Weird calls/challenges of Week 7

[Hasselbeck]

Too bad the Dolphins offense was putrid in that game. They had a million chances to win, including on the last drive of the game and they failed.

The Steelers defense makes lots of offenses look bad.

All that is moot though because the Dolphins D made a play when it had to, and were jobbed by a stupid decision.

It's like the Super Bowl XL dilemma all over again. Just because a team plays like shit doesn't mean the bad call should be diminished for what it was.

 

[AJay]

Too bad the Dolphins offense was putrid in that game. They had a million chances to win, including on the last drive of the game and they failed.

Exactly, this game shouldn't have even came down to that for the Dolphins. Dolphins are a big mess by itself but they do have some bright spots. They are just hurting right now.

Who knows even if the Phins recover, Pittsburgh had all 3 timeouts remaining. With that defense and the way the Phins were moving the ball they could've gone 3 and out. You never know.

Yes Pittsburgh got very lucky to win the game, but I do believe the refs made the correct call.

 

[BigDuke]

If memory serves, it was two plays after the penalty on Loadholt that Matthews just ripped his own helmet off and ran down the field trying to make the tackle.

That was a clear violation of the "Emmitt Smith" rule and should have resulted in a Vikings 1st down somewhere around the 15-20 yard line.

Matthews did rip his helmet off mid-play and go for the tackle. Should have been a penalty.

The Shiancoe TD reversal was ridiculous. Should have remained a TD.

 

[Senser81]

If every call went to who handed the ball to the ref after the pile-up was broken up while walking back to the sidelines 50% of the calls would be wrong. You can't just base your decision on that and say "Ok well Dansby just gave me the ball so Dolphins ball."

I remember seeing that yesterday watching the game. I'll try to find it again.

By the same token, if every call went to the guy who appeared to be the first to land on the ball, then 50% of those calls would be wrong. Sometimes its not the guy who first gets the ball in the pile-up, its the guy who ends up with the ball after the pile-up is broken up.

The fact that you are complaining that Dansby had the ball "after the pile-up was broken up" makes no sense, because that is usually how the refs award the ball. Furthermore, from the replay, it looks like two Dolphins players landed on the ball. So, not only does it "appear" that the Dolphins recovered the ball before the pile-up, they also ended up with the ball after the pile-up. So, my question to you and to the official who made the screwy explanation...at what point was it "unclear" that Miami had recovered the ball?

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Mike Francesca was laying into the refs on his show.
I fully agreed with his assesment. Refs are just getting lazy and playing it safe. They are missing obvious calls knowing or relying that replay will sort it all out. The initial call of TD in the Vikings game where the receivers foot was clearly out of bounds is a perfect example. How does a ref whos clearly looking at his feet when they land call that a TD ? Theres no gray area if you cant see 3/4 of a foot out of bounds you shouldnt be reffing.

 

[AJay]

By the same token, if every call went to the guy who appeared to be the first to land on the ball, then 50% of those calls would be wrong. Sometimes its not the guy who first gets the ball in the pile-up, its the guy who ends up with the ball after the pile-up is broken up.

The fact that you are complaining that Dansby had the ball "after the pile-up was broken up" makes no sense, because that is usually how the refs award the ball. Furthermore, from the replay, it looks like two Dolphins players landed on the ball. So, not only does it "appear" that the Dolphins recovered the ball before the pile-up, they also ended up with the ball after the pile-up. So, my question to you and to the official who made the screwy explanation...at what point was it "unclear" that Miami had recovered the ball?

Now you are just making my argument for me. Never did I say a Steeler nor a Dolphin landed on the ball and it should be their ball.

Never did I complain that Dansby had the ball. YOU did. Just because a player hands the ball to the ref after the pile up is over and players are walking to the sidelines doesn't mean they had the ball at the bottom of the pile. Every game I see players take the ball from other guys in attempt to try and fool the refs. Even wayyy after the play is dead. Come on that arguement makes no sense.

I thought Dansby handed the ball to the refs after recovering the ball. If thats not "complete possesion" of the ball, what is?

All I said was that I agree with the call the ref made. There is not CLEAR UNDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE that the Dolphins 100% had possesion of the ball at the bottom of the pile. At first glance the two players to jump on the ground and attempt to secure the ball are Dolphin players. But the video evidence doesn't prove that they were the ones who had it and that is what you need to give the Dolphins the ball. Again I'm going from the replays they showed during the game during the challenge. You said it was clearly Dolphins ball, I disagree with you and believe the refs made the correct call. Could it be possible that the Dolphins did in fact have the ball at the bottom of the pile? Sure, but there is not enough video evidence. Therefore Steeler football.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Could it be possible that the Dolphins did in fact have the ball at the bottom of the pile? Sure, but there is not enough video evidence. Therefore Steeler football.

I think instead of "enough clear evidence" it should be "not enough to guarantee I and our crew wont get roasted all week long if we get this wrong".

If theres any gray with a game on the line Refs will be cautious. I thought it was pretty clear it was Dolphins ball but at least the refs made some semblance of an effort.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

The ref called TD on the Roethlisberger run because he thought he broke the plain.

Review clearly showed he dropped the ball at the one. There was no clear evidence of which team recovered the ball in the scrum. The fact that Dansby handed the ball to the ref after the fact means nothing.

Once it goes to review, the thoughts of the other officials on the field mean shit.

It was the proper call.

A. You are supposed to let the play develop. Even if you think its a TD you cant ignore the ensuing scrum becuase its clear the ball came loose. Its the refs job to make the right call and they cut the play short causing the booths hesitance.

B. The decision on the field is what the booth review is based on. They dont make a fresh decision. They make a decision to stick or overturn based on the call on the field.
Any gray area reverts to the refs initial call. The initial handling of the loose ball was piss poor and cost a team a win.

 

[Senser81]

Now you are just making my argument for me. Never did I say a Steeler nor a Dolphin landed on the ball and it should be their ball.

Never did I complain that Dansby had the ball. YOU did. Just because a player hands the ball to the ref after the pile up is over and players are walking to the sidelines doesn't mean they had the ball at the bottom of the pile. Every game I see players take the ball from other guys in attempt to try and fool the refs. Even wayyy after the play is dead. Come on that arguement makes no sense.

I can't respond to this, because I have no idea what you are saying. I'm not complaining that Dansby had the ball. I was simply stating a fact. Dansby had the ball after the scrum unpiled. Did Pittsburgh actually have the ball at the bottom of the pile? If so, then how did Dansby end up with the ball? If so, then why didn't the refs just say the Steelers recovered the ball in the endzone and be done with it? If the Steelers DIDN'T have the ball at the bottom of the pile, then how can you ignore the one shred of evidence that we have, which is Dansby had the ball? Here is what I saw...

1. Roethlisberger fumbles into the endzone
2. It APPEARS that two Dolphin players fall on the ball
3. Scrum ensues
4. TV camera shows refs huddling and Dansby handing the ball to refs

So, again, at what point is it unclear that Miami didn't recover the ball? At what point, are you thinking "The Steelers may have recovered the ball", which would HAVE to happen for the recovery to be in dispute. I disagree with the refs call, because they DIDN'T say "we blew the play dead when we signaled the TD". They tried to weasel out of their mistake by saying, essentially, "even though we blew the play dead, we want to make it seem like we gave Miami a chance to recover the fumble, but they screwed it up."

 

[Derrville]

Officiating has been crap all year long.

 

[EmpireWF]

The initial handling of the loose ball was piss poor and cost a team a win.

Nope, the Dolphins poor offense cost themselves a win.

 

[AJay]

I can't respond to this, because I have no idea what you are saying. I'm not complaining that Dansby had the ball. I was simply stating a fact. Dansby had the ball after the scrum unpiled. Did Pittsburgh actually have the ball at the bottom of the pile? If so, then how did Dansby end up with the ball? If so, then why didn't the refs just say the Steelers recovered the ball in the endzone and be done with it? If the Steelers DIDN'T have the ball at the bottom of the pile, then how can you ignore the one shred of evidence that we have, which is Dansby had the ball? Here is what I saw...

1. Roethlisberger fumbles into the endzone
2. It APPEARS that two Dolphin players fall on the ball
3. Scrum ensues
4. TV camera shows refs huddling and Dansby handing the ball to refs

So, again, at what point is it unclear that Miami didn't recover the ball? At what point, are you thinking "The Steelers may have recovered the ball", which would HAVE to happen for the recovery to be in dispute. I disagree with the refs call, because they DIDN'T say "we blew the play dead when we signaled the TD". They tried to weasel out of their mistake by saying, essentially, "even though we blew the play dead, we want to make it seem like we gave Miami a chance to recover the fumble, but they screwed it up."

You're asking a lot of questions. Lets break it down.

Question 1) Did Pittsburgh actually have the ball at the bottom of the pile?

It is unclear who has the ball at the bottom of the pile. The refs say that. And video evidence proves that.

Question 2) If so, then how did Dansby end up with the ball?

It is unclear how Dansby ended up with the ball, after the pile was blown dead and the touchdown had been announced he could have take the ball out of a players hands (teammates or not) and hand it to the ref.

Question 3) If so, then why didn't the refs just say the Steelers recovered the ball in the endzone and be done with it?

The initial rule was a touchdown. Sparano challenged and they accept the fact that the call on the field was incorrect and it was in fact a fumble. But it is unclear who recovered. So they aren't going to say Steelers recovered in the end-zone and give them an automatic touchdown anyway. Just like they aren't gonna say Dolphins recover and it is a touchback.

Question 4) If the Steelers DIDN'T have the ball at the bottom of the pile, then how can you ignore the one shred of evidence that we have, which is Dansby had the ball?

There is no evidence. Just because Dansby walked up and gave the ref the ball doesn't mean he had full possesion on it at the bottom of the pile. Just like you said earlier if the ball went to the first person who landed on it 50% of the calls would be wrong. It's the same thing.

Question 5) So, again, at what point is it unclear that Miami didn't recover the ball?

It is unclear throughout the whole replay that Miami or Pittsburgh recovered the ball in the endzone.

Question 6) At what point, are you thinking "The Steelers may have recovered the ball.

When there is a scrum in the endzone there is a huge pile. There is pushing, shoving, pinching. Anything goes type of dogpile. People are doing anything to get any advantage and get that ball. I don't know who has it, Steelers or Dolphins. So basically it is very unclear.

You keep saying it "appears" Dolphin players were the first one to jump on the ball. I'm not disagreeing with you. It does appear that there are two Dolphin players that get to the ball first and try to make an attempt to recover it. But we don't know what happened at the bottom of the pile and a replay doesn't give us clear evidence. Which is what you need to overturn the call and give Miami the ball. 100% clear video evidence that a Dolphin player is in possesion of the ball at the bottom of the pile. But you just keep telling me it appears that Miami jumped at it first and that Dansby gave the ball to the ref. That means nothing man.

So how do you still believe that the refs had 100% clear video evidence to overturn that call and give Miami the football? There is none.

 

[NAHSTE]

Had my mom and sister in town for the weekend, so I had to hang with them all day Sunday. Didn't catch a second of NFL football, and it appears I didn't miss much.

Oakland beat Denver 59-15?
The Ravens and Bills went into OT?


Glad to hear the NFL still sucks.

 

[MrBill]

*In the "we have too many rules" category, I didn't understand the replay reversal of Shiancoe's TD catch in the Packers-Vikings game. I thought they had previously made a rule where the ball could touch the ground as long as the receiver demonstrated possession. IMO, Shiancoe demonstrated possession and the initial call on the field was TD, so to claim that you had indisputable evidence of Shiancoe not having possession is ridiculous. I didn't understand the official's explanation on that one, either.

Looks like the VP of NFL Officiating, Carl Johnson, agreed the Shiancoe overturned TD was bogus.

@KFANAM1130 Childress: Talked with VP of Officiating Carl Johnson, who said that the Shiancoe TD should NOT have been overturned.

 

[strahanfan92]

Mike Francesca was laying into the refs on his show.
I fully agreed with his assesment. Refs are just getting lazy and playing it safe. They are missing obvious calls knowing or relying that replay will sort it all out. The initial call of TD in the Vikings game where the receivers foot was clearly out of bounds is a perfect example. How does a ref whos clearly looking at his feet when they land call that a TD ? Theres no gray area if you cant see 3/4 of a foot out of bounds you shouldnt be reffing.

I was listening to him today too and boy did he lay into the refs, almost as much as Bret Favre. He said NBC made Bret look like a hero that led the Vikings to the victory after the game by show him limping and hugging everyone, when he was the reason why they lost.

 

[EmpireWF]

Glad to hear the NFL still sucks.

Sounds like your mom and sister pussified you.

:elephant:

 

[strahanfan92]

Also, why the NFL doesn't do exactly what the NHL does is BEYOND me. They need to have somebody in New York look over all of the replays and not leave it to the head official to make a decision based on video evidence under the booth. This way, it alleviates the immense pressure from the head ref that he already has from worrying about with the actual game.

 

[f16harm]

Since it has been said 40 times here, for the record, can I please let it be known it wasn't Dansby who was holding the ball. It was Ikaika Alama-Francis.

Alama-Francis recovering

Alama-Francis standing up

And holy shit, I've never even known who the fuck AJay is before this thread and the -rep he gave me yesterday in another thread for simply being "a Dolphins fan"....but his posts are fucking atrocious.

 

[f16harm]

Nope, the Dolphins poor offense cost themselves a win.

Miami only had 35 less total yards than Pittsburgh did.

Miami out-gained Pittsburgh on the ground.

Miami had less turnovers.

 

[EmpireWF]

Miami only had 35 less total yards than Pittsburgh did.

Miami out-gained Pittsburgh on the ground.

Miami had less turnovers.

Those two screen caps you posted don't prove anything.

Fact is, Dolphins kicked 5 field goals including one from 22 yards out and one from 23 yards out. If they put either in the endzone, they win.

They stopped the Steelers and forced a FG. On the final drive of the game, they can drive down the field and end it. They could not.