Comments on: ESPN "B" team justifies their assignment

By: Raiders757

Raiders757 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:07:10 +0000

We can argue about this damn rule all day. When push comes to shove, the Raiders had plenty of time afterward to react and win the game. In the end, they failed. The loss is not the fault of the TD being overturned. It was the same thing that has effected every other close game with the Bolts over the past six seasons. The failure to take the lead and hold on to it until the end. There was no excuse for letting the Chargers go over 80 yards in a little over two minutes.
One thing is for sure. This is a better Raiders team this year, and if the Chargers plan on going to the Super Bowl, they better up their level of play a hell of a lot more. They got blown off the ball pretty much all night long. They aren’t going ot win anything playing like that.

By: Eli

Eli — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:51:16 +0000

From the official NFL rulebook…
“A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball.”
Watching the play that is EXACTLY what happened.
The guy caught the ball, had both feet down AND clearly had possession of the ball.
As a matter of FACT, he landed on his behind and his elbow as well.
If the NFL is going to say that he did not have possession (which is a lie) then how do they justify the Jeremy Shockey catch in New Orleans the day before?
Never saw a review or them nitpicking that TD.
Anybody with a set of eyes and not lying to themselves could clearly see the NFL took away a touchdown from that kid.
It’s a shame.
This time, the ESPN guys had it right.
For them to overturn that call was criminal.
Looks as if Mike Florio has become the NFL’s head apologist.
Congratulations Mike, keep lying to yourself.

By: LightningLucci

LightningLucci — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:49:50 +0000

“If that play happens anywhere else on the field, it’s a catch since he’d be down when his rear hits the field.”
No, it doesn’t. See play at 3:15.
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009091401/2009/REG1/chargers@raiders/watch
The same rule that made the Weddle play incomplete is the same rule that made the touchdown play incomplete.
Both parts of the following sentence have to be true:
When catching a ball ON THE WAY to the ground, you must maintain possession of the ball until AFTER the completion of the play.
So, two feet down, butt-contact, end zone line, and all that don’t matter.
Having said that, and even with the Charger-fan disclaimer, I still think this could have been ruled a touchdown. Applying the TB/Rams playoff rule, he looked like he still had possession when the ball hit the ground, the first time. And then when he started getting up, it hit the ground. My only guess is that the ref was saying the ball was moving the whole time between those two points. Meh.
See play at 1:45.
Still pisses me off, though, when the announcers get rules wrong. Because then all the fans watching get it wrong. This rule was used in the 2005 playoffs, when Tampa’s Chris Simms threw a seemingly completed touchdown pass in the final seconds that was ultimately ruled incomplete. Tampa again! The announcers should know better.

By: Bob S.

Bob S. — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:44:58 +0000

NFL should do it like NHL does. Once it goes to replay, rule experts and former top refs of the NFL sitting in their head office in NY or wherever with all the rules in front of them and monitors for every single game being played in the room – ref on the field should tell them what his officials saw BUT head office should make the call NOT a ref running around like a chicken with his head cut off.
A much better system to avoid the league then being forced to give excuses and bs statements about Hochulis, Chieffers and tucks.

By: eballa1

eballa1 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:50:38 +0000

If that play happens anywhere else on the field, it’s a catch since he’d be down when his rear hits the field.

By: JoeSixPack

JoeSixPack — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:29:37 +0000

They couldn’t even get the names of the players right. Who is Todd Light anyways?
Suzy Kobler must be looking forward to covering the Jets. Not only will their QBs talk to her, they want to kiss her.

By: finsbooyah

finsbooyah — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:53:38 +0000

I totally understand the rule that in the end zone the player must maintain control of the ball all the way to the ground. However, here’s what I don’t understand about that particular ruling…
Murphy’s ass hit the ground before losing control of the ball. Since he was touched by a defender, once his ass hits the ground, with total control of the ball, shouldn’t the play be over at that exact moment?

By: 24Seven

24Seven — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:34:36 +0000

“For what it’s worth, the Raiders have benefited from the two of the worst calls/rules in the history”
Yep, they have had two go their way. For those two, I can name four off the top of my head that went against them: Immaculate Reception, Lytle fumble, Tuck Rule and now this phantom incompletion.
I’ll bet that if we tallied up all the controversial calls from all teams that the Raiders would have twice as many against them as the next team.
And yes, I agree that the Raiders are not going anywhere with Russell at QB or Davis as owner.

By: 24Seven

24Seven — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:19:36 +0000

“A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by a defender) must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone.”
A: The ball wasn’t loose when his feet hit the ground. He secured it from that moment all the way until after he his butt hit the ground and he landed.
B: He does not have to maintain possession infinitely. He needs only a moment of possession for it to be a touchdown and he had that and more.
“If he loses control of the ball and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception or recovery.”
I suppose he did that twice: once at the very end of the play and once when he tossed the ball to the ref. Seriously, he did not lose control until well after he had hit the ground. The ball was not loose until he hit the ground at the end. Should have been a touchdown.

By: Pastabelly

Pastabelly — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:42:37 +0000

For what it’s worth, the Raiders have benefited from the two of the worst calls/rules in the history of the game and nobody should feel badly for them. The first was the phantom roughing the passer call on Ray Hamilton of the Patriots giving the Raiders an extra down and a ticket to the AFC CG. The second, of course, was the ridiculous “on purpose” forward fumble which caused the NFL to change a rule. Of course, last night we got to see them play in the worst facility in all of the NFL with their ridiculous fans dressing up as if it were Halloween. The Raiders aren’t yet good enough to hate again and won’t be winning anything anytime soon with Russell at quarterback.

By: slutnuts

slutnuts — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:29:13 +0000

ok bob s you got me on the regularity of the play. but seriously, explain why a team would want to be up by 5? its pointless. being up by 6 at least gives you hope of blocking a game winning extra point, as doubtful as it is. and my second point wasnt aimed at your post, i’m gonna have to be more clear next time.

By: Bob S.

Bob S. — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:17:47 +0000

They use this BS wording so they can rule however they please! And why? THEY USED TO FOR DOWN BY CONTACT OR NOT SO REFS COULD FIX GAMES AS WELL UNTIL ENRAGED FANS MADE THEM CHANGE THE RULE. So they found other rules to manipulate so the refs for the greedball owners could determine any game they chose to. San Jose Mercury News But Raider Nation likely will be talking about the Murphy touchdown that the officials nullified, the one that got away via a questionable replay review in the final minute of the first half. “Honestly, I caught the ball, and when I fell down, the hand that I had the ball in is what I used to push myself up because I thought I scored,” Murphy said. “I was trying to come up and celebrate because I was so excited.” It sure looked like a touchdown, a 14-7 lead and a hoppin’ house party at the Coliseum. It came away looking like the officials are out to hose the Raiders again, perhaps in honor of it being throwback-jersey night and all. At halftime, ESPN’s Steve Young and Raiders megaphone Greg Papa hounded an in-house officiating supervisor for an explanation. Beat writers demanded an answer, too, from referee Carl Cheffers, a name Raider Nation must think is an alias for Walt “Tuck Rule” Coleman. “I’m disappointed. (Murphy) came down with both feet, his rear end hit the ground and the ball came out,” Raiders coach Tom Cable said. “(Cheffers) said he has to come down on the ground with possession of the ball. I don’t believe that’s the rule, but we’ll see.” The replay review led Cheffers to rule that Murphy “lost possession as he went to the ground” on the incompletion. Murphy looked to have two feet down and it seemed like a catch. But twisted rules can also make Tom Brady fumbles look like incompletions. Referee Carl Cheffers said in an interview after the game that the ruling was “pretty clear-cut.” “By definition in our rule book, he’s going to the ground and has to maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire act of the catch,” Cheffers said in regard to Murphy. “And in this case, he lost possession and the ball hit the ground. Therefore, it’s incomplete.”

By: fish0462

fish0462 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:59:26 +0000

Florio kind of like how you justify writing here and not with ESPN?

By: Bob S.

Bob S. — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:45:40 +0000

slutnuts says:
bob s – going for 2 allows for the possibility of the bears missing an extra point if they happened to score. teams go for 2 in this situation EVERY season, this cant be new to you.
–
fair enough! then if it happens so often give me one example of a team who had just scored a td in the last minute to give themselves a 4 point lead go for 2 points. give me just one other example!
plus what i said was raiders receiver had more control of the ball when his thigh touched the ground than the packer receiver as he caught the ball on the ground.

By: straverse

straverse — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:41:21 +0000

Awful call. If the rule’s the problem, change it. That should have been a TD. Whatever happened to the fact that the ground can’t cause a fumble?

By: Foust

Foust — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:37:57 +0000

Q: When is that play not a touchdown?
A: When the receiver is wearing silver and black.

By: slutnuts

slutnuts — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:30:18 +0000

bob s you’re back on the packers covering the spread? give it up. whats the point of being up by 5 (going for 1)? going for 2 allows for the possibility of the bears missing an extra point if they happened to score. teams go for 2 in this situation EVERY season, this cant be new to you.
by rule i guess that wasnt a td. i would like to see this rule altered though. maybe if the guy gets 2 feet down then thats it, td. with this rule the way it is, i’m surprised more defenders arent tackling in the endzone.

By: mike

mike — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:27:05 +0000

Raider fans are like Dale Jr. fans in Nascar. And both sports would be better without them.
The Raiders don’t even play on a REAL football field. It’s like watching a highschool football game because the town can’t afford both a football stadium and a baseball stadium.
And I hope their thug coach gets fired and spends some time in jail.
F the Raiders and their idiotic thug fans.

By: RSKindred

RSKindred — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:25:14 +0000

Guys… when his knee hit the ground, he had possession. It was a touchdown, plain and simple. That call was disgusting. The ref’s are garbage.
They looked like Stewart’s Root Beer employees with those throwback zebra suits on, so they should probably just stick to their other jobs.

By: dawk20db

dawk20db — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 09:16:33 +0000

That was one of the most painful 5 minutes of my life. However, I like that Steve Young talks to the fans with the assumption that we are NOT bumbling idiots. He harped on the man free coverage a little to much, but at least we didn’t have a 10 min coaches tape class about what man coverage is.
There really is no such thing as a good anouncing crew. I wish someone would come up with televising the game with nothing but game sounds. Crowd noise, pads, and whistles. Just like you were there. We’d still have replays, but no announcers.

By: Bob S.

Bob S. — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:56:45 +0000

Re: “A receiver must control the ball to the ground.”
–
Unless that rule says control the ball for 10, 15 seconds or forever?
FACT is he had 2 feet on the ground, controlled the ball and when his thigh hit the ground he still had control of the ball in the endzone. Then it came loose. He was clearly what they call down by contact if it occurred anywhere else on the field.
Refs again fix a game! This time they give game back to Chargers who they robbed last year in Denver. How about when Green Bay went for the 2 point conversion to beat the spread on Sunday, those refs thought he controlled the ball?
Owners of these teams are scalping tickets and fixing outcomes.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:42:57 +0000

Face it that was a touchdown.

By: American

American — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:38:19 +0000

“A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without contact by a defender) must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone.
“If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception or recovery.”
That is the rule verbatim. This announcing crew was horrible. Will never listen to them do a game again. It is just too annoying and stupid.

By: skf727

skf727 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:17:49 +0000

Q: How many times to you see a guy stretch the ball over the plane, it gets knocked out, and they still call it a TD?
A: Every time.
Full disclosure: I am a Raiders fan.
This was simply a horrible call. Murphy clearly got both feet down with possession of the ball. In fact, I don’t think the DB even touched the ball.
I was somewhat surprised that the refs were even reviewing the play considering how clear cut it was. I seriously doubt the Chargers would even have challenged the ruling had the play not occurred in the last two minutes.
I hate to sound like Raiders Conspiracy Guy but this is yet another instance that the NFL chooses to follow obscure rules by the letter of the rule and not the spirit of the rule. Brady fumbled, no question. Murphy scored, no question.
Fascinating how the Raiders are always on the short end of these rulings.

By: BeerCur

BeerCur — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:16:57 +0000

“I’ll take Steve Young over him any day.”
~Brought to you by Steve Young.
Seriously I thought commentary, Chris Collinsworth, for the NBC Thursday’s Night game was a lot worse. However Collinsworth did do a much better job in Sunday night’s game. Maybe the old video of him talking about women, took him down a ego step or two, and as a result his performance improved.

By: Vinces Power Sweep

Vinces Power Sweep — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:07:50 +0000

With all of the more than competent announcers that do college games for ESPN and ABC, they can’t use one of those teams instead of these three turds? Even outside of not knowing the correct ruling, they were absolutely awful.

By: AutumnWind999

AutumnWind999 — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:59:59 +0000

Relax everyone.
Mort posted that it wasn’t a catch on his Twitter account.
What more proof do you need?

By: slutnuts

slutnuts — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:38:58 +0000

another beauty was on the illegal contact penalty against the raiders in the 2nd quarter. golic watches the replay of the raiders db making contact before the five yards, but then continually enagaging the sd wr as they run down field (another 10-15 yards). golic then proclaims this should be legal. the ball is i the air and oak db still has arm on the wr. how can golic believe this isnt illegal contact.

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 07:21:24 +0000

This rule sux. I hate this rule – I hate the tuck rule. Murphy caught the ball – 2 feet down his butt hit the turf and he still had the ball. Twisting to the ground – he bobbles it a little and its not a catch?
Someone has to bring some common sense as to what a catch is and what a catch isnt.
Yes – I am a Patriots fan and do not like the tuck rule. By Rule – Brady didnt fumble vs Oakland – but in reality – we all know its a fumble.
NFL – Change the damn rules.

By: TommYD

TommYD — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 06:55:11 +0000

How many times did Greenberg incorrectly identify Michael Bush as Darren McFadden during the game? I havd McFadden in my Fantasy league and it drove me nuts. It was like they were calling the game from a TV monitor. Brutal.
As for Steve Young’s misinerpretation of the video-reviewed incomplete TD pass to Murphy, I think it was Young’s [i]laissez-faire[/i] attitude that mostly caused him to get it wrong. (I’ve been waiting a while to use that )