Referee Walt Coleman explains the ruling of fumble in overtime

[WoodysGirl]

-- Carlos Mendez

Here are the quotes from Coleman:

On the catch:

“He had two feet down, had possession of the ball and turned upfield and got hit as his third step was coming down. He had possession and time enough to do something with the ball – a football move.”

On if Colston has to tuck the ball away:

“He doesn’t have to tuck it. So long as he has possession of it and moving it from one hand to the other, he doesn’t have to tuck it away. He just has to have possession of the ball to be able to do something with it like a normal football act. But he doesn’t have to tuck it against his body.”

On the Cowboys having similar play last week:

“If the second foot is not all the way down, then it is not a catch. But in this case, his third foot was down.”

On recovering a forward fumble:

“Well in the overtime, you play fourth-quarter rules, so the fumble rule doesn’t start until you get to the two-minute warning – as far as the forward-fumble rule where you would bring it back to the spot of the fumble.”



Read more here: http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.co...xplains-the-ruling-of-fumble-in-overtime.html

 

[theebs]

Hah.

Exact play as last week and last week it was incomplete.

The league needs to explain it and explain how the same play can be viewed differently by two refs.

 

[speedkilz88]

The league also needs to change the fumble forward rule in OT. Since it's sudden death the rules needs to apply at all times.

 

[newlander]

when Walt is the ref....don't let the southern 'twang' fool ya: dude hates our GUTS

 

[rbr651]

My only problem was that initially the refs said the Cowboys had recovered, obviously they didn't but it was signaled Cowboys ball, with this being said I was under the impression that the recovery couldn't be over turned. If this had been the case it would of been a bad call but the refs did signal Dallas ball.

 

[newlander]

My only problem was that initially the refs said the Cowboys had recovered, obviously they didn't but it was signaled Cowboys ball, with this being said I was under the impression that the recovery couldn't be over turned. If this had been the case it would of been a bad call but the refs did signal Dallas ball.

......that's weak: Graham ripped it away from our DB's just like a man amongst boys like he did all day long: SO pissed Church and Scandrick are hurt as their replacements are hot garbage.

 

[DMX690]

Let just say if Dallas had recovered the ball. Walt would have reserved the play and called it incomplete.

 

[Irving Cowboy]

Let just say if Dallas had recovered the ball. Walt would have reserved the play and called it incomplete.

I hate when they reserve plays.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I have more of an issue where the OT rules state the winner of the coin flip has to score a TD to win. That alters the way you see the OT and perhaps play calling.

So we have now moved into a special time that the rules of the game have been suspended for this special time only.

If the league were to adopt rules that are arbitrary, I'd suspect the Holy Roller game between Oakland and San Diego would have influenced the OT session.

We lost, so I guess it doesn't matter. I fail to see how a game can set rules for one team the other team does not have to abide by.

 

[TwoDeep3]

......that's weak: Graham ripped it away from our DB's just like a man amongst boys like he did all day long: SO pissed Church and Scandrick are hurt as their replacements are hot garbage.

Scandrick is hot garbage and Church very well may be.

 

[speedkilz88]

I hate when they reserve plays.

It's even worse when they reverse plays.

 

[Hoofbite]

Hah.

Exact play as last week and last week it was incomplete.

The league needs to explain it and explain how the same play can be viewed differently by two refs.

Here's your explanation.

It's a live judgement call.

Sincerely,

NFL

 

[Hoofbite]

My only problem was that initially the refs said the Cowboys had recovered, obviously they didn't but it was signaled Cowboys ball, with this being said I was under the impression that the recovery couldn't be over turned. If this had been the case it would of been a bad call but the refs did signal Dallas ball.

I think they corrected it before the review even took place.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Let just say if Dallas had recovered the ball. Walt would have reserved the play and called it incomplete.

You know it and I know it.

 

[AdamJT13]

My only problem was that initially the refs said the Cowboys had recovered, obviously they didn't but it was signaled Cowboys ball, with this being said I was under the impression that the recovery couldn't be over turned. If this had been the case it would of been a bad call but the refs did signal Dallas ball.

I don't think they were signaling that. I think they were pointing to the spot of the fumble, as if the forward fumble rule were in effect.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

I hate when they reserve plays.

 

[DMAC]

I don't think they were signaling that. I think they were pointing to the spot of the fumble, as if the forward fumble rule were in effect.

That is exactly what they were doing.

 

[percyhoward]

Frampton needed to tackle Jimmy Graham (without the ball), and he didn't.

 

[CowboyChris]

I don't think they were signaling that. I think they were pointing to the spot of the fumble, as if the forward fumble rule were in effect.

and had the announcers fooled in the process.