You have to read between the lines with Pereira. He got to the point where he explained that the ball should have been spotted where Faulk establishes control of the ball. He never uses the video to show where that is, even though the reverse angle clearly shows it. It is easy to combine the two shots and see Faulk has control just before contact when his left foot is on the 30 yard line (making the ball clearly on the other side of the 30). Pereira's only comment was "Wow, this is close". Translation: "Yikes, we spot that as a first down 99.99% of the time. Maybe we shouldn't look at this too closely."
Pereira effectively confirms what I've been saying all along. The side judge had the responsibility to spot the ball where Faulk established control...and he couldn't see when that happened. He saw the bobble, lost sight of the ball and saw the ball again (clearly in control) when Faulk landed. Since he couldn't see when clear control was established, he guessed. That is my problem with the whole situation. When officials start making calls without visual evidence, the league becomes Professional Wrestling. The officials have story lines in their head ("Wouldn't this be huge if the Colts made this comeback and fans got to continue following their undefeated season?") and their calls without visual evidence (guesses) will drift to supporting that conclusion.
Here is the way it should have went down. The side judge should have spotted his foot with forward progress beyond the 30 (where he lost sight of the ball) and the opposite side judge should have spotted as well if he got a view on the play. If the spots conflicted, the opposite side judge would win since he could see the ball. If the opposite side judge was blocked or out of position, then the original spot beyond the 30 would stick.
This usually isn't needed on forward progress spots since officials always award forward progress. So not only did this side judge make the spot up, he made it up in a way that is inconsistent with how the call is made by every other official in every other situation.
If the situation was completely reversed and the Colts got a first down to ice the game, I would have had absolutely no problem with the call. If the side judge had spotted Faulk's catch at or beyond the 30, I don't believe the Colts would have had much problem with it either (maybe a little grumbling about the bobble).
I'll just say that this side judge is lucky that Brady, Belichick and Kraft don't play these issues out in the media (don't know what they are doing with the league in private). I don't think the Colts would be as considerate if the situations were reversed.
