Kraft's comment about the Denver game....

[DaBruinz]

For crying out loud, it's right in front of your eyes in the frames. If you, for whatever reason, refuse to simply look at it, so be it.

By the way, I graduated from the University of Illinois, the 5th ranked engineering school in the country. And I graduated with honors in engineering and mathematics. If you want to make a point about it.

So you graduated from the University of Illinois? That and a lot of arse kissing still won't help you prove your point or get a job.

What is right in front of my eyes is someone who absolutely refuses to realize that he screwed up and forgot one of the basics of drawing and just can't admit it.

Also, I will take the word of Champ Bailey, whose eyes never left the ball, and Ben Watson, who was right there, over your math any day.

 

[CheerforTom]

For crying out loud, it's right in front of your eyes in the frames. If you, for whatever reason, refuse to simply look at it, so be it.

By the way, I graduated from the University of Illinois, the 5th ranked engineering school in the country. And I graduated with honors in engineering and mathematics. If you want to make a point about it.

I admire your conviction to prove your point and you've obviously thought this through (it doesn't hurt that you're obviously educated, either), but your problem is the use of the terms 'obvious', 'not even close'. It's simply ridiculous to apply those to this situation. You make compelling arguments, moreso than anybody else I've seen, but be honest man: there's nothing you've given us that conclusively proves the ball's location. It's EXTREMELY circumstantial, yes, but not conclusive.

The main problem from my (very tired) perspective is that the photos you offer are all from an angle that favours the idea that the ball was out of bounds. What I mean is that they're all taken from various angles of the same direction. Since we don't have an aerial shot as Bruin pointed out, any shot that faces the out of bounds area is going to make the ball look like it's out of bounds by nature. In the same way, if we had a bunch of shots that were taken from the opposite angles you give (so if they were looking out onto the field FROM the out of bounds area) they would all seem to indicate that the ball was over or beyond the pylon.

Even if your second and third photos are taken at the exact same time, it is still quite possible that the ball went into the end zone due to both photos being taken from the left side of the ball.

And to everyone telling us to stop talking about it, lighten up, it's the offseason. It's either this or talking about how much we love/hate Law or what color shirt BB wore today.

 

[DaBruinz]

You are absolutely correct. They have to be at the same moment in time.

And that is really simple to observe. There is only one point in the sequence when Bailey's left leg is perpendicular to the field - you will see that in both frames. You can corroborate it also by looking at Watson's legs - you will see that they are in the same position in both frames. Also the fact that the ball is in front of Bailey's face in both frames is a third verification.

As you can see, it is actually not even close. The referee called it out at the one yard line and it appears that was a pretty good spot.

The only problem is that Champ's body, in the second frame looks to be rotated more towards the right than in the 1st frame. And it also looks like Champ's head is rotated slightly to the right whereas, in the first frame, its staring straight at the ball.

BTW, the 2nd frame, thanks to your line, makes it nearly impossible to see where the ball is.

 

[CheerforTom]

And by the way, you don't have to have taken a course in causality to know that if Brady doesn't get pressured into throwing a pick (which is VERY uncharacteristic of him, but you need to give credit to Denver), then all this never happens. We deserverd to lose that game, bottom line.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

It's not so much whether we "deserved" to lose, to me, it's what becomes of teams (and/or fanbases) obsessed with what "should" have happened.

You guys are obviously getting off on the details of the interception return, which is fine. (And how much of a stud was Watson!? unreal.) But I still think what I started out saying on this topic - when you get down to "the offficials screwed us out of the Denver game...," etc., you just end up sounding like a Faiders/Dolts/[your perreniel loser team here] fan.

You want to win the game, taking into account for a worst case scenario in terms of officiating? Dominate the game.

I don't think the Pats played well, but that's beside the point. The point is they didn't play well enough to win. Add to that that Denver has played NE tight throughout the dynasty years, as well as before. A little less time solving the officiating, and a little more time solving Denver, might be an appropriate redirecting of all this mental might.

The Steelers, at present, are the best team in the National Football League. The Broncos, at present, are the team that (I would say) most consistently keeps up with the Pats, scheme for scheme, game for game. Well, the Steelers "hate us," as Tom Brady put it, basically because we always have their number. Time to get Denver's number, I would say.

I forget, do officials wear numbers?

PFnV

 

[Patjew]

What it is, is perpendicular to the edges of the picture presented. Anyone who knows ANYTHING about 3 dimensional geometry knows that, when looking at the field at an angle, the way the pictures do, your lines would also be at an angle.

That's exactly what I was trying to say the other day. The field is not flat in the pics, so a vertical line proves nothing.

 

[patpatriot]

Only in Boston

Orthagonal? 3-dimensional analytical geometry? Enginering degrees from top five schools? You *gotta* love this board!

 

[pats1]

See, I disagree with this. I don't think the Pats earned the loss.

1) Asante Samuel PI - Bogus call
2) False Start Non-Call on Denver FG.
3) Spearing Non-Call on Todd "The Juicer" Sauerbrun against Ellis Hobbs.
4) Andre Davis being mauled non-call -
5) Non-calls on at least 4 different occasions against the Broncos O-line.
6) Troy Brown Fumble - As was mentioned, should have been ruled an interference on the punting team.

You take away the 1st bad call and the entire Dynamic of the game changes.

Let's not forget about a spearing call against the Denver safety Brandon (man, I really sound like RamFan here, but that's OK. ) who gave Givens a shoulder and knee to Givens' chest and head while Givens was already in a defenseless position, being brought down by Bailey after a 21-yard completion. It's shown twice in that highlight video made by some Broncos fan:

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?t=52407