Heavy-Jumbo Posted January 19, 2002 Share Posted January 19, 2002 That call will go down in the books as one of the worst calls in playoff history!<br /><br />The call on the field was correct! How then does the instant replay guy then decide that Brady was attempting to throw when he was clearly and from every angle, bringing the ball down after PUMP-FAKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br /><br />This kind of behavior sickens me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonjeff Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 Not according to the NFL ruling. If the QB's arm goes forward its not a fumble unless the QB completely tucks the ball back against his body, which Brady never did. It's an incomplete pass. The ref called it just like the rule states. If anything the rule needs changed this offseason, which it probably will be due to all the whinning the Raiders and Al Davis will do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 I agree with jonjeff. It changed the game, but it was the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 Im with the Zebras on this one... Sux for the raider fans, but it sure did make it alot more fun for us football fans who have no emotional investment in either team <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <br /><br />Pats have a solid chance of beating either the Steelers or the Ravens.... should be a fun AFC Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangman55 Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 Yea....That will be the first vote (The Ice Cream Man with The Grandma Chain around his glasses) will have made in like 5 years..<br /><br />I don`t think you will hear the normal I abstain vote from this one..<br /> <br /> [ January 20, 2002: Message edited by: Hangman55 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 I had no leanings toward either of the teams, but I must say I didn't like the call. <br /><br />Brady was in the process of tucking the ball away when Woodson hit him. His arm was no longer moving forward but in fact had stopped or was beginning to move back toward his body. It was close, but I don't see how there was enough to overrule the call on the field.<br /><br />Made for an interesting finish, though.<br /><br />I'll bet it was a miserable drive to the hotel for the Raiders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 I don't know, the one replay seemed to show the ball in both hands when he was hit. It cetainly looked to me like he had pulled it down all the way. Heck we've seen Banks run holding the ball less securely than Brady was holding the ball. If nothing else, it was too close to overturn a call on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 This statement pulled right out of the NFL rulebook makes it clear :<br /><br />NFL Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2<br /><br />Note 2: When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if the player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble. <br /><br />Note 3: If the player loses possession of the ball while attempting to re**** his arm, it is a fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 That's the stuff, Mick. Maybe a crappy rule, but the officials got it right. I saw the same thing in another game recently whose details I don't recall. The announcers fussed and whined ignorantly, but the zebras got it right there too.<br /><br />Try explaining this to a Raiduh fan, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S Man Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 IMO, the Raiders had plenty of chances to put the game away earlier-- like convert a third down from 3 yards and run out the clock-- and didn't get the job done. To whine about an officials call (which was by the book correct) just adds another page to the book:<br /><br />"RAIDERS FANS SUCK!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogeyMan Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 I couldn't believe it!. After the "fumble", I figured the game was over and started watching a movie. I didn't find out the Pats had won until this morning, so I missed the overtime and everything <img border="0" title="" alt="[Mad]" src="mad.gif" /> . <br /><br />I was pulling for the Pats, but it still looked like a fumble to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 I guess that's one problem with only knowing a paraphrased version of a rule. I saw that play (as I was going to another channel, with the sound off), and I thought it was a clear fumble. (I thought they were ruling on whether it was Raiders ball, or had a whistle blown). <br /><br />But, if that's what the rule says, then there's no question, and it was a good call. <br /><br />(And, I like rules that are hard to (mis-)interpret. I think I'd leave it as it is. Much easier to see if the ball has touched the QB's chest, than it is to decide if it was still (barely) moving forward. I'll take a rule that's clear (either his knee touched, or it didn't) over some interpretation (was the pass catchable?))<br /><br />In fact, I'd like to see some clearer standards of what is or isn't "posession". One scene that irritates me is, after a fumble, digging through the pile to see who comes up with a ball. To me, if the replay shows a player grab the ball, and he brings the ball in till it touches his chest, and he's on the ground, then the play's over right there, and it doesn't matter who was able to wrestle the ball away after the pile formed. <br /><br />But that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 The refs probably opted to make a borderline call due to the stadium they were in and not evoke the wrath of drunk Foxboro fans. If they were in Oakland it would have been different.<br /><br />And oh yeah, did anybody see the part where Phil Simms got hit by a snowball? Now that was comedy. He sounded like he was about to wring the guy's throat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 20, 2002 Share Posted January 20, 2002 Bogus call and rule.<br /><br />And the refs out my other half in a foul mood good thing I was p!ssed(?) off like she was <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted January 21, 2002 Share Posted January 21, 2002 It was a good call on a bad rule.<br /><br />But even with replay and all the lawyers in the world deciding how to write the rules, some decisions will rely on the judgement of an official. Strike or ball, charging or blocking, posession or no-posession.<br /><br />.<br /><br />It's interesting. Football for some reason has the mentality that it is, or can become, a game of absolutes totally divorced from human judgement. I don't why that is. Perhaps because teams play so few games per year, and the playoffs are single elimination, thus one call either way can have more of an impact. But like basketball and baseball, we're always gonna have to live with calls we don't like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 21, 2002 Share Posted January 21, 2002 The rule is atrocious. What if Brady pumped, and brought the ball down and started to run. Say he didn't tuck the ball when he was running, like QBs often don't do, and instead was waving it around, taking five or six steps to decided if he wants to cross the line or find another receiver. The whole time he's ****ing the ball and trying to fake the defender, but, finally he gets drilled and fumbles. According to this nonsense it's not a fumble unless the ball is tucked. And we all KNOW it is a fumble.<br /><br />It's just a stupid rule <img border="0" title="" alt="[smile]" src="smile.gif" /> . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 21, 2002 Share Posted January 21, 2002 yeah, but it couldn't have happened to a nicer team, eh?<br /><br />The Raiders are the bunch that benefitted from the old Dave Casper fumblerooski and the Sugar Bear Hamilton play right?<br /><br />Well, turnabout is fair play. <img border="0" title="" alt="[big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.