Did the ball hit Holmes' foot?

So! Did the ball hit Holmes’ foot or not?

Here are 2 screen shots.



Wasnt it Foot Ball????

Anyhow yes it hit him, and the give away was how Holmes was looking
over to the official as he was running back to get it.

Either way a very weak play by a savy veteran. Why take the chance
on a ball that was that close to your foot. Pick it up quickly and
take the call away from the official.

The ball hit his foot, but if they overturned the call based on video they made a mistake. The Official in the photograph should have made a single, decisive call immediately, but if the call was reversed based on his testimony at least the system worked.

Actually beaver they overturned it and made the
correct decision.

i was in the crowd, and i knew it hit his foot the second it happened...i couldnt figure out why there was such discussion going on, and refs lookin at replay, for what i thought was an obvious call.

I agree Esk . I just think it shouldn't have been overturned on video "evidence" , 'cause there was none ! (IMHO)
Thanks for the info Drummer. Why was the call overturned ? Any "word" or rumours goin' around ?

I would think that during the conference at least one ref was saying he saw the ball hit the foot. That testimony and the replay was enough for the overturning of the call

ya it hit him :wink: great actor :rockin: and great challenge :stuck_out_tongue:

kudos for Chip Cox for being the only guy in the park who knew the ball hit Holmes’ foot…is that guy a gamer or what!

I don't know how you guys can say it hit him. It was very close but the ball didn't redirection at all. The replay video did not help in seeing if it hit his foot or not. The call should not have been overturned.

ro1313 just posted 2 pics showing the ball hitting holmes' foot.

Because as I understand it, they have access to more angles for replay than just TV feed.

Since both benches are on North side and Holmes was facing East -- bear with me --- Matthews and Als would have an unobstructed view of Holmes' left foot and could see that it his foot.

The angle used in screenshot showed ball taking a weird hop as it went by Holmes foot. That tells me it hit the foot.

The angle used in screenshot showed ball taking a weird hop as it went by Holmes foot. That tells me it hit the foot.

BINGO!!!! We have a winner.

And based on that one camera angle (the one utilized in the screen shots), the viewer at home couldn't really tell because the ref was blocking the shot. The other camera angles couldn't give as clear a view of the play as that one camera angle did. So unless you had the "zoom and focus feature", like ro did, you really couldn't tell upon initial inspection.

i think that the ball did hit him, and when they showd the re-play like the picture up above, the ball did take a wierd bounce as soon as it appeared to have hit his foot..but that doesnt mean the call should have been oberturned as i dont think that evindence was clear enough..sure the ball bounced, but that may have been the ground to..i think holmes was dumb not to jumo on it, and get the 15 yard no yards if the ref wasnt goin to call it a fumble..idiot

Well like I mentioned before, the conference after the play tells me that at least 1 ref saw it hit the foot. That testimony and the video was probably enough to convince the ref making the decision

so the ball hit his foot, so what? was he trying to kick it?

Kanga, you should try to understand the issue before you add your two cents.

If the ball touched Holmes foot, then it is a fumble, which can be (and was) recovered by Montreal, which gives then possession in the Cats' territory.

If the ball bounced over Holmes foot, then the receiving team was still the only one able to recover the ball, hence the recover from Chip Cox would have given 15 more yards to the Cats (for no yards) and possession of the ball.

"Was he trying to kick it?"... really...

well, if it hit his foot, then one can assume he was going to quick kick it, and thus is why it's a fumble in the frist place.


KK you have no clue what you are talking about so dont!