There are 133 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The Non Fumble Call

Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.

In that case, so was the Whitner hit vs NO and a lot of fumbles in the league that dont instantaneously pop the ball out from a front side hit.
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.

In that case, so was the Whitner hit vs NO and a lot of fumbles in the league that dont instantaneously pop the ball out from a front side hit.

yah but the ball fell without another player holding him up stripping the ball.
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.

In that case, so was the Whitner hit vs NO and a lot of fumbles in the league that dont instantaneously pop the ball out from a front side hit.

yah but the ball fell without another player holding him up stripping the ball.

Forward progress is forward progress per rule.
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.

In that case, so was the Whitner hit vs NO and a lot of fumbles in the league that dont instantaneously pop the ball out from a front side hit.

yah but the ball fell without another player holding him up stripping the ball.

Forward progress is forward progress per rule.

Its another stupid pansy rule instituted by Goodell to protect the NFL owner's investments.
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
The ref was standing right there with a good look at Bowman stripping the ball. If Bowman doesn't get the ball loose my bet is the whistle doesn't get blown until Bradshaw is on his back. We've all seen the exact same play thousands of times where the ref swallows the whistle until the play is fully concluded . . . except this time.

So this. I think refs have a mental alert once they see players reach in and rip. it is normal and even if i were a ref, i would be quicker to blow a whistle on forward progress if see a rip happening.

BUT this opens a can of worms. One can make a claim Whitners hit on the Saints running back was not a fumble due to forward progress. The hit happened and the RB was turned which immediately stopped forward progress. The ball started to fall out after his body turned.

Solution: award forward progress on downed players but a player MUST keep full possession of the ball until he is stood up, the whistle blows and the play is clearly dead or if he is down by contact prior to fumble.

Or the conspiracy theorist might suggest, they blow the whistle early to protect the Giants, but if that's Frank Gore getting stripped that same ref waits a tic longer to complete the play . . .
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.

In that case, so was the Whitner hit vs NO and a lot of fumbles in the league that dont instantaneously pop the ball out from a front side hit.

yah but the ball fell without another player holding him up stripping the ball.

And the same hit that knocked the guy out, knocked the ball out. Different situation.
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Originally posted by susweel:
I havent seen the play again but watching the game live and multiple replays to me it did not look like a fumble. I thought the refs made the correct call on that one.

Just my opinion.

Go ahead and start the flaming.

how can you watch the replays and not think that was a fumble


They ruled forward progress was stopped and it was.

In that case, so was the Whitner hit vs NO and a lot of fumbles in the league that dont instantaneously pop the ball out from a front side hit.

yah but the ball fell without another player holding him up stripping the ball.

And the same hit that knocked the guy out, knocked the ball out. Different situation.

Not exactly. The Whitner hit stopped foward progress. The ball came out after the RB's body turned from forward progress and his arms went limp. Bradshaw was still struggling to try to fall forward after Bowman made contact with him.

MOST of the time, officials will call it down if the runner has stopped struggling for yardage.
this is one of those situations that if the whistle was a few seconds later, the entire play, and game, is different. Refs need to be instructed to hold their breath until the play is clearly over. They use replay to save their own asses enough already, might as well leave those kinds of plays up to replay as well.
Originally posted by HessianDud:
this is one of those situations that if the whistle was a few seconds later, the entire play, and game, is different. Refs need to be instructed to hold their breath until the play is clearly over. They use replay to save their own asses enough already, might as well leave those kinds of plays up to replay as well.

They just need to change the rule so it is clear cut, like the TD rule. Forward progress only takes into affect if the runner has surrendered, or down by contact AND has the ball. Forward progress is null if the runner is still struggling to stay up and loses the ball.
I hate Ed Hocili!,,, the guy has screwed so many teams,,, he could have overruled the whistle for forward progress....
Originally posted by RonRon:
I hate Ed Hocili!,,, the guy has screwed so many teams,,, he could have overruled the whistle for forward progress....

He's just mad because he had to wear long sleeves.
  • vaden
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 3,043
It's like the Lee Evans non-TD. By the eyeball test, that was a TD and this was a fumble, but the refs have enough wiggle room to call it their way. They have too much power.
If a RB hits a wall backs up, turns and gains some yards they don't stop him. If a WR hits a wall and it is obvious he's going no where, they blow the whistle. The play was still going. I haven't seen the replay, but I was pretty sure the whistle came after the ball was already loose anyway.


That is why it should be a fumble.