We Played 4qtrs Tonight

forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
9,100
Location
North Shore, Chicago
Disagree. First fumble was called a fumble on the field. Back judge came in from way out to call incomplete pass. Should have been left a fumble. Insufficient evidence to overrule the call on the field should have been GT Ball. No field goal. Shut out through 3 quarters.
 
forensicbuzz

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
9,100
Location
North Shore, Chicago
00Burdell said:
Sorry, but both overturns were solid.
Click to expand...
sorry, but the first one wasn't an overturn, it was a "ruling on the field stands." That means there wasn't sufficient video evidence to confirm or reverse the call on the field. The first two refs in called it a fumble and gave possession to GT. They went to commercial during the review and when they came back from commercial the umpire stated the ruling on the field was an incomplete pass and the play stands as called.

Not saying it was a catch or not, but the initial ruling was a fumble, and that's what should have stood. Personally, I thought he had the ball and made a football move. That's subjective, and I wouldn't argue it. But the initial call was GT ball after a fumble. The back judge came in an overruled even though he had no better angle than the other two. That's my point.
 

jayparr

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,441
Location
newnan
forensicbuzz said:
sorry, but the first one wasn't an overturn, it was a "ruling on the field stands." That means there wasn't sufficient video evidence to confirm or reverse the call on the field. The first two refs in called it a fumble and gave possession to GT. They went to commercial during the review and when they came back from commercial the umpire stated the ruling on the field was an incomplete pass and the play stands as called.

Not saying it was a catch or not, but the initial ruling was a fumble, and that's what should have stood. Personally, I thought he had the ball and made a football move. That's subjective, and I wouldn't argue it. But the initial call was GT ball after a fumble. The back judge came in an overruled even though he had no better angle than the other two. That's my point.
Click to expand...
His knee clearly hit the ground before the fumble!
 
Minawreck

Minawreck

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
624
forensicbuzz said:
that was #2. Not a question about that one at all. Talking about the one on the goal line when they ended up kicking the FG.
Click to expand...
I was wondering why CPJ was pissed and why they said the call stands or at least explained that watching at home. Thanks for the explanation. I do think it was the right call though the ball was rattling a little bit IMO, but the D stood tall and got a FG when it looked like the first team to settle would lose and they did.
 
Bruce Wayne

Bruce Wayne

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,870
Watched the game when I got home from it (can't sleep for the adrenaline) and it cracked me up to see a coach happy and slapping the helmet of the wide receiver who dropped the pass when they announced the reversal of the fumble call. I mean, he didn't catch the ball . . . and you congratulate him for it? Miami was doing that kind of thing all game, they were just screwing up enough to avoid a turnover. If Miami could have caught a couple of passes then our D would have actually forced more turnovers in the game. Sounds crazy but that was about what kept happening.
 
Top