PDA

View Full Version : Interesting picture.



hawaiianvike21
11-16-2004, 12:38 AM
http://www.daht.com/images/_temp/blown2.jpg


It also mentioned the refs and the upstairs booth opted NOT to review the kickoff fumble as well. :roll:

VikingsTw
11-16-2004, 12:41 AM
I guess we will never really know who came out with it but sure in the hell know who had possesion of it before the pile up. Those kinds of plays should be reviewable.

hawaiianvike21
11-16-2004, 02:17 AM
Again whose decisions are those to be made in crucial moments like these? The refs! All they had to review the damn thing and it could/most likely be in our favor had they even tried to review it. But thats just how the refs at green bay are. :roll:

PhxFan
11-16-2004, 10:36 AM
http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/edoom/sad2.gif

snowinapril
11-16-2004, 10:39 AM
Anyone see the NO CALL FUMBLE in the Eagles/Cowboys game on MNF.

They didn't even see the fumble and spotted the ball where the returner landed on the ground. The ball was about 3 yds behind him.

SKOL
11-16-2004, 10:49 AM
I don't want to beat a dead horse, but this is my first time venting on the kickoff-fumble. Yes, D. Ross unquestionably recovered the fumble. While the clearest camera view was from behind when he secured the ball, he was clearly covering the ball, HE WAS NOT making additional efforts to secure it since he already had it. The dual possession call was week, and in my mind was just a cop-out so the refs didn't have to deal with the home crowd. All one of the Packers had to do was get his hands on the ball at the same time as Ross and the dual possession call would go the Packers way. The call sucked, and yes we were robbed... so there, I'm done venting. I feel better :lol:

XTAP59
11-16-2004, 11:59 AM
This just leads to the belief that the refs are biased, and human, and for whatever reason, personal, political, monetary, they control the outcome of certain games.

Afteral, the NFL is a business, and they want the best product on the field, and meaning best product, the teams with the best stories behind it.

Quick case in point is Peyton manning. He threw 5 TD passes in three games this season. ESPN said it was a record and he is on pace to break Marino's record of 48. Not a single mention that Culpepper has also thrown 5 TD passes in three games this season as well. But since Moss is out, the NFL jumps on Peyton bandwagon.

dan3ski
11-16-2004, 12:15 PM
I believe any call like that should be viewed automaticly by the booth as in the case of the TO TD against the Vikings earlier this year. Take the flag away from the coaches and do what is right. It will stop the stupid flag throwing and let the players not the refs decide the game!

SKOL
11-16-2004, 01:19 PM
One major problem I see with replays is that the Field Judge approaches his review with the biased opinion that the officials are right. There has to be "indisputable evidence" to overturn their call. That's bogus. Why do they have to use a biased approach when reviewing a play? It's too bad they just can't review the play, and make a call based on what they see, using all the angles, slow motion, or whatever other technology they're privy to. Who care's what call was made on the field by the officials.

This is something that the competition committee needs to seriously consider.

LosAngelis
11-16-2004, 07:12 PM
I guess I don't know. I know this is coming from a Packer fan who is happy they called it this way, but how many years have we heard announcers talking and talking about how everytime there's a fumble, there's "finger getting poked in the eyes", "the ball switches hands about five times", and "there stuff going on under that pile that we can't mention on the air".

While I agree the refs sucked, and may have screwed up that call NOT by giving the Packers the ball, but by not reviewing it, if Steele took the ball away from Ross a second before the ref unpiled them, that's kind of the way its "always been". Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to tick you guys off, but I have a feeling this is a call that isn't unusual in football, but moreso came at a really critical point in the game, and was compounded by not reviewing.

Now, let's consider this:

Steele maintains that he had possession all along. I hypothesize that Ross had initial possession before the scrum started, Steele took it away underneath, and when the ref saw him with the ball, Steele let go and Ross ran out of the pile with the ball Steele let go

Technically, this could be made the Vikings ball in review.

However, could you imagine the complaining by the Packer fans and team if they did award it? Steele said when he was unpiled that the ref said, "Let it go, 82, you've got it". So, he lets it go.

Then, a review says the Vikings have it? After the ref told him by number he had possession? When there is really only a millisecond of game footage showing Ross with possession before the scrum landed on him?

No matter the call, the NFL would be apologizing to someone for it. The refs should have called possession one way or another right away, before the players even started piling, and allowed replay to do its job. By waiting and unpiling, the review was taken out of the play and didn't do its job.

It reminds me of the Owens TD against you guys. In that case, the refs DID do the right thing in calling it a TD, and Tice didn't throw his flag to reverse the call and allow replay to do its job.

The refs screwed up by awarding the ball to the strongest man under the pile, and how is review going to change that?

Just my thoughts.

HarrisonB57
11-16-2004, 08:59 PM
that picture makes me depressed.

hovan
11-16-2004, 10:38 PM
"LosAngelis" wrote:

I guess I don't know.

However, could you imagine the complaining by the Packer fans and team if they did award it? Steele said when he was unpiled that the ref said, "Let it go, 82, you've got it". So, he lets it go.

Then, a review says the Vikings have it? After the ref told him by number he had possession? When there is really only a millisecond of game footage showing Ross with possession before the scrum landed on him?


The refs screwed up by awarding the ball to the strongest man under the pile, and how is review going to change that?

Just my thoughts.

Well Go watch the play again Los, you will see that Ross secured the balll and therefore he is down Viking ball.

hawaiianvike21
11-17-2004, 02:59 AM
Yep and he came out long before the ref even made the call whose ball it is.

snowinapril
11-17-2004, 09:44 AM
"SKOL" wrote:

One major problem I see with replays is that the Field Judge approaches his review with the biased opinion that the officials are right. There has to be "indisputable evidence" to overturn their call. That's bogus. Why do they have to use a biased approach when reviewing a play? It's too bad they just can't review the play, and make a call based on what they see, using all the angles, slow motion, or whatever other technology they're privy to. Who care's what call was made on the field by the officials.

This is something that the competition committee needs to seriously consider.

I think the problem is they can't get all the refs looking at the monitor. It is the head ref that is looking at the screen. He needs to rely onthe verbal skills of the ref that made the call in question. So the guy that made the call looking at the replay might say oh I that he had his hand under the ball right there I guess he didn't. But he has to explain quickly what he saw to the head ref then the head ref goes to look for the stuff that will overturn the call.

It is a flawed system and it always will.

SKOL
11-17-2004, 10:28 AM
That's exactly what I mean Snow. They pay too much attention to what the ref that made the call saw..., who cares what he saw. Whatever he called is what's being questioned. While reviewing the play they should take a completely unbiased approach and just make a call based on what is seen during the review.

ItalianStallion
11-17-2004, 11:31 AM
MY biggest complaint with this thing is not the ref's call, but the fact that is was not reviewed. Tice couldn't have reviewed because it was in the last 2 minutes, but they should have gone upstairs. It makes absolutely no sense that you cannot challenge possesion on a fumble when

1. The replay clearly shows possesion and
2. The method currently used is "hey lets wait till they unpile and it has changed hands 5 times".

The replay rule needs serious ammendments.

LosAngelis
11-17-2004, 06:32 PM
"hovan" wrote:


Well Go watch the play again Los, you will see that Ross secured the balll and therefore he is down Viking ball.

I wasn't taking a side on whether he had the ball or not. I was saying they should have called it right away instead of unpiling to determine possession.

And, had the Vikings been given possession, the Packers would have had a case against it, too. Point is, by waiting and unpiling, they set themselves up for controversy.

VKG4LFE
11-17-2004, 08:08 PM
I don't think there is a good way of working those "scrums' if you will. The refs are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I do think that Ross had the ball in possesion with a packer player on him, thus making him down by contact with possesion. But, when it comes to fumbles, uless the official blows his whistle right away when he sees a player land on the ball, then it is every man for himself and it turned out Ross wasn't as strong as the guy tugging on the ball with him!!