it Iowa's fault they missed the field goal? Is it Iowa's fault that Indiana turned the ball over in the fourth quarter? Is it Iowa's fault that Indiana's defense decided not to play the fourth quarter? Of course, it it makes Indiana feel better to think they were robbed instead of dealing with the fact that they blew another lead, we can let them have their illusions.
Gobbs23 2 years ago
How can you say the replay official was right, there needs to be indisputable video evidence that there is no possible way his foot could have been down. Seeing as his foot slid along the turf and dislodged rubber footing there is no such video evidence. Second of all, you can't take a way a play from game an assume the rest of the game will be played exactly the same. There is an aspect of sports called momentum, I'm not saying Indiana would have won but its a blown call that killed momentum
jlaguna04 2 years ago
I dont think his toe touched the fact that you can see the shadow consitently means his toe could have never touched and as far as "momentum" goes Ricky Stanzi must of had tons of "Momentum" after he threw 5 Picks in the 3rd quarter while behind...Thank god for the momentum he had during the fourth quarter when the very first time he touched the ball he threw a TD pass same with the second time he touched it in the fourth TD pass =)
stopitching 2 years ago
if everyone wants to take their eyes off of the impossible job of telling if his foot was down or not, the ball slid down his chest...he didnt have it until right after he hit the ground...
usm18 2 years ago
I watched this game with 3 Iowa Hawkeyes fans, they all go to the university and they all love that they are no.4. Guess what? All 4 of us said that the call was rediculous. Indiana had the touchdown. Guaranteed. Don't know what that official was thinking..
iraceforfood 2 years ago
Doesn't Indian get a field goal after this drive? Despite the fact that the replay official makes a good call, the TD is only worth 4 more points in this case. Iowa won by 18. The real complaining should be about Indiana's play in the 4th quarter.
tzi3hta 2 years ago
they missed the field goal.
tombrokaw3 2 years ago
That's my mistake then. Indiana's field goal came with 2:05 remaining in the 3rd. I think my overall point still remains valid. This is not a game that came down to one call. Iowa outscored Indiana 35-3 in the second half, and 28-0 in the 4th. I don't even mind if people think it was a bad call. It was very close, but it just wasn't detrimental when talking about winning vs. losing.
tzi3hta 2 years ago
New video evidence shoes Stanzi on the grassy knoll. The video has been sent to the Warren Commission.
myfirstutubeaccount 2 years ago
Ya know, I am a true black/gold Hawkeyes fan, and I can see the issue with the reversal. I mean hard to tell if foot down to reverse it. He did bobble the ball when he landed slightly, but still not grounds for reversal, BUT, it was reversed. I would not have reversed if I was replay ref. The issue is feel, is people blaming IOWA, dogging Iowa. It ISN'T Iowa's fault. They came out the 4th quarter and played hard and won. Give Indiana the extra 7 I say, still makes it 42 to 31.
TovChaver 2 years ago
Indiana beat Michigan too. Lynch was robbed at least twice this year.
GeneralUrsus 2 years ago
Comment removed
RVAspeculator 2 years ago
wow espn nice... get your eyes checked his foot doesn't touch the ground until he lands out of bounds
9-0 baby
11hawksfan 2 years ago
Wow, a little butt hurt about the game there hoboman255? There is a shadow under his foot the entire way which means it wasn't ever touching, plus he bobbled the ball slightly before he had complete possession out of bounds. The refs in the booth saw it, and Iowa is 9-0.
End of story
9-0 BITCH!!!!!
timmay1280 2 years ago
your clowning right the shadow is in front of the foot. You got the benefit of a bad call. everyone gets them at some time.
WFH951 2 years ago
Oh Oh want more evidence it was a TD look at 12 seconds pause it there. Look his toe is pointed down. Then 13 its still pointed down. OMFG what the fuck just happened at 14???????? O ya his fucking foot is sideways and parallel to the turf. Now why the fuck would a reciever turn his foot in the blink of an eye just parallel to the turf. Hmmmmmmmm I think it has something to do with his toe hitting the turf and turning the foot. Or maybe its the magical tree elves IDK which ones more logical!!!
hoboman255 2 years ago
ProproNJ look just before the guy freezes it. You can see his toe touch and bounce up again. I mean there is no way for a downward going foot to stay that low that long. It bounces up just watch closely and I agree you can see his foot drag in the other one much better.
hoboman255 2 years ago
Nobody has the angle that shows his toe dragging. It's a camera on the sideline at the goal line near where the players went out. There is a CLEAR line left on the field by his dragging toe. That particular replay was shown over and over and it amazingly wasn't noticed by the announcers. The guys in the replay booth had their blinders on, so they get a pass.
ProproNJ 2 years ago
Hey Timmay1280 since you're obviously blind why dont you watch from 12-15 over and over again dumb fuck. his foot moves which means it hit the ground. Iowa will lose their next two games. You are just an ignorant prick you shouldn't talk about football ever again.
hoboman255 2 years ago
There is an obvious gap between his foot and the ground before his knee hit out of bounds. This is a no-brainer. Why is everyone thinking it was a touchdown? It clearly wasn't.
The Hawkeyes have proven time and time again that they can battle back from any deficit which is a good sign of a true championship contender! Everyone wants to doubt Iowa because they wish their team had half the heart that this Iowa team has.
timmay1280 2 years ago
For those of you that say "you can clearly see a shadow under the foot the whole time," I say, You can clearly see turf fly up after his foot touched the ground? If his foot touched down once, that's all it takes, regardless of if the foot remains in the air after the foot touched the turf.
x97freeman 2 years ago
wow... fine I'm in a generous mood GIVE EM THE FUCKING TOUCHDOWN. Iowa wins by 11. Oh i know, i know, the momentum... it "took the wind out of our sails" Really???? You looked like you had plenty of wind when IU got an INT the very next drive. Everyone is looking for an excuse to doubt the hawks....9-0 nuff said.
jbswim07 2 years ago
I agree with the replay official on that. I never see the toe touch the ground at all. I have looked at it both on this video and on the Slow Motion viedo posted by an Iowa fan.
I don't feel the toe is down and i'm not positive he maintained possession to the ground. It looks the ball may have been jostled a bit when he hit the ground and he regained possession.
The possession issue isn't enough to overturn the call, but I think the toe issue is.
chapmaja 2 years ago
Dang at first glance i thought it was a TD, but they made a good call.
SOSA714 2 years ago 3
@SOSA714 how is that a good call?
coleyde3 1 year ago
Iowa fans are ridiculous. Indiana got robbed, and if you were an Indiana fan you would be complaining about this too. That win was the cheapest in the history of sports.
psunl781 2 years ago
You can honestly say you think that foot was down? Are you retarded, or blind? I watched this game and I wanted Iowa to lose as my cousin is an o-lineman for Indiana. A big swing in this game came when Indiana finally started getting called for offensive holding in the fourth quarter... and they had been doing it ALL GAME! There isn't a conspiracy that is going to make Iowa win every game this year. Indiana pissed that one down there leg more than the officials. Blame them!
PantherState 2 years ago
noone cares about your cousin playing for Indiana.
BonzOmega 2 years ago 2
the florida win over iowa in i think the outback bowl was the cheapest win in the history of sports
rblaze09 2 years ago
BOO to Lou Holtz who cheers for whoever Iowa is playing every week. I don't know if he was run out of the state by his boyfriend back in the day or what the problem is here? But he also claimed Iowa doesn't matter BUT be needs to realize that people looking for excuses to cry about losing or hoping Iowa loses are going to FEED off this. The Big Ten got the call correct... out of bounds AND a bobble that doesn't matter as he never caught the ball in bounds. BOO Lou! Poor Sport.
GregHammel 2 years ago
This is rediculous. First let me say I don't think it was a TD, but at the same time I don't think it should have been overturned. But this one event is in no way the only reason Indiana lost. After the following missed FG what happened? Stanzi INT. So any momentum was given right back. 6 turnovers (3 in deep Iowa territory) plus a 9 yard punt that gave them good field position. This call didn't make the game, Indiana not being able to take advantage of TOs did, get over it. Iowa 9-0!
boycej1 2 years ago
The toe was never down! Watch it again carefully. He never touched the ground inbounds. 9-0
jussisello 2 years ago
The shadow that is referred to is from the Iowa player.
hendersonjones 2 years ago
I honestly dont see his toe hitting the ground when the freeze frame..I see his foot parrellel to the ground with a shadow under his foot every time I pause it....can anyone else see that? His toe isnt down!!! Am I blind or are the announcers stupid?
abhat84 2 years ago 3
"the dude clearly bobbled the ball a bit when his back finally hit the ground"
Does not matter. he clearly had the ball controlled, both hands, with a toe in the end zone. It is a TD at that point, it does not matter that he bobbled he he hit the ground, that is after the play. I see nothing in this replay to overrule the call on the field.
bobestes24 2 years ago
Funny everyone whining about this call... even if it would have been ruled a touchdown Indiana still would have lost. Last time I checked a touchdown and point after does not add up to 18 points.
EricMason0321 2 years ago
you don't know football.. it is called momentum. this was not the only momentum killer for IU. instead of 7 they get 3 on the board. and on Iowa's next possession on 3rd and long the ball clearly hit the ground but they got a first down and scored. Iowa is garage.. they would be better with someone else under center.
jlhorns07 2 years ago
LOL! your logic shows your retardation
djax4mvp 2 years ago
What the defenders of this call are doing is MISLEADING, and they know it. Look at 0:14, NOT 0:15. The toe is DOWN on 14, and conveniently, the poster doesn't show you the other [lateral endzone] angle where grass/dirt is CLEARLY coming up from the ground. This call was obviously a touchdown. Don't talk to me about shadows, a shadow doesn't bring up ground, and you are too afraid to show the other angle which clearly demonstrates his toe dragging ground. Indiana was jobbed in this game. Period.
lemonsoupkid 2 years ago
It's a turf field, kid, no grass, no dirt. I've seen the sideline angle, it doesn't show crap.
randallchilds 2 years ago
Anyone at Kinnick saw the replay from a different perspective than that. It's not like after watching it, 70k fans thought that by booing they'd get the call overturned. Even in this video (despite Lou Holthz spot-on commentary, as usual), you cannot clearly see a toe on the ground until his leg is clearly on the line. Give me a break conspiracy theorists...
tgoldhammer 2 years ago
His foot was never less than an inch above the turf. You people are blind.
No catch.
zer0shark 2 years ago 2
Look at the shadow under his foot.
clubmeister2850 2 years ago 3
Toe was down, after his knee was out of bounds. Clearly it wasn't down when they zoomed in--did you even look at the video? After they zoomed in his foot only got further from the ground and then his knee hit--that is what I'm seeing at least.
millage15 2 years ago
Toe was down.
rzesty 2 years ago
The toe never touched inbounds. It was parallel to the ground and you can see lots of space between his leg and his shadow. No touchdown! The commentators were WRONG!
randallchilds 2 years ago
If you go to 15 seconds and pause it in full screen you'll see all kinds of air under his toe which is sideways he never actually puts his toe down but leaves it sideways about three inches above the ground his knee hits first out of bounds right call. Close but right
lincolnlogs24 2 years ago
if u look closely the ball is moving around right as the Indiana player hits the ground out of bounds and as a result he didn't maintain possession all the way through the catch. Therefore the ruling was correct despite an incredibly close play. Indiana didn't show up in the forth quarter, thats what lost them the ballgame, not this play.
mastergator724 2 years ago
I don't think there was enough evidence to overturn the call; but it was probably the right one by the replay official.
It just isn't clear to me that he has possession of the ball all the way down. In the freeze-frame you can see that as his tow touches the ground his hands are about to catch the ball, they grab it and as he is hitting the ground OOB he is still trying to get possession. You need to maintain it all the way down for these types of catches to be ruled complete. Hard to say here.
SXCfearNloathing 2 years ago
Rule states that as soon as you have possession and one foot is down in the endzone its a TD, now you can argue what is and at what point a catch is a catch frame by frame all you want. The point is there was NOT "indisputable evidence" to overturn the call.
One call/play can change the outcome of the game, at that point IU would be up 28-14, which would change the way what defensive playes are called and what type of offensive styles are used ect. Not saying this call would have, but it can..
MegaPyro101 2 years ago 2
You haven't disputed anything I said.
The rule states that once you "have possession" AND one foot is down its a TD. I was disputing the first prong of that disjunction.
Even so, I said that there was not enough evidence to overturn the call. I was just commenting on what looked like the right call to me (even if it shouldn't have been overturned).
SXCfearNloathing 2 years ago
I believe that this is a VERY important point! It's pretty damn hard to tell whether or not the toe is down, but the dude clearly bobbled the ball a bit when his back finally hit the ground, thus he didn't have full possession of the ball until after he finished landing, and at that point he was clearly out of bounds.\
I'm amazed that the announcers didn't mention that in this clip, although I haven't watched a lot of commentary on the play and thus maybe its been discussed later.
awindenberger 2 years ago
The word is spelled TOE, so sad that you aren't aware of that!
Breal701 2 years ago
Yes, a typo must indicate that I am unaware of it being a mistake.
SXCfearNloathing 2 years ago
Iowa has been "cashing in" on bad officiating all year. This is just another example.
urntwrthyZ 2 years ago
that may be so but in the end that call by the refs did not decide the outcome of the game, the outcome was decided by indiana giving up 4 touchdowns in the 4th quarter,
iriemike420 2 years ago
People don't realize that this one play called back changed the whole outcome of the game. Sure they lost by 18 now but instead of putting this game out of reach they gave Iowa all of the momentum, and that's what carried them to their win. How many times have you seen just one play change the outcome of the whole game?
ND3STRUCT1BLE 2 years ago
Explain to me how it gave Indiana all the momentum. This is at roughly the 6 minute mark of the 3rd quarter. After the play, Stanzi would go on to throw another interception, Indiana would score again to take a 10 point lead, and Iowa wouldn't score their next touchdown until the 13 minute mark of the 4th quarter. Roughly 9 minutes of football until Iowa would score.
roseofstone 2 years ago
looks like they did the freeze frame late. his toe had already bounced off the ground IMO
lambertface 2 years ago
you can clearly see the shadow of his foot. the media just HATES to see Iowa win in such perplexing ways. keep winning and they eventually shut up.
lakeshow499 2 years ago
ESPN guys are morons -- they freeze-frame it and highlight it to prove a point and say that his toe is down, but the picture they used as their own evidence proves them wrong. The booth got the call right. The Hoo Hoo Hoosiers can quit their damn complaining and F off. And stop melting down at the end of football games. That's why IU lost. Like the refs made Chappell fumble told Sash to go return it 84 yds for a TD. Like they caused DJK and McNutt to catch huge TD passes. Go Hawks
honprelude 2 years ago
Indiana lost by EIGHTEEN POINTS!! If anyone robbed the Hoosiers, it was their 4th quarter defense. This play was from the 3rd quarter.
roseofstone 2 years ago
Didn't Indiana score the very next play?
ottomaniac89 2 years ago
no... on an earlier and less controversial review where they upheld that the IU receiver was bobbling the ball as he caught a pass in the back of the endzone, they scored the next play. Of all the other calls that there could possibly be a question about, they either ended up costing IU nothing or the call went to IU
MauiHawk2 2 years ago
There's effing SPACE below is foot and the end zone...I don't see how this is so complicated. Regardless, The replay officials didn't help Indiana Implode like they do every week...They did that on their own.
MrMmc81 2 years ago
I'm an Iowa fan... I will go as far to agree that this shouldn't have been overturned because I don't see how that is indisputable. That said, I think this video probably provides more evidence against this being a TD than for it (both the shadow under the foot and what looks to be a bobbled ball).
But why is this getting so much attention? It cost IU 7... they lost by 18.
MauiHawk2 2 years ago
you dont think it might of been a different game if Indiana went up another TD? I think it would of been who says iowa would got 3td in the 4qt. Im sure indiana would ran more if they was up by another td and Iowa might of never got the INT at the goal line.
noffas 2 years ago
First of all, the call was in 3rd quarter. The 4th was controversy free. Sure, you could argue it would have been an alternate reality where anything can happen, but to claim one call that may/may not have been wrong cost 3 TDs?
Keep in mind, 3 plays later, Stanzi was intercepted and IU had the ball on the Iowa 24. And after another IU score, Stanzi was intercepted again. So it's not like this call gave Iowa any sort of momentum.
MauiHawk2 2 years ago
I'm seeing shadow under his leg and foot. Regardless, can't see if catch is secured here.
WeylanYutani 2 years ago
The Hoosiers were robbed.
ThaddeusRobe 2 years ago
I completely agree. Replay official should be fired for sure......was there INDISPUTABLE video evidence? Absolutely not....in fact, it was INDISPUTABLE that the foot was in and he wasn't juggling the ball.
meijerboy 2 years ago
Sorry dude, but that foot wasn't on the ground. I don't see how anybody can argue this was a catch. The right call was made.
PantherState 2 years ago
I disagree, but it just goes to show how two people can see different things....i got nothing at stake in this anyway, I live in Michigan and am a Wolverines fan lol....wish I had something to challenge on their game saturday
meijerboy 2 years ago