Bronco Billy Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I didn't see this topic on the first 2 pages, and can't believe it's not getting any time here. WR Vince Jackson of SD catches a first down throw on a 4th & 2 play, gets up, and spins the ball on the ground in excitement & to make a statement against the Raiders. The problem? No one on the defensive side had touched him when he did it. The Raiders immediately knew it was a live ball & fell on it. Jackson's team mate berated him on the field for his stupidity. Then in step the refs. They solve SD's problem - they call an illegal forward pass on the spike rather than a fumble. First they ruled on the field that it was a fumble recovered by OAK, then decided it was an illegal forward pass that with the associated penalty still gave the ball to OAK on downs, and then after much meeting decided that not only was it an illegal forward pass, but that Jackson had gained enough yards that even with the penalty SD had gained enough yards to get a first down & retain the ball. SD then proceeds to tie the game shortly afterwards on LT's TD pass to Gates. How in the world could the refs possibly screw this call up so badly - even after huddling & discussing it they stuck with a call that was obviously wrong? If this is a repeat, please aim me at the proper thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Here it is Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 i coulda swore that when burress did the exact same thing a couple years back it was ruled a fumble. but then i saw something where the chief NFL ass-coverer...err, i mean, chief of officiating, saying that it was the correct call and citing the burress play as precedent. i dunno...who remembers the burress play better than i do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I'm going to watch NFL Network on Tuesday so that guy comes on and tries to explain this.. and he'll explain it....he'll have a handful of BS to give to everyone willing to eat it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 i coulda swore that when burress did the exact same thing a couple years back it was ruled a fumble. but then i saw something where the chief NFL ass-coverer...err, i mean, chief of officiating, saying that it was the correct call and citing the burress play as precedent. i dunno...who remembers the burress play better than i do? I'm pretty sure I had Burress that year and it wasn't a fumble... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I've seen that exact same thing done by a rookie (can't remember if it was Burress), and it was definitely ruled a fumble. What a silly, silly, over-thought call. It was definitely a fumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Whichever way you cut it, it was a BS call. The Raiders immediately knew it was a live ball and recovered it. It was not a pass, forward or otherwise, it was a fumble. The fact that he intentionally let the ball go doesn't mean the ball wasn't live. The SD check to the refs should be in the mail right about now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaxfactor Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I'm going to watch NFL Network on Tuesday so that guy comes on and tries to explain this.. and he'll explain it....he'll have a handful of BS to give to everyone willing to eat it... +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 (edited) so now all forward fumbles will be ruled as illegal forward passes? it really is reminiscent of the tuck rule: official makes a boneheaded ruling that goes against every ounce of sense, the NFL steps in to cover their own ass and comes up with some new legalistic way to construe the rules to conform with the boneheaded ruling, and then afterward to be consistent the league starts calling all lame pump-fake fumbles "incomplete passes". Edited November 27, 2006 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Yep this was just a major mistake, but instead of admitting it was a major mistake, the league will circle the wagons around these idiot officials and demand that they were correct in the face of overwhelming evidence and public outcry. Why? Because there is an elitist attitude in the upper-management of the league that WILL NOT be questioned. They have this "how dare you" reaction to anyone that opposes them or their representatives. What a freakin sham! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 the worst call of the year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaiderSteve Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 That was a fumble plain and simple....the only difference is the Raiders are 2-9 and not 9-2 so it really doesn't matter. Just goes to show though we seem to always get the bad calls one way or the other...What's next...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Burress had his play in 2000 against Jax. I guess it was a fumble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I kep thinking about how players would accidentally spike the football too early on a long run and the ball would bounce out of the back of the endzone for a touchback - not an illegal forward pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abishagenaden Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I thought the rule was, that a fumble could only be ruled a fumble, if an opposing player causes (by tackling) it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggieFries Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I thought the rule was, that a fumble could only be ruled a fumble, if an opposing player causes (by tackling) it. I believe a failed lateral would also be ruled a fumble. Even if no one was there to tackle anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I thought the rule was, that a fumble could only be ruled a fumble, if an opposing player causes (by tackling) it. Not correct, as a player dropping the ball or a bad snap from the center are other examples of fumbles. But the ground can't cause a fumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I believe a failed lateral would also be ruled a fumble. Even if no one was there to tackle anyone. Correct. Backward passes are live and if the intended recepepiant does not catch it, it is a fumble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 (edited) I thought the rule was, that a fumble could only be ruled a fumble, if an opposing player causes (by tackling) it. where would you get that idea? you think it would be a dead ball if a runner just dropped the ball switching hands or something? there are fumbles like that all the time. and what about fumbles on the center-QB exchange, or on the QB-RB exchange...did you think those could not be ruled fumbles since they weren't caused by an opposing player? Edited November 27, 2006 by Azazello1313 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 That was a fumble plain and simple....the only difference is the Raiders are 2-9 and not 9-2 so it really doesn't matter. Just goes to show though we seem to always get the bad calls one way or the other...What's next...? Unfortunetly though, the Raiders had the momentum at that point in the game, and the Chargers didn't. After this play however (the Raiders not getting the ball, the Chargers not having to redo the down, and the first down give nto them), the Raiders simply lost whatever signs of life they had. Unfortunet, would have been nice to see if they could have finished the game like they stated it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 i coulda swore that when burress did the exact same thing a couple years back it was ruled a fumble. but then i saw something where the chief NFL ass-coverer...err, i mean, chief of officiating, saying that it was the correct call and citing the burress play as precedent. i dunno...who remembers the burress play better than i do? The Burress play was a fumble........ and, by the way, I've watched a lot of the Giants a lot this year, and Burress is the exact same player as he was in his rookie year. Tons of talent, can make the spectacular play look easy, but, will then turn around and drop easy passes, fumble the ball away, and make mental mistakes. He is a frustrating guy to watch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 27, 2006 Author Share Posted November 27, 2006 I thought the rule was, that a fumble could only be ruled a fumble, if an opposing player causes (by tackling) it. Vick was charged with a fumble when he dropped the ball without being touched in what turned out to be ATL's final drive in their loss last week. Aaron Brooks has been charged with several fumbles when the ball simply came out of his hand when he dropped back to pass & dropped the ball before getting the chance to start his passing motion. I'm not sure where you got the idea contact by the opposition had to be involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 The call was total crap, and it definately shifted the momentum in the game. But what pisses me off is that the Raiders ALLOWED it to shift momentum in the game, and they gave up 2 TDs without scoring another point. That is what gets me, they lost the game after that with nop help of a bad call. This season sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bier Meister Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Not correct, as a player dropping the ball or a bad snap from the center are other examples of fumbles. But the ground can't cause a fumble. ..............unless the player is untouched by a defensive player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 27, 2006 Author Share Posted November 27, 2006 I'd just like to add that I feel horribly dirty being placed in the position of defending the Raiders. I wonder if that is actionable against the NFL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.