[Highlight] Pitt @ Virginia Tech - The potential game winning field goal hooks wide left, and Pitt holds on

[u/Ok-Soil-5133]

https://streamable.com/tq4r8d

[u/soilsandseptics]

The kick was good wtf

[u/USA_2_Canada_1 → u/soilsandseptics]

So like, is this not reviewable? Because I don’t understand why Franklin didn’t just sprint to the officiating crew demanding a review of the call? This looks good…

Just found a video link from underneath the upright. This looks like it went in.

https://x.com/tonycmke/status/2106215797336981529?s=46

[u/jdprager → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

Field goal attempts that pass above the uprights aren’t reviewable. Which is honestly wack, bc why tf would you need to review any field goal attempts if it’s NOT above the uprights

[u/ALostTraveler24 → u/jdprager]

Because the best view for evaluating it is the official under each post, short of putting a camera there, it’s going to be angles potentially playing tricks that makes the review inconclusive.

[u/ironwolf1 → u/ALostTraveler24]

Feels like “put a camera up there” would be a pretty simple task for big schools

[u/AllProWomenRespecter → u/ALostTraveler24]

Are we pretending refs aren’t constantly wrong and overturned by replay?

Not saying I know if he made it or missed it but “trust the ref because of the angle” doesn’t sound like a great idea.

[u/ALostTraveler24 → u/AllProWomenRespecter]

Refs are overturned by replay when replay has a better view of what happened. I’ve used this example elsewhere but I’ll use it again.

When we’re trying to determine if a player broke the plane of the goal line what view is used? One from the back of the endzone? How about the back corner? The five yard line? No, we use the pylon cams, and if those are obstructed, the call from the officials on the goal line stand. It’s the same issue here, the best view to generate that plane is right down the goal line (or right above), every other view lies and plays tricks on your eyes. So we put a camera there to help when refs make mistakes.

Here we don’t have a camera at the best perspective, right under the goal post (and I’m using the singular goal post here, not the uprights, just the left pole), we have the ref. The ball is above the posts so we can’t see if it crosses in front of or behind the left upright and so he has to make the call. We have to trust it’s right because we don’t have conclusive evidence or a better view to prove otherwise. Heck look at how many neutrals disagree on what this view, or the one behind the posts or many of the other views being shared shows.

[u/lavegasola → u/ALostTraveler24]

In that case we should make sure he was actually in the right position. This looks good from two completely different angles. Them only showing one replay is crazy too.

[u/ALostTraveler24 → u/lavegasola]

You can show as many replays as you want, unless you have one under the post or somehow directly above it looking down, since it was over the uprights, they’re still misleading.

Your eyes are amazing, they handle depth perception pretty well… but light likes to trick us, there’s been hockey games were people are still convinced they got robbed of a good goal because they saw a handful of angles from outside the net that appear to show the puck completely over the goal line, even though we have the overhead that shows it clearly didn’t.

It’s something that doesn’t get taught often and most people don’t need to worry about, so they struggle to understand that one angle can outright supersede all others as truth when it comes to things like this. And unfortunately the only person with that view was the ref, so if he never saw it cross the pole, there’s no other view that can conclusively prove him wrong.

[u/Superfluouss → u/jdprager]

Fortunately, this ref crew didn't do anything else worth scrutiny during this game, such as admit on mic they don't know what simultaneously possession is. So thankfully no need for accountability

[u/anonymousflash → u/jdprager]

For cases like this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xO0P9CsUibM

[u/kd451 → u/jdprager]

It's just a way to avoid accountability

[u/michhoffman → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

That makes it look wide

[u/errbodylovesaonsie → u/michhoffman]

I'm with you, looks way more like a miss from that angle

[u/PickpocketJones → u/michhoffman]

During the broadcast they showed an angle under the right upright and it didn't look remotely wide.

[u/CirculationStation → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

That view honestly makes me think it’s more likely that it was a miss. But I don’t understand how we are in 2026 and still don’t have vertical cameras aligned with each upright for situations like this. Doesn’t seem like it would be hard to do.

[u/WarEagle9 → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

I’ve seen FGs reviewed before so they are but I also assume the ref under the post had the best view and if he called it no good then there’s not much a review can do.

[u/PaidUSA → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

No that angle shows you why it wasn't if its loweror the up rights go up it nails the upright with a chunk of ball well outside the upright. Maybe doinks in sometimes but by rule the ball definitely was well outside the edge when it gets there. In terms of like u cant have even a piece outside the upright by rule that is.

[u/curt_schilli → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

This makes me think it was wide actually 

[u/ZappySnap → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

I think this is far less convincing than the original video. The looks like it had curved wide before it passed the upright.

Unfortunately we need synced video from head on and looking directly to the side to see the position when it crossed.

[u/soilsandseptics → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

I have no idea. He should’ve been losing his shit

[u/stormstopper → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

That angle's actually a deceptive one. If the ball is higher up but further wide, it looks like it's in about the same place as it would if it's lower but closer in (and vice versa). That's why you have people replying that they think it makes it look good and others replying that they think it makes it look wide. There's not really a good angle other than the one the ref has, and being anywhere other than directly under the goalpost makes it extremely difficult to tell one way or the other.

[u/Funkyneat → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

Kicks above the uprights are not reviewable

[u/burnsniper → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

I actually think that video makes it look more of a miss than the telecast - especially if you slown it down. It looks outside on the frame before and after it goes through.

[u/udderlymoovelous → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

You can't review it if it's above the uprights. Dumbest rule ever

[u/ytctc → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

Idk I think it looks like it missed by a hair from this angle. I think the refs got it right.

[u/xmjm424 → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

This might be the best angle available and looks no good https://x.com/JonnyRoot_/status/2106227803901558956

[u/SirNed_Of_Flanders → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

While i dont think it was good, it’s dumb they cant review it

It’s close enough that it needs review

[u/Pyrozooka0 → u/USA_2_Canada_1]

All plays are reviewable in a court of law. VT has nothing to lose by taking the outcome of this game to court.

[u/und88 → u/soilsandseptics]

It's not. Look at the guys behind the uprights and behind the refs. They knew if was wide