The overturned fumble

[JJHLH1]

It definitely wasn’t obvious in my opinion.

It was hard to see the ball on the reverse angle since it was in the shadows.

 

[manster4ever]

Bull.

All you see is that the ball is brought back towards his body. There is ZERO evidence that he had control of it, because that angle didn’t show that.

All we know is that he fumbled, brought the ball back towards his body, and then lost it completely as he hit the ground.

More than likely that means he NEVER regained full control of the ball. The fumble should’ve stood.

EVEN IF you want to argue that he likely did regain full control of the ball, there is zero angle that shows that conclusively, which is what the standard of proof is supposed to be.

DAMN straight Nav22.....brutal call that could've cost us the game. We were on the end of 2 crap calls that cost us big time today. ****** zebras....

 

[Starstruck22]

There also seems to be no such thing as holding the Cowboys d line

Agreed egregious holding on Parsons…..just really bad

 

[nathanlt]

Yep, I agree with many here. There was no way that the replay was conclusive proof that the runner had control of the ball prior to his knee touching the ground. Nothing even close to "indisputable proof"

 

[Established1971]

agree, worst Ive ever seen. Not in its game significance of course but in the mechanics of the rule and what happened and what we see and dont see. There is no way he restablished it and his knee then hit the ground. We not only see the ball come out but we also see the ball hit the ground

 

[Starstruck22]

It definitely wasn’t obvious in my opinion.

It was hard to see the ball on the reverse angle since it was in the shadows.

It was not obvious because there was no angle showing runner regained control. Zippo, nada, it was not there and hidden in all angles, so it was a fumble by causality.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Disagree. You assume he had it.

Not at all. The sideline view clearly shows he DIDN'T have control of it after the handoff.

 

[Brooksey]

Looked like a really bad call, I’d like to see it again in slow mo

 

[Nova]

The idea of repossessing the ball seems to go against all previous logic with fumbles.

 

[HungryLion]

What did he do wrong there? What rule did he violate?

His arms went up towards the QB’s neck. You can make the argument that they never touched his head. That’s fine. But what I’m saying is….. in real time….. refs are constantly making that call. Constantly.

 

[MarcusRock]

You’re freaken blind dude.

There is absolutely no way in that video you can say he hit the head or neck.

BS dude… its in the chest and he pulled his arms down. And once again only 2 replays from how many cameras.. you do know at some point in time you are allowed do disagree with a call… i thought last week the body slam was 1000% 15 yards

RULE 12
ARTICLE 11. ROUGHING THE PASSER. Because the act of passing often puts the quarterback (or any other player attempting
a pass) in a position where he is particularly vulnerable to injury, special rules against roughing the passer apply. The Referee
has principal responsibility for enforcing these rules. Any physical acts against a player who is in a passing posture (i.e. before,
during, or after a pass) which, in the Referee’s judgment, are unwarranted by the circumstances of the play will be called as fouls.
The Referee will be guided by the following principles:
(a) Roughing will be called if, in the Referee’s judgment, a pass rusher clearly should have known that the ball had already left
the passer’s hand before contact was made; pass rushers are responsible for being aware of the position of the ball in passing
situations; the Referee will use the release of the ball from the passer’s hand as his guideline that the passer is now fully
protected; once a pass has been released by a passer, a rushing defender may make direct contact with the passer only up
through the rusher’s first step after such release (prior to second step hitting the ground); thereafter the rusher must be making
an attempt to avoid contact and must not continue to “drive through” or otherwise forcibly contact the passer; incidental or
inadvertent contact by a player who is easing up or being blocked into the passer will not be considered significant.
​

Know your rules. So did Gholson know the ball was passed, seeing as he tipped it? Did he also "drive through" Fields or forcibly contact him or not using his forearm? Even with the escape hatch part of the rule, do you see Gholson "easing up" as he approaches? He could have easily just kept his hands up and chest bumped Fields. That wouldn't have been called. But when you draw your hand back into a forearm and hit him with force up high, what do you expect on a call like that? Refs have literally shown they're emphasizing that on a QB and then you make it easy for them.

 

[Jipper]

Head scratching that you could watch every angle there and say you KNOW 100% beyond the shadow of a doubt he repossessed the ball. "I think he had it" isn't good enough.

Yeah it's fair....kinda feel like things like this show that the league is fixing certain things.

 

[adwar]

RULE 12
ARTICLE 11. ROUGHING THE PASSER. Because the act of passing often puts the quarterback (or any other player attempting
a pass) in a position where he is particularly vulnerable to injury, special rules against roughing the passer apply. The Referee
has principal responsibility for enforcing these rules. Any physical acts against a player who is in a passing posture (i.e. before,
during, or after a pass) which, in the Referee’s judgment, are unwarranted by the circumstances of the play will be called as fouls.
The Referee will be guided by the following principles:
(a) Roughing will be called if, in the Referee’s judgment, a pass rusher clearly should have known that the ball had already left
the passer’s hand before contact was made; pass rushers are responsible for being aware of the position of the ball in passing
situations; the Referee will use the release of the ball from the passer’s hand as his guideline that the passer is now fully
protected; once a pass has been released by a passer, a rushing defender may make direct contact with the passer only up
through the rusher’s first step after such release (prior to second step hitting the ground); thereafter the rusher must be making
an attempt to avoid contact and must not continue to “drive through” or otherwise forcibly contact the passer; incidental or
inadvertent contact by a player who is easing up or being blocked into the passer will not be considered significant.
​

Know your rules. So did Gholson know the ball was passed, seeing as he tipped it? Did he also "drive through" Fields or forcibly contact him or not using his forearm? Even with the escape hatch part of the rule, do you see Gholson "easing up" as he approaches? He could have easily just kept his hands up and chest bumped Fields. That wouldn't have been called. But when you draw your hand back into a forearm and hit him with force up high, what do you expect on a call like that? Refs have literally shown they're emphasizing that on a QB and then you make it easy for them.

Show me a clear replay that shows that you are saying. How many cameras are at a National game and how many replays did we see.. there is NOTHING that was shown that can back up the what you are saying

 

[aikemirv]

Clearly the RB had regained possession before he went down. The replay from the end zone (behind the RB) was the best angle. It was easy to see he had the ball when his knee hit the turf.

He may have had it pinned but not control-that’s why it came out when he hot

 

[NeathBlue]

We got shafted on the fumble and the interception that was cancelled out after a ridiculous penalty call…
If that interception had stood, we probably score at least a field goal and go in at halftime 31-7 up.

 

[adwar]

Show me a clear replay that shows that you are saying. How many cameras are at a National game and how many replays did we see.. there is NOTHING that was shown that can back up the what you are saying

Sorry to reply to myself, but they never even replayed the initial shot from the line of scrimmage

 

[MarcusRock]

Show me a clear replay that shows that you are saying. How many cameras are at a National game and how many replays did we see.. there is NOTHING that was shown that can back up the what you are saying

Lol. You have the video, you now have the rules since you didn't know them and then you ask for more video that isn't available while not answering any of my questions. All the proof needed here. Thanks for playing.

 

[jrumann59]

I have been discouraged in recent years with the NFL’s rule changes where as a viewer at home you have no idea anymore what the referees are going to decide when they review a play. I use to feel I knew the rules well enough where I was sure of the call after watching it but not anymore.

But that overturned fumble has to be the worst reversal I have ever seen. The replay with the side view clearly shows the ball coming loose but during the review the officials had to see some view that was indisputable that the runner reestablished control of the ball and then fumbled a second time after his knee had already touched the ground. The only other view they showed was from behind and there is no way you can say that he reestablished control and lost it again.

That call really has me concerned. How in the world can any official stand by the call that they see irrefutable evidence of reestablishing control and losing it again?

Has anyone heard any other explanation? Was there another view we did not see?

I believe they get more angles, either from other networks or NFL cameras.

 

[buybuydandavis]

EVEN IF you want to argue that he likely did regain full control of the ball, there is zero angle that shows that conclusively, which is what the standard of proof is supposed to be.

"indisputable visual evidence"

It's a clown league, but this is nothing new. The UnCatch, most disputed catch in the last decade, somehow had "indisputable visual evidence" to overturn the call on the field.

Bad rules and bad officiating suck the life out of my interest in the games. Hard to get up much enthusiasm for "I hope the refs pick us to win today."

 

[CowboyFrog]

Lol. You have the video, you now have the rules since you didn't know them and then you ask for more video that isn't available while not answering any of my questions. All the proof needed here. Thanks for playing.

Whatever Maecus they did not have"Undiputable proof" to over turn the call but yet here you are again...they had good video of him losing control with none that he got it back...but again here you are "Setting us Cowboys Fan staright" lol