Desean Jackson Non-TD Question...Mike Pierera explains rule Post #30

[TellerMorrow34]

Are you sure about that Jobberone?

What else could happen after a TD?

Actually it is my understanding, as it was explained on shows last night and Talking Cowboys today (Mick said he talked to someone to do with the officials, or used to be) and the ruling is that the moment an official signals TD that is the same as blowing the whistle, thus making the ball dead.

That's why it was called a dead ball deal cause a ref had already signaled TD.

 

[zeromaster]

AJones did what he was supposed to. How many times have you yelled at the TV because a player didn't pay attention to a ref blowing a play dead (right or wrong) and kept running? At least he was going to the ball until he saw the ref's signal. I suppose he could have at least picked the ball up, but what's done is done.

 

[Hostile]

I just wanted to know why this was not considered a fumble. Was it becase non of the players for Dallas picked the ball up or would it not have mattered if they did?

It was ruled a fumble on review, but none of our players recovered it. Dead ball. Eagles maintain possession. If even one of our guys had picked it up, it would have been our ball.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

The play is live until the whiste blows. Just signaling a TD would not stop play.

That makes no sense. If the ref rules a TD. The play is over (even if he is wrong). Nothing comes after a called TD, but an extra point (or conversion).

 

[TellerMorrow34]

It was ruled a fumble on review, but none of our players recovered it. Dead ball. Eagles maintain possession. If even one of our guys had picked it up, it would have been our ball.

Actually Hoss that is not how they explained it last night (in some post games) or on Talking Cowboys today. They explained it, as it was explained to them, that even if we'd recovered and scored a TD on it that it would have still be the Eagles ball at our 1 yard line because the referee signaled TD and that's the same as if someone had blown a whistle and blown it dead. (Just like in the Denver game)

 

[dest]

If even one of our guys had picked it up, it would have been our ball.

Nope.

COWBOYS COULDN’T HAVE RECOVERED THE BALL
Posted by Mike Florio on September 16, 2008, 11:26 a.m.
Appearing on Tuesday’s Dan Patrick Show, NFL director of officiating Mike Pereira explained that the Dallas Cowboys could not have recovered the loose ball that receiver DeSean Jackson discarded as he was on the doorstep of the end zone during Monday night’s game.

The outcome, then, is the same as it was on Sunday between the Chargers and the Broncos. The ball was dead when it hit the ground.

The key is that, in Jackson’s case, the ruling is that he was throwing a backward pass. By rule, the review of the touchdown call resulted in the ball being down where it landed.

The point here, then, is that the officials screwed up as badly as Jackson. None of them noticed that Jackson had dropped the ball before he was in the end zone.

Moving forward, the question is whether the rule will change. Pereira explained that, when the down-by-contact rule was changed to permit efforts to recover a loose ball after the whistle, the owners considered applying the same rule to the Hochuli situation, where a fumble was ruled an incomplete pass. Pereira said that, because the ball will bounce more freely in such situations, a decision was made not to allow the action to continue after the whistle.

That’s fine, but unless and until the officials are trained to err on the side of not blowing the whistle, fairness requires a procedure that allows teams who have forced turnover to enjoy the benefit of their efforts.

 

[jobberone]

Are you sure about that Jobberone?

What else could happen after a TD?

Ok. Once the ball leaves the field of play and the endzone is not the field of play, the ball is dead.

On that play the ball is still live and stays live and in the possession of the last team to have possession or the Eagles. The whistle doesn't really stop the play in theory. The whistle is supposed to be the result of something that does stop play like a knee on the ground. But it effectively ends the play unless something happens to change possession. I know that sounds like double speak but that's the way it is.

I don't know when the whistle blew. If it blew when the official thought the ball went into the endzone which is supposed to happen then the ball is effectively dead and in the possession of the last team to have it. If it didn't blow and Dallas recovered the ball before touched by a non player then it would have been Dallas' ball. If the official picked the ball up then the play is dead and the ball still in the possession of Philly.

Hope that helps.

 

[Nightstalker]

All I know is that it was funny as hell to watch that happen. His early realease of the ball in High School was pretty funny too.

 

[magic-sword]

The play is live until the whiste blows. Just signaling a TD would not stop play.

Dead ball once the TD is signaled - Pac mentioned that he knew it was a fumble but the ref blew the chance when he signaled TD. Official messed up just like an inadvertent whistle.

 

[WoodysGirl]

COWBOYS COULDN’T HAVE RECOVERED THE BALL
Posted by Mike Florio on September 16, 2008, 11:26 a.m.

Appearing on Tuesday’s Dan Patrick Show, NFL director of officiating Mike Pereira explained that the Dallas Cowboys could not have recovered the loose ball that receiver DeSean Jackson discarded as he was on the doorstep of the end zone during Monday night’s game.

The outcome, then, is the same as it was on Sunday between the Chargers and the Broncos. The ball was dead when it hit the ground.

The key is that, in Jackson’s case, the ruling is that he was throwing a backward pass. By rule, the review of the touchdown call resulted in the ball being down where it landed.

The point here, then, is that the officials screwed up as badly as Jackson. None of them noticed that Jackson had dropped the ball before he was in the end zone.

Moving forward, the question is whether the rule will change. Pereira explained that, when the down-by-contact rule was changed to permit efforts to recover a loose ball after the whistle, the owners considered applying the same rule to the Hochuli situation, where a fumble was ruled an incomplete pass. Pereira said that, because the ball will bounce more freely in such situations, a decision was made not to allow the action to continue after the whistle.

That’s fine, but unless and until the officials are trained to err on the side of not blowing the whistle, fairness requires a procedure that allows teams who have forced turnover to enjoy the benefit of their efforts.

 

[jobberone]

COWBOYS COULDN’T HAVE RECOVERED THE BALL
Posted by Mike Florio on September 16, 2008, 11:26 a.m.

Appearing on Tuesday’s Dan Patrick Show, NFL director of officiating Mike Pereira explained that the Dallas Cowboys could not have recovered the loose ball that receiver DeSean Jackson discarded as he was on the doorstep of the end zone during Monday night’s game.

The outcome, then, is the same as it was on Sunday between the Chargers and the Broncos. The ball was dead when it hit the ground.

The key is that, in Jackson’s case, the ruling is that he was throwing a backward pass. By rule, the review of the touchdown call resulted in the ball being down where it landed.

The point here, then, is that the officials screwed up as badly as Jackson. None of them noticed that Jackson had dropped the ball before he was in the end zone.

Moving forward, the question is whether the rule will change. Pereira explained that, when the down-by-contact rule was changed to permit efforts to recover a loose ball after the whistle, the owners considered applying the same rule to the Hochuli situation, where a fumble was ruled an incomplete pass. Pereira said that, because the ball will bounce more freely in such situations, a decision was made not to allow the action to continue after the whistle.

That’s fine, but unless and until the officials are trained to err on the side of not blowing the whistle, fairness requires a procedure that allows teams who have forced turnover to enjoy the benefit of their efforts.

Gobbley ****. A backwards pass is the same as saying he threw the ball to the ground. And didn't go to pick it up.

But it's really simple. The ball was live. No one picked it up until an official got it then its dead. It stays in the possession of the last team to have possession or the Eagles. I assume this means the official blew the whistle. After that no one can change possession.

So he's right but is trying to slip out of it with techspeak of a backwards pass. Of course it was a backwards pass or lateral or deliberate fumble.

The point is how to rectify the occasions when an early or inadventent whistle is clearly erroreous. They need to bring justice and correction with replay. Not excuses and certainly not techspeak.


Since when is g o o k a banished word??

 

[WoodysGirl]

Gobbley ****.


Since when is g o o k a banished word??

If I'm not mistaken, it's considered an offensive term towards Vietnamese.

 

[Real1st]

If I'm not mistaken, it's considered an offensive term towards Vietnamese.

correct

its offensive towards Koreans too

 

[TheCount]

Gobbley ****. A backwards pass is the same as saying he threw the ball to the ground. And didn't go to pick it up.

But it's really simple. The ball was live. No one picked it up until an official got it then its dead. It stays in the possession of the last team to have possession or the Eagles. I assume this means the official blew the whistle. After that no one can change possession.

So he's right but is trying to slip out of it with techspeak of a backwards pass. Of course it was a backwards pass or lateral or deliberate fumble.

The point is how to rectify the occasions when an early or inadventent whistle is clearly erroreous. They need to bring justice and correction with replay. Not excuses and certainly not techspeak.


Since when is g o o k a banished word??

Sounds to me like they are saying it WASN'T live, that it was an illegal pass for some moronic reason. So it would have been their ball anyway.

And the word is banned because it's a racial term.

 

[jobberone]

If I'm not mistaken, it's considered an offensive term towards Vietnamese.

It's also a word to describe BS. And that's how I meant it. I didn't even remember the derogative until called attn to.

I'm sorry. I didn't use it in that vernacular.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

When computers are officiating games THEN and ONLY THEN will they call the game correctly.


A sensor on the goal line that gets triggered when ball breaks the plane. The End zone lights up.

Last night it wouldnt have lit up and PacMan takes it back the other way.

Yeah Baby!!

 

[jobberone]

Sounds to me like they are saying it WASN'T live, that it was an illegal pass for some moronic reason. So it would have been their ball anyway.

And the word is banned because it's a racial term.

The point is the ball WAS live but was erroreously declared dead by the referees. I understand why they did what they did and the point is NOT they made a mistake.

The point is there is no legal way for them to correct the mistake. They'll need to address this but I don't see them changing it. It's not a common problem.

I'd much rather they call holding.

And again I apologize for any offense I may have caused. But goobly **** is a recognized term. Both words are supposed to be taken together.

 

[links18]

The ball was live or should have been live and yes, even if they signaled TD or the refs blew the whistle PAC or ROY still should have picked the ball up and ran with it. Are you telling they knew that was not reviewable? Even if they did, pick it up anyway! At least it draws attention to the controversy and there is always that chance of the refs making an on-the-field correction like they did on the PI call on TO in the end zone.

 

[Bungarian]

Why is a bacwards pass not a lateral?

 

[AdamJT13]

But it's really simple. The ball was live. No one picked it up until an official got it then its dead. It stays in the possession of the last team to have possession or the Eagles. I assume this means the official blew the whistle. After that no one can change possession.

So he's right but is trying to slip out of it with techspeak of a backwards pass. Of course it was a backwards pass or lateral or deliberate fumble.

The point is how to rectify the occasions when an early or inadventent whistle is clearly erroreous. They need to bring justice and correction with replay. Not excuses and certainly not techspeak.

His point was that once the whistle blows, you can't recover any fumble other than one when a runner is ruled down by contact. Jackson wasn't down by contact, so any fumble recovery after the whistle would not have counted.