There are multiple views at espn.com. They keep showing the deceptive view because that gives them something to talk about. There was another excellent example of the effect of camera angle in the AFC game. It sure looked like Edlemann touched the ball on the punt return. On one view, it appeared that he touched it with one or both thumbs. In another view, however, it was clear that he didn't touch it with the right thumb. With yet another view, it was clear that he didn't touch it with the left thumb. It was fortunate for the Patriots in that case that there were multiple camera angles. Otherwise, the play might have been let stand. I'm surprised that many Rams fans have conceded that the play in the NFC game should have been called pass interference. I beg to differ. It is clear from the side view that the defender made contact a split second before the ball arrives. The non-call is therefore consistent with the way such calls are made all the time in the NFL. There are many examples in which a defender made contact a split second before the ball arrived in Rams games this season in which pass interference wasn't called. Many of those plays were discussed by announcers in replays, and they agreed that they were good calls. In this case, the focus has been on a misleading camera angle, and the pundits -- as well as Sean Payton -- have made much ado about nothing.
