Officiating??

[AbeBeta]

Then go look at the video tape. And look at when the ball is actually in his hands.

I've seen that replay about 10 times. It is a close play -- if he doesn't have it is by a millisecond or two. As another poster pointed out if you think it wasn't close then you must have a view of the play that is tainted by wanting to see something that isn't there.

 

[SultanOfSix]

I've seen that replay about 10 times. It is a close play -- if he doesn't have it is by a millisecond or two. As another poster pointed out if you think it wasn't close then you must have a view of the play that is tainted by wanting to see something that isn't there.

A millisecond or two? Ok, Mr. Laser detector.

He continues to bobble it with the left foot not down, and doesn't have the ball in both hands (a sure sign of posession which he didn't have) until he's out of bounds.

 

[speedkilz88]

Gamble's second foot was across the white(toes) that would be incomplete. I don't know about you guys but I have a 65" hdtv.

Hoover's fumble was definitely a fumble. You can't see exactly when it came out but there was one angle that showed when his knee hit and the ball was already falling out when it hit.

 

[Stautner]

A millisecond or two? Ok, Mr. Laser detector.

He continues to bobble it with the left foot not down, and doesn't have the ball in both hands (a sure sign of posession which he didn't have) until he's out of bounds.

First, 2 hands aren't required to have possession.

Second, no one besides you seems to have seen it as clear cut one way or the other.

I can respect that you think it was a bad call - I personally think it was as well. But to say it wasn't even close is a distortion of the truth.

 

[SultanOfSix]

First, 2 hands aren't required to have possession.

Second, no one besides you seems to have seen it as clear cut one way or the other.

I can respect that you think it was a bad call - I personally think it was as well. But to say it wasn't even close is a distortion of the truth.

Yeah, well maybe "close to being an interception" wasn't the right phrase.

However, take out that phrase, and then what do you have? Just the facts. Sure, two hands are required for posession, but bobbling while your in bounds, and then not having the ball in your hands until you are out of bounds tells me he didn't have posession.

 

[Stautner]

Yeah, well maybe "close to being an interception" wasn't the right phrase.

However, take out that phrase, and then what do you have? Just the facts. Sure, two hands are required for posession, but bobbling while your in bounds, and then not having the ball in your hands until you are out of bounds tells me he didn't have posession.

Well, if you are comfortable being in the lonely position of holding a view that almost no one else has, who am I to worry about it.

Frankly what I saw was that he did get possession and the only question was whether the 2nd foot landed completely in bounds or if some fraction of his toes landed on the sideline. I believe his 2nd foot did hit the sideline, but it was vvery tough to tell.

Whether people believe his 2nd foot hit the sideline or not (there are obviously different opinions on that), I think the overwhelming majority of people do agree he got possession at that point and that it was very close as to whether or not he stayed in bounds.

 

[AbeBeta]

Yeah, well maybe "close to being an interception" wasn't the right phrase.

Flip flopper.

 

[dbair1967]

Hoover's Fumble on the Kickoff could have been ruled that he had a kneedown. Also, Delhomme's Fumble looked just like Manning's fumble that was overturned.

and it wouldnt have been the right call

just like last weeks wasnt the right call

David

 

[SultanOfSix]

Well, if you are comfortable being in the lonely position of holding a view that almost no one else has, who am I to worry about it.

LOL. You and abersonc are hardly conclusive of everyone, but please keep speaking in generalities.

I was in the game thread when the play happened. I'd wager that there were an order of magnitude more people calling it a non-interception than the two most vocal in this thread who are even after they saw the replay.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

We just make to many mental break downs...that cost us!

 

[cc cowboy]

The call that bothered me the most was the PI that was called on Henry on the short pass over the middle on 3rd down. There was no flag and the Keyshawn and Delhome ran crying to the refs and they ended up throwing the flag very late.

 

[ghst187]

The two calls I was furious about was the PI call where the ref threw the flag 20 seconds after the play was over and ONLY after Key cried and whined and the fans booed. You CANNOT throw a flag that late! It was a key third down too and the penalty gave them a first. Fortunately, they didn't score on that drive but oddly they punted from OUR 38 yard line. Bizarre.
The other was the false start on Gurode that was total bs. Carolina was jumping into the neutral zone all night and sometimes they'd call the penalty on us.
TO's holding call was pretty lamea** call too.
I didn't agree with the INT call but it was close. I wasn't sure the kickoff fumble was a fumble though either.

 

[AmishCowboy]

I Agree both Delhomme's and Manning's were fumbles, I just wondering why one is upheld and the other overturned when they were the same play?.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Two plays before the Romo INT, they called a completely bogus holding call on Gurode. It was a text book block that drove the defender to the ground. It wasn't even a borderline call. And even if it was, it would still be a tick tack call considering it had no bearing on the play.

Later on, they missed a real bad hold on Rivera where he basically tackled a Carolina DT.

I still think Gamble stepped out of bounds and if he didn't, I don't think he had control of the ball on the INT.

I saw several holds on Carolina O-Lineman that went uncalled.

The threw one of the latest flags I've ever seen on Henry for a play that wasn't PI (you can use your arm around the receiver if it doesn't impede his progress).

Sadly, it was one of the better ref'd games we've had this season.


YAKUZA

 

[Future]

Why are people so riled up about that INT -- it was a very close call -- I didn't see enough to overturn it. Honestly, I think the refs called it right there.

Yep, i agree. Looked like a catch from what i saw.

The one thing I have had a problem with almost every game this year is that Ware never gets a holding call. The guy gets held all the time, but never draws a flag. Its unreal.

 

[Stautner]

LOL. You and abersonc are hardly conclusive of everyone, but please keep speaking in generalities.

I was in the game thread when the play happened. I'd wager that there were an order of magnitude more people calling it a non-interception than the two most vocal in this thread who are even after they saw the replay.

First, we aren't "inclusive" of everyone, not conclusive.

Second, I called it a non-interception too - and still do (or did you miss the 2-3 times I said that). That's doesn't mean I didn't think it was a close call.

Third, I was like others last night - I screamed at the TV and the officials when it was originally called an INT, but then after watching multiple replays I determined that while I still thought it was a bad call, it was a very close and difficult one.

The tone of the members of this board this morning - AFTER reviewing the play and haveing a chance to view it calmly - is indicative of the general mood of most fans. It WAS a very close play.

 

[AdamJT13]

The biggest mistake the refs made was when they spotted the ball at our 7 after Henry's first pass interference penalty. The interference ended around the 12-yard line.

I wonder if we could have challenged the spot of the ball on that?

 

[SultanOfSix]

First, we aren't "inclusive" of everyone, not conclusive.

As much as I want to get into semantics...

Yes, that's true. However, although your mentioning of most fans as being in agreement with you would be considered conclusive, the fact that it lacks such a foundation is apparent.

The tone of the members of this board this morning - AFTER reviewing the play and haveing a chance to view it calmly - is indicative of the general mood of most fans. It WAS a very close play.

LOL. Sure, the tone is indicative of the mood. That's because we won. And the mood of fans has no relevance to the conclusiveness of the play.

 

[joseephuss]

The biggest mistake the refs made was when they spotted the ball at our 7 after Henry's first pass interference penalty. The interference ended around the 12-yard line.

I wonder if we could have challenged the spot of the ball on that?

They missed a spot on a Barber run to the left. He made the first down, but they spotted it just short. On the next play, T.O. was called for holding. He did hold as you could see the jersey being pulled, but as Madden said, he didn't need to hold to get the block.

The play clock operator clearly was trying to help Carolina before halftime. He would stop the clock before the refs blew their whistles.

I didn't think it was a poorly officiated game. There were a few questionable calls, but nothing just outrageous. The replays were all close. I don't think any would be overturned either way. For example, if they called Gamble's pass incomplete on the field, it would have stood upon review.

 

[Doomsday101]

One play I'm glad they got right was Ellis knocking the ball out of Delhomme hand. To me that looked like the same play he made aginst the Giants but replay blew it in the giants game