Abe Sargent
09-07-2003, 02:36 PM
Detroit punts, Arizona player Anquan Boldin catches, fumbles, detroit recovers and runs it into the endzone.
Refs have a conference in the field, rule that Anquan never had possession so it was a muff, so "Detroit could not advance the ball. Detroit has the ball at the 35 yard line."
Big roar in the crowd. Mariucci wants to challenge the ruling that it was a muff. He thinks its a fumble, not a muff. Here is what the commentators said:
"So Mariucci is essentially challenging for possesion, he won't get a TD" (Completely false, the ruling was Detroit had possession. Mariucci wants it to be a fumble for the TD not possession)
"Even if Mariucci wins, it won't be a Touchdown." (False, a fumbled ball on special teams can be advanced according to a rules expert on radio)
Mariucci loses the challenge. The referee says "The ruling on the play stands." The commentators say:
"But they announced that the ball was now Detroit's, so Mariucci ended up winning. Unless they meant that Arizona had the ball" (Possession was always Detroit's and NEVER IN QUESTION. If I can get that as an observer, then you should get that being on the phone with the NFL rules guru)
When will networks get commentators that are haveway knowledgable about the rules? And, in this case, halfway observant of the field? This is worse than Collinsworth's "He could spike the ball"
-Anxiety
Refs have a conference in the field, rule that Anquan never had possession so it was a muff, so "Detroit could not advance the ball. Detroit has the ball at the 35 yard line."
Big roar in the crowd. Mariucci wants to challenge the ruling that it was a muff. He thinks its a fumble, not a muff. Here is what the commentators said:
"So Mariucci is essentially challenging for possesion, he won't get a TD" (Completely false, the ruling was Detroit had possession. Mariucci wants it to be a fumble for the TD not possession)
"Even if Mariucci wins, it won't be a Touchdown." (False, a fumbled ball on special teams can be advanced according to a rules expert on radio)
Mariucci loses the challenge. The referee says "The ruling on the play stands." The commentators say:
"But they announced that the ball was now Detroit's, so Mariucci ended up winning. Unless they meant that Arizona had the ball" (Possession was always Detroit's and NEVER IN QUESTION. If I can get that as an observer, then you should get that being on the phone with the NFL rules guru)
When will networks get commentators that are haveway knowledgable about the rules? And, in this case, halfway observant of the field? This is worse than Collinsworth's "He could spike the ball"
-Anxiety