Jump to content

Just re-watched the 4th and goal...


Recommended Posts

I thought the game was poorly officiated. Not so much us not getting into the endzone, but the Turner and Finneran fumbles were BS to me. Turner is CLEARLY down, on his back, before any evidence of the ball moving is shown.

If Finneran's was a catch, then all talk of Roddy's catch the week before is over. One of those plays is really wrong if one of them is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am 99.9% sure that Ovie crossed that goaline on the third down.

Then again we DID stop LT in the endzone, and that wasn't a safety, so who knows...

The reason we did't get the safety with LT was because he got out of the endzone (for a second) so he was given foward progress. That is pretty standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first time I saw it (live) I could've sworn we got in on the 4th down play, however it looked as if we were stopped short and it was the right call. There were however SEVERAL and I mean several questionable calls by the officials. This has been a horrendous season for officials in general, nice to see that we beat the zebras and the Chargers Sunday though. All that matters is that we were able to overcome it and win anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the game was poorly officiated. Not so much us not getting into the endzone, but the Turner and Finneran fumbles were BS to me. Turner is CLEARLY down, on his back, before any evidence of the ball moving is shown.

If Finneran's was a catch, then all talk of Roddy's catch the week before is over. One of those plays is really wrong if one of them is right.

The problem was, that they called it a fumble on the field. As a result there had to be indisputable visual evidence that Turner was down before the ball started coming out, for them to reverse the call. From the camera angles they had, it wasnlt clear when the ball started coming out, so the call couldn't be overturned.

On the goal-line stand, I was surprised that the booth didn't call for the 3rd and 4th down plays to be review. They were definitely close enough to warrant another look by the refs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem was, that they called it a fumble on the field. As a result there had to be indisputable visual evidence that Turner was down before the ball started coming out, for them to reverse the call. From the camera angles they had, it wasnlt clear when the ball started coming out, so the call couldn't be overturned.

On the goal-line stand, I was surprised that the booth didn't call for the 3rd and 4th down plays to be review. They were definitely close enough to warrant another look by the refs.

I understand that there were no real good angles. Although, I could argue that one angle clearly shows the ball never in doubt of losing possesion. But that's fine.

My problem is with that moron official that was right there. He's the only one who threw his fumble bean bag, and he does it way late, after San Diego recovers it. The other official is marking the ball down. So the only guy who calls fumble is the one that is closest to the Turner, but is looking at his back, and the ball come out after he's clearly down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see your point. I'm not covnviced that it was a fumble or that the official saw the ball come out.

Until a few years ago, the refs would have no hesitation blowing plays dead. These days if there is any doubt they let play continue - giving the benefit of the doubt to the defense - on the basis that it can then be reversed if it is wrong. In theory that should work, except that the video footage isn't always clear.

Given that turnovers change games and turnover ratio correlates very closely to wins and losses - there is any doubt, the call on the field should be ruled in favour of the offensive team, not the defense. In my view, the Turner and Finneran plays should have been called in our favour on the field, and the onus should have been on San Diego to challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see your point. I'm not covnviced that it was a fumble or that the official saw the ball come out.

Until a few years ago, the refs would have no hesitation blowing plays dead. These days if there is any doubt they let play continue - giving the benefit of the doubt to the defense - on the basis that it can then be reversed if it is wrong. In theory that should work, except that the video footage isn't always clear.

Given that turnovers change games and turnover ratio correlates very closely to wins and losses - there is any doubt, the call on the field should be ruled in favour of the offensive team, not the defense. In my view, the Turner and Finneran plays should have been called in our favour on the field, and the onus should have been on San Diego to challenge.

That is EXACTLY what I am saying! The officials want to let plays go and not blow it dead, but they then need to change the method of review. When they "guess" and say that a team has fumbled, you have to find CLEAR evidence to the contrary. If when a play was reviewed they looked at it totally objectively and not with a bias towards the call on the field, we would have a better replay system!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason we did't get the safety with LT was because he got out of the endzone (for a second) so he was given foward progress. That is pretty standard.

What is the rule for "getting out of the endzone?" I know that if any part of the ball crosses the stripe of the endzone it is a touchdown. Is it the same for a safety? If any part of the ball crosses the stripe it is not a safety? Or is it the opposite, that all of the ball has to cross the stripe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am 99.9% sure that Ovie crossed that goaline on the third down.

Then again we DID stop LT in the endzone, and that wasn't a safety, so who knows...

looked like to me when i watched the game most of his upper body was across the goal line.

the refs tried to help the chargers out a bit. they didn't review that play, and turner was clearly already laying on the ground when the football got ripped out in the 2nd half. the fact that it was challenged and STILL stood was what really bothered me. F the refs. Whoever was calling that game, I hope never get to officiate another falcons game. Yikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the rule for "getting out of the endzone?" I know that if any part of the ball crosses the stripe of the endzone it is a touchdown. Is it the same for a safety? If any part of the ball crosses the stripe it is not a safety? Or is it the opposite, that all of the ball has to cross the stripe?

As far as I know (which isn't very far) scoring a TD only requires that the ball crosses the imaginary plane of the goal line before the runner is deemed down by contact.

As to coming out of the endzone, I think it is no different that running the ball from anywhere else on the field. The refs decide the yard line that the runner had acheived before being forced backward, and is awarded forward progress at that point. It is their judgement call. So, because LT had crossed the goal line before being stopped, his forward progress got him out of the endzone = no safety.

OK - let me amend that last statement: So, because LT had crossed the goal line before being stopped STONEWALLED LIKE A GNAT HITTING A WINDSHIELD AT 98 M.P.H., .......

there - fixed B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the rule for "getting out of the endzone?" I know that if any part of the ball crosses the stripe of the endzone it is a touchdown. Is it the same for a safety? If any part of the ball crosses the stripe it is not a safety? Or is it the opposite, that all of the ball has to cross the stripe?

I believe that it is the same as with a TD, so if any part of the ball is on any part of the goal line its a safety. The ballcarrier has to get the whole of the ball past the goalline to avoid the safety.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/safety2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was originally ticked about the Turner out of bounds call when he was running it up the right side for the TD. But when I got home and reviewed the tape, Clabo had a blatant tackle on that side. We were fortunate that it didn't get called (he wrapped the tackler up around the ankles and made a text book tackle...LOL). Add in the fact that we got away with a PI on Boley, I'd say that this game was officiated extremely poorly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the game was poorly officiated. Not so much us not getting into the endzone, but the Turner and Finneran fumbles were BS to me. Turner is CLEARLY down, on his back, before any evidence of the ball moving is shown.

If Finneran's was a catch, then all talk of Roddy's catch the week before is over. One of those plays is really wrong if one of them is right.

Agreed. Jerious DID score. Mike WAS down. Finn NEVER had control of the ball to make it a fumble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...