McNabb WAS short of the first down.

[theogt]

I hate to admit it, but I think McNabb did get the first. That picture doesnt show his forward progress. That pic is after he had slid down the pile.

Regardless, Philly got a terrible spot. The 3rd down measurement was closer than the 4th down measurement, meaning the refs actually soppted the ball BEHIND the 4th down LOS.

I won't shed any tears for them, made up for the blatant Samuel PI in the 1st half.

Very clearly, watching the slo-mo replay, the ball was at its furthest point forward when his elbow hits the ground.

 

[Hoofbite]

I believe this is false, as long as the refs conclude that the original call was incorrect you win the challenge, regardless of whether or not it was the outcome you were hoping for.

For instance, in the New York/San Diego, San Diego challenged that a New York receiver was down by contact hoping to get a fumbe recovery. Instead the refs ruled he never had possesion at all and it was incomplete, but SD still won the challenge and was not charged a TO.

I'm pretty sure its false.

If you watch official review this week they asked Periera about it and he says he would have moved the ball but wasn't sure it would have given them a first down.

Pretty much means that they are challenging the spot of the ball, not 1st down.

 

[bbgun]

Eh, what? He slid forward, if anything. On the ground there was the farthest he got.

true

http://img690.*************/img690/7246/26298008.jpg

 

[AlcoholicNinja]

I hate to admit it, but I think McNabb did get the first. That picture doesnt show his forward progress. That pic is after he had slid down the pile.

Regardless, Philly got a terrible spot. The 3rd down measurement was closer than the 4th down measurement, meaning the refs actually soppted the ball BEHIND the 4th down LOS.

I won't shed any tears for them, made up for the blatant Samuel PI in the 1st half.

*** are you talking about.

 

[iceberg]

I know most of us know that, but Philadelphia fans kept moaning about it.

http://img14.*************/img14/9375/ch51sunnov82009110332pm.jpg

http://img94.*************/img94/9375/ch51sunnov82009110332pm.jpg

Judging by the yellow marker, the first down was right outside of the top of the beak. McNabb was down before he got outside of top of the beak.

well thank god this debate is over.

 

[21Savage]

I'm pretty sure its false.

If you watch official review this week they asked Periera about it and he says he would have moved the ball but wasn't sure it would have given them a first down.

Pretty much means that they are challenging the spot of the ball, not 1st down.

No, the outcome has to change for you not to lose the challenge. It's already been on in an episode of official review a year or two ago. I can't remember exactly what call brought the question into play but it was something similar where I believe the spot was changed but since it didn't make a first down, the challenge was still lost.

That's why Collingsworth and Al Michael used the phrase win the battle, lose the war when referring to the Lesean Mccoy play earlier in the game. If that wasn't the rule, a smart coach would only have the intention on challenging the spot knowing that the refs would have to take a look at everything else. In that case, almost any challenge can result in a spot being moved a couple of inches even though it's irrespective of the play ramifications.

 

[chuffly]

In that case, almost any challenge can result in a spot being moved a couple of inches even though it's irrespective of the play ramifications.

This makes a lot of sense actually.

 

[theogt]

You challenge the first down, not the spot of the ball. Even if they move the spot, you lose the challenge and the time out if you don't get the first down.

 

[Hoofbite]

No, the outcome has to change for you not to lose the challenge. It's already been on in an episode of official review a year or two ago. I can't remember exactly what call brought the question into play but it was something similar where I believe the spot was changed but since it didn't make a first down, the challenge was still lost.

That's why Collingsworth and Al Michael used the phrase win the battle, lose the war when referring to the Lesean Mccoy play earlier in the game. If that wasn't the rule, a smart coach would only have the intention on challenging the spot knowing that the refs would have to take a look at everything else. In that case, almost any challenge can result in a spot being moved a couple of inches even though it's irrespective of the play ramifications.

They were talking about the fact that the ball should have been moved but it was going to be moved BACKWARDS.

Periera said this week that he would have moved the ball but wasn't sure it would have been a 1st down. With that being a possibility, its impossible that they challenge only the 1st down part of it.

And the outcome does change. The ball is moved.

 

[SultanOfSix]

The question of where he was on the ground is irrelevant if the refs ruled his forward progress stopped and blew the whistle, which was quite possible, and would make sense considering where the ball was placed.

 

[The30YardSlant]

No, the outcome has to change for you not to lose the challenge. It's already been on in an episode of official review a year or two ago. I can't remember exactly what call brought the question into play but it was something similar where I believe the spot was changed but since it didn't make a first down, the challenge was still lost.

That's why Collingsworth and Al Michael used the phrase win the battle, lose the war when referring to the Lesean Mccoy play earlier in the game. If that wasn't the rule, a smart coach would only have the intention on challenging the spot knowing that the refs would have to take a look at everything else. In that case, almost any challenge can result in a spot being moved a couple of inches even though it's irrespective of the play ramifications.

Philly challenged the spot of the ball, not whether or not it was a first down. I don't even think you can technically challenged whether it was a first down or not, you always have to challenged the spot of the ball. There was a game earlier this season (Washington/St. Louis I think) where a ball spot was challenged and they moved it back, instead of forward which is what Washington was hoping for when they challenged.

And, unless two sets of officials screwed up this past week, I know for a fact that they can change something about the call other than specifically what was challenged by the coach, because it happened in both the NY/SD game and the GB/TB game

 

[RainMan]

Very clearly, watching the slo-mo replay, the ball was at its furthest point forward when his elbow hits the ground.

Absolutely right. I've watched the video replay of that, and the picture posted in this thread indeed shows the farthest advancement of the football (not including any squirming McNabb did after his knee landed upon falling off the pile).

The ball never advanced past the white tip of the Eagle logo.

 

[Eskimo]

I think one thing that becomes obvious from seeing the pictures is how far behind the LOS that McNabb first met resistance which means our DL moved the whole line back about 2/3 of a yard. You got to give it to the interior DL on this play, especially Ratliff.

 

[bbgun]

I think one thing that becomes obvious from seeing the pictures is how far behind the LOS that McNabb first met resistance which means our DL moved the whole line back about 2/3 of a yard. You got to give it to the interior DL on this play, especially Ratliff.

Keith's hand on Donovan's *** made all the difference.

 

[Eskimo]

Keith's hand on Donovan's *** made all the difference.

On a serious note, Brookings staying with Donovan made his slide down the line take an angle. If he was not still resisting Donovan on the way down, he may have slid forward for the first down.

 

[21Savage]

They were talking about the fact that the ball should have been moved but it was going to be moved BACKWARDS.

Periera said this week that he would have moved the ball but wasn't sure it would have been a 1st down. With that being a possibility, its impossible that they challenge only the 1st down part of it.

And the outcome does change. The ball is moved.

This is taken off wikipedia and I'm aware of the fallibility of wikis so you can spare me that and stubbornly reject it. But I know for a fact that this has been corroborated by more official sources.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_replay_in_American_and_Canadian_football

If a play is overturned, the official is also responsible for making any related revisions to the game clock if applicable, especially in late, game-ending situation. For instance, if a player makes a reception and runs a long distance several seconds may run off the game clock. If the play is challenged and the catch overturned, the game clock would be reset to have stopped at the moment of incompletion (presumably adding time back to the clock).
Note that the spot of the ball may be challenged in certain cases. In such cases, a decision to respot football is not enough to win the challenge; Only when ball is respotted AND ruling on the field is reversed by remeasurement, the challenging team would not be charged their timeout.
Some unusual, and confusing sequences of events can occur during replay stoppages, and most have been address through rules clarifications. For instance, inside the two minute warning, if a team calls a timeout in the normal course of play, but the replay assistant calls for a challenge of that play, the initial timeout is ignored and restored in favor of the replay stoppage. Likewise, if a team commits a delay of game penalty (before the snap), the opposing team still has the opportunity to challenge, provided it is done before the ensuing snap.
The current replay system replaced a previous system used during from 1986 through 1992; procedure similar to that of college football was used. From prior to 1986, and from 1993-1998, there was no replay system utilized. While there is occasional controversy over the appropriateness of overturned calls, the system is generally accepted as an effective, and necessary way to ensure a fair game.

 

[links18]

nah. When they challenge, I don't think that they challenge that the spot was wrong. They challenge if it was a first down or not.

Doesn't it depend on what the coach challenged? If he said, "I challenge the spot of the ball." Then he should have won the challenge and kept his time out. If he said, "I challenge that the runner was stopped short of the line to gain." Then he loses the challenge and the time out. Oh hell, I don't know.

One thing I did get is that the offense always has the advantage when it comes to challenges as they control the snap of the ball for the next play.

 

[illhurtya]

If you challenge the spot of the ball and the officials move the ball in any direction you win the challenge. How can (if you win the challenge) they take the timeout from you? Makes no sense.

 

[links18]

Philly challenged the spot of the ball, not whether or not it was a first down. I don't even think you can technically challenged whether it was a first down or not, you always have to challenged the spot of the ball. There was a game earlier this season (Washington/St. Louis I think) where a ball spot was challenged and they moved it back, instead of forward which is what Washington was hoping for when they challenged.

And, unless two sets of officials screwed up this past week, I know for a fact that they can change something about the call other than specifically what was challenged by the coach, because it happened in both the NY/SD game and the GB/TB game

I have heard refs more than once announce that such and such team is challenging the ruling that the runner was down prior to the line to gain. Now, why a coach would make that challenge, rather than simply challenging the spot of the ball is not clear. I remember in our 2007 game vs. the Patriots, Wade had a very annoyed look on his face when BB challenged the spot of the ball when a first down was not in question and it was only the matter of a few yards in doubt.

 

[links18]

If you challenge the spot of the ball and the officials move the ball in any direction you win the challenge. How can (if you win the challenge) they take the timeout from you? Makes no sense.

Its like Gruden said a couple of weeks ago, you need to bring a lawyer with you to watch an NFL game these days.