Mike Stefanov

I tried to post this a few days ago but the mods would not allow it. We'll see if they post it this time. With the Zips out of the tournament now this all doesn't matter but I want to post it anyway. The picture proves nothing. From the angle that the picture is taken at I see nothing that indicates the ball is completely over the line. Anybody that says they see a space between the post and the ball should get an eye appointment. Remember, if even .01% of the ball is still on the line and the other 99.99% of the ball is over the line and in the goal, it is not a goal. There is no way that the AR, from his position could have been able to determine it either even though he is in a great position. If Brenes hadn't been in the position he is in I doubt that the AR still would have awarded the goal. The other thing is that is a static picture. Did the ball advance any further into the goal or is that the extent of it?

While that is a great picture, it doesn't prove that it was a goal. The near post from the angle of the picture is not allowing the viewer to see if the ENTIRE ball crossed the line. From my perspective it proves that it isn't a goal but nothing can be concluded from the picture. The referee probably couldn't tell either and had the near post on his ide and/or Brenes blocking his view. Remember: for a goal to count the entire ball must cross the line. If 99.9% of the ball has crossed the line but there is that .01% that still has the line underneath it, it's not a goal. Same rules as when a ball is out or not over a touch line. BEAT MARQUETTE!!!