Anyone else remember this play from the Sugar Bowl?

[ken01fan]

Can someone please explain me the difference in this play and the one last night that went Auburns way??
YouTube - Arkansas touchdown taken away in 2011 Sugar Bowl

 

[RT3413]

I think the replay official extended the "hand" to the wrist. To me, this was a lot closer of a call than the Dyer run.

 

[Con]

I just commented on this on another thread. I just knew the play was going to be reversed last night.

 

[RTR91]

I would like to see the other side to see if his knee or arm touched. His wrist did come close to the ground on that run, but so did Dyer's. I think both plays were right the first time - runner was not down.

 

[RedStar]

By the letter of the law, the wrist is down, the hand is not. How there is a difference I have no idea.

The replays never showed his wrist/knee touching so the play stood.

What I don't understand is why one side of the hand is ok to touch the ground, while the other is not. The rule is odd & needs changing.

 

[bama_fan01]

By the letter of the law, the wrist is down, the hand is not. How there is a difference I have no idea.

What I don't understand is why one side of the hand is ok to touch the ground, while the other is not. The rule is odd & needs changing.

I interpret the difference as being the front vs the back of the hand, but I do agree that it should be changed. Leaves way too much interpretation in the hands of the officials. In the BCSNC game, the whistle never blew, so dyer was allowed to keep running. Had the whistle blown, it wouldn't have made a difference. He would have been down at the spot.

 

[day-day]

I'm fairly certian that Dyer's wrist touched and then he rolled his hand to the ground; I'm absolutely certain that the back of the wrist on the hand/arm that the Arkansas player was using to carry the ball touched the ground. I can understand why the rulings went the way they did.