I know it doesn't really matter because the Redskins won, but was there ever any replay that made any sense out of the Darren Cox "interception" in the second quarter? That was a very important swing, because the Redskins were in a good position to pad their lead with 1st and 10 at the Jaguar 17. The announcers were all over it, saying that clearly the replay would reverse the INT as Cox's left foot clearly landed on the line when he came down. And then ... it wasn't. And the announcers later reported that "they were told" that the defender's left foot was on the ground when he caught the ball. From the replay that they had shown over and over again it looked like Cox's feet were (no joke) at least 12" off the ground when he caught the ball. There was no view that I saw where the call made sense at all. And yet the announcers dropped it like a hot potato, and there was nothing about it in the Post's coverage today. And yet giving up a good shot at 3 points and a possibility of 7 in a game that went to OT I would think was HUGE. And yet ... nothing.
I wasn't on the thread yesterday, so apologies if this was already beaten to death there. But am I crazy, missing something, or was that exactly the type of play that instant replay was supposed to solve? I'm not just a homer - I thought the sack at the end of regulation was called correctly. While you could only just see the ball between Carter and the other guy sacking Garrard, it was at least arguable that Garrard's hand was still holding the ball when his knee hit. Given the "tie goes to the call on the field" ethos, I was disappointed but thought they got it right. But for the life of me I can't figure out what the HELL the replay guy was looking at on the pick.
If anyone has a link to a view that makes sense of it, please post it here.