OT: NFL Refs and replay

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 5:13 pm

Bears were just sodomized .............Tagliabue style.....

They NFL should think of getting refs who know the rules....My God!... that was horrific!

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 5:18 pm

I am sitting here in absolute shock that the Bears didn't win or at least take a 1 point lead with 1 minute and a half left. I am also extremely pissed off and want that ref to lose his job.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 5:24 pm

ScoopBrady wrote:I am sitting here in absolute shock that the Bears didn't win or at least take a 1 point lead with 1 minute and a half left. I am also extremely pissed off and want that ref to lose his job.

MAN....I know EXACTLY how you feel...If I was a Bear fan....I would have thrown my TV out the window...I was close as it was...

...

I cant stand garbage like that...and that guy doesnt deserve a job.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 9:49 pm

ScoopBrady wrote:I am sitting here in absolute shock that the Bears didn't win or at least take a 1 point lead with 1 minute and a half left. I am also extremely pissed off and want that ref to lose his job.

Just brutal. I could see how they ruled Berrian didn't have the catch in real time, but the replay clearly showed he had possession and both feet in. Swept by the freakin' Lions....

Insult to injury, I was at my in-laws and away from Sunday Ticket, so I couldn't watch the Colts-Chargers.

Boom · Post by **Boom** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 12:44 am

I absolutely despise instant reply. 9 plays out of 10 that I think should be replayed aren't allowed because the of the play being blown dead. Just pisses me off.

Also hate the fact that 9 fumbles out of 10 get challenged to see as to whether or not the knee was down a 1/10 of a second before the ball came loose.

It's friggin pointless.

I can't remember which game it was yesterday, but I receiver player clearly fumbled the ball and the defense recovered, but it wasn't reviewable because the ref whisteld the player down.

Just get rid of replay all together if you can't review the s*** that actually needs to be.

gabeschw · Post by **gabeschw** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 7:39 pm

Here's my perspective on this as a Lions fan:

I've seen the play a bunch of times now, and I'm about 90% sure it should have been called a good catch and a touchdown. However, you have to remember that for instant replay to overturn a call the replay has to clearly show the original call was incorrect. In this case, I think you could make the argument that the ball was still moving around in the receiver's hands enough when he hit the ground where he may not have had control of it at the point in time where both feet were still in bounds. Again, I think it was almost certainly a touchdown, but due to the way the rule is written, I'm not entirely sure the referee made the wrong decision.

In any case, the Bears are probably the winners in the end of this, because now they get a higher draft pick than the Lions, which is probably going to end up being more important in the long run than one more win in a losing season.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 11:18 pm

gabeschw wrote:Here's my perspective on this as a Lions fan:

I've seen the play a bunch of times now, and I'm about 90% sure it should have been called a good catch and a touchdown.

Then you're 10% blind, I'm not sure how anyone who saw that replay could even consider it not a good catch. Draft picks aside, this is about refs blowing calls and not being held accountable for their actions, it happens every week and it is sickening.

Did you know the initial ruling on the field was he was out of bounds, it had nothing to do with the ball moving. They only came up with that s*** after it was clear they blew the call and they needed something to cover their ass.

gabeschw · Post by **gabeschw** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 11:45 pm

Danimal wrote: Did you know the initial ruling on the field was he was out of bounds, it had nothing to do with the ball moving. They only came up with that s*** after it was clear they blew the call and they needed something to cover their ass.

The fact that the ball may have been moving is the reason he was called out of bounds. The ruling was that he never had full control of the ball until after he hit the ground, and at that point he was already out of bounds. And like I said, I don't really think that was the case, and I was suprised by the final decision, but I can see where you could make the argument that the evidence was not conclusive enough to reverse the call.

And calls on the field are reversed all the time, so I don't see how this is a case of covering anyone's ass.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 12:52 am

gabeschw wrote:The fact that the ball may have been moving is the reason he was called out of bounds. The ruling was that he never had full control of the ball until after he hit the ground, and at that point he was already out of bounds. And like I said, I don't really think that was the case, and I was suprised by the final decision, but I can see where you could make the argument that the evidence was not conclusive enough to reverse the call.

And calls on the field are reversed all the time, so I don't see how this is a case of covering anyone's ass.

That is incorrect. The officials initialy ruled his feet were out of bounds. In fact according to what I've read and heard the officials gave three seperate reasons why it was an incomplete. Only today, after it had received some national attention (because it was such a f***in bad call) did they use the wisdom that when he hit the ground the ball move, so he was out of bounds.

Yes calls are reversed all the time. This one wasn't and clearly should have been. Of course they are covering their ass on a call they missed which decided a game with a minute to play.

Personally as a Bears fan, I am happy they lost I would like a better draft pick. As a football fan I am disgusted that crews like this exist in the NFL, the guy should be suspended.

adam31 · Post by **adam31** » Tue Dec 28, 2004 12:58 am

Danimal wrote:
gabeschw wrote:The fact that the ball may have been moving is the reason he was called out of bounds. The ruling was that he never had full control of the ball until after he hit the ground, and at that point he was already out of bounds. And like I said, I don't really think that was the case, and I was suprised by the final decision, but I can see where you could make the argument that the evidence was not conclusive enough to reverse the call.

And calls on the field are reversed all the time, so I don't see how this is a case of covering anyone's ass.
That is incorrect. The officials initialy ruled his feet were out of bounds. In fact according to what I've read and heard the officials gave three seperate reasons why it was an incomplete. Only today, after it had received some national attention (because it was such a f***ing bad call) did they use the wisdom that when he hit the ground the ball move, so he was out of bounds.

Yes calls are reversed all the time. This one wasn't and clearly should have been. Of course they are covering their ass on a call they missed which decided a game with a minute to play.

Personally as a Bears fan, I am happy they lost I would like a better draft pick. As a football fan I am disgusted that crews like this exist in the NFL, the guy should be suspended.

Does the NFL and its officials have a vendetta against the Chicago Bears because of ownership or something? There has been a multitude of calls such as this against the Bears all year, in particular the GB game which they won, but also when they played MIN and Colts and Lions at Soldier Field. Terrible officiating this season against the Bears.