Replay issues

[BonMallari]

If you watched the replay, Roghesberg was sitting on his ass looking around for the ball nowhere near the ball. And you can bet your ass that if a Pitsburg player recovered the football, he would never have let it go as the Miami player held the ball high in the air as he ran off the field. The only call that should have been made was Miami ball at the 20 or a Pittsburg touchdown. Had to be one or the other. We will see in the days ahead because I have a feeling that this will be talked about for awhile.

^^^^^^ THIS....

I watched Big Ben claim today that he was on the bottom of the pile with the ball...almost laughable he was no where near the ball...

[Roger Perry]

You decide, here is the replay

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVo4HM1sMnE

[Cody Covey]

You decide, here is the replay

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVo4HM1sMnE

Looks exactly like they said a fumble where they have no way of knowing who gained possession.

[Roger Perry]

Looks exactly like they said a fumble where they have no way of knowing who gained possession.

I'll say it again, the only 2 possible right calls were either Pittsburg scored a touchdown by recovering the fumble or a touchback where Miami recovered the ball and has possession on the 20. The replay clearly shows 2 Miami players on top of the ball with 2 to 3 Pittsburg players diving in on top. The only time the ball should have gone back to Pittsburg on the 6 inch line is if the ball went out of bounds and no one gained possession before it went out of bounds.

Usually after a fumble there are a stack of players on top of the ball and the officials do not know who has the ball until they unstack the players. The officials did not unstack the players but a Miami player came up with the ball and it should have been a touchback.

[Cody Covey]

I'll say it again, the only 2 possible right calls were either Pittsburg scored a touchdown by recovering the fumble or a touchback where Miami recovered the ball and has possession on the 20. The replay clearly shows 2 Miami players on top of the ball with 2 to 3 Pittsburg players diving in on top. The only time the ball should have gone back to Pittsburg on the 6 inch line is if the ball went out of bounds and no one gained possession before it went out of bounds.

Usually after a fumble there are a stack of players on top of the ball and the officials do not know who has the ball until they unstack the players. The officials did not unstack the players but a Miami player came up with the ball and it should have been a touchback.

But thats not how the rules work. The call on the field was a touchdown. They overturned that and said it was a fumble but there are a couple problems. First the play was called a touchdown meaning end of play. Second in a NFL replay to overturn an on field decision there must be completely conclusive evidence, clearly there wasn't since it became a pile of 15 people.

[Roger Perry]

But thats not how the rules work. The call on the field was a touchdown. They overturned that and said it was a fumble but there are a couple problems. First the play was called a touchdown meaning end of play. Second in a NFL replay to overturn an on field decision there must be completely conclusive evidence, clearly there wasn't since it became a pile of 15 people.

So if a loose ball came out at the 50 yard line and the official blew the whistle ending the play saying the ball carrier was down by contact and there were 15 people on top of a loose ball and the official could not see who was at the bottom of the pile with the football and the recovering team challenged the call that the ball carrier was not down by contact that it actually was a fumble and replay showed it was clearly a fumble are you saying that the ball would go back to the team that fumbled the ball because replay could not determine which team recovered the ball?

Every time I saw a play like that the officials unstacked the pile to see who ended up with the ball. The Miami player clearly came out of the pile with the ball. I can't imagine that a Pittsburg player would hand the ball to a Miami player if he had recovered the ball himself.

[YardleyLabs]

So if a loose ball came out at the 50 yard line and the official blew the whistle ending the play saying the ball carrier was down by contact and there were 15 people on top of a loose ball and the official could not see who was at the bottom of the pile with the football and the recovering team challenged the call that the ball carrier was not down by contact that it actually was a fumble and replay showed it was clearly a fumble are you saying that the ball would go back to the team that fumbled the ball because replay could not determine which team recovered the ball?

Every time I saw a play like that the officials unstacked the pile to see who ended up with the ball. The Miami player clearly came out of the pile with the ball. I can't imagine that a Pittsburg player would hand the ball to a Miami player if he had recovered the ball himself.

When there is a pileup with the ball at the bottom, the ref's blow the ball dead and then sort out who has it. The play is dead.

If the ball is knocked out of the QB's hands and the ref blows the whistle, ending play, before anyone covers the ball, the play is dead regardless of whether replay shows that it was actually a fumble. The ref should not blow the whistle in that case until the ball has been covered by one side or the other.

BTRW, Biran Dawkins used to brag about how often he stole the ball at the bottom of the pile. If necessary, he would try to break the fingers of the player with possession.

It is completely unfair. However, the players are supposed to stop play when the whistle blows whether it it right or wrong. You have no way of knowing what might have happened if the whistle has not been blown and cannot allow the players that ignored the whistled to be rewarded. That is why a ref call of down by contact is not open to challenge, while a ref's failure to stop play when a player is down by contact is subject to review.

[Roger Perry]

When there is a pileup with the ball at the bottom, the ref's blow the ball dead and then sort out who has it. The play is dead.

If the ball is knocked out of the QB's hands and the ref blows the whistle, ending play, before anyone covers the ball, the play is dead regardless of whether replay shows that it was actually a fumble. The ref should not blow the whistle in that case until the ball has been covered by one side or the other.

BTRW, Biran Dawkins used to brag about how often he stole the ball at the bottom of the pile. If necessary, he would try to break the fingers of the player with possession.

It is completely unfair. However, the players are supposed to stop play when the whistle blows whether it it right or wrong. You have no way of knowing what might have happened if the whistle has not been blown and cannot allow the players that ignored the whistled to be rewarded. That is why a ref call of down by contact is not open to challenge, while a ref's failure to stop play when a player is down by contact is subject to review.

I have heard many times an official saying "runner was ruled down by contact, such and such is chalenging that ruling."

[dnf777]

I can't imagine that a Pittsburg player would hand the ball to a Miami player if he had recovered the ball himself.

Not unless he looked up and saw the official signaling "touchdown" and heard whistles!

And that's my point. Once the play is dead, and people stop playing, and officials stop officiating, you cannot award a change of posession or any other action that occured! It altered the activity on the field. Dead ball at the point of the call. Fix it, but don't retroactively allow the play to continue.

I admit. Bad call. But they made the best they could out of it.

Ben should have just hung on to the damn ball!

[dnf777]

I have heard many times an official saying "runner was ruled down by contact, such and such is chalenging that ruling."

That is in the event of a ball that pops loose. Since the ground cannot cause a fumble, if a team thinks the ground did NOT cause the fumble, ie the player was not down, they will challenge "down by contact". Different situation altogether. If a change of posession is awarded, it is at that spot. They do not allow the play to continue in retrospect if half the players are mulling back to the huddle and some showboat is strutting down the field with the ball.

The signaling of "touchdown" definitavely ends all play. Some guys might have been fighting for the ball, others may have been trying to get up and celebrate or pout.