I see the refs are as putrid as ever..

[SirFozzie]

Gruden must be ready to pop a vein.. thank god for instant replay on that "fumble"

[sterlingice]

Yeah- anyone not named Stevie Wonder watching this knew it wasn't a fumble.

Then again, Madden's announcing right after that made it even worse. Michaels was explaining to newbies about the limit on replays and Madden clearly just didn't understand like the dolt he is.

SI

[BFleming]

After the refs couldn't even figure out who the home team was, you just knew we were in for an nfl officiating classic

[SirFozzie]

Welllllll...

mixed bag on that call.

Good call on the field. No way, even without the push would he have gotten both feet down..

but of course, the refs have to be TOLD that you can't challenge it.. :rollseyes:

[sabotai]

I think he gets both down without the push. His one leg "swinging" out was a result of the push. And the leg that "swung" out was further inbounds than the one that didn't.

[Chief Rum]

Actually, what was challenged was challengeable (whether Porter was in). What was not challengeable was the force out, the lack of knowledge of which falls on Callahan, not the refs.

I don't think it's all that clear he wouldn't have found a way to get a foot in without the push, though. Did anyone notice Porter's foot came within an inch or two of brushing the green grass before he fell out of bounds? And that was with the push.

IMO, the back line judge absolutely refusing to allow that that was an illegal force out was abominous. And it was his clear from him making the motion about 10 times that after he made a quick judgement call, he was too stubborn from being repeatedly questioned about it to properly consider whether he made the right call.

I'm sorry, but if you're close to in-bounds, and you get pushed, you're in. Even if the odds are likely you wouldn't have gotten in even without being pushed, the fact you were pushed means everything there. That backline judge made a horrible call.

Chief Rum

[SirFozzie]

I was watching the replay. Before the hit, WIth his backward momentum, I saw him landing a half yard or so on the chalk with the back foot.

[SirFozzie]

But after what Gannon pressed the self destruct button, doesn't matter none.

Rich Gannon, MVP for the Tampa Bay Bucaneers.. with five TD passes.. two to Oakland, and three to Tampa Bay ;)

[Chief Rum]

What do you thhink I was watching, Sir Fozz? A replay of the Golden Girls? :)

The fact of the matter is that it wasn't clear whether he would land inside or outside of the bounds. The fact that both sides are "clear" to different people (you and me) shows that that it could at least be called questionable.

And if it's questionable and he's pushed, the decision of whether he would have landed in or out is moot--he was pushed out. Catch and conversion good.

Chief Rum

[SirFozzie]

Chief: Now that you mention is.. Gannon DOES look like Bea Arthur ;)


Turned out it didn't matter though.. so no harm, no foul

[Bee]

The officiating was horrid. I don't think it ended up affecting the final result since the Bucc's walked all over the Raiders, but still it was really bad. I think this was an "all-star" crew doing the officiating, perhaps next year they can just use a crew who actually has worked together before...

[cincyreds]

Why did the NFL assign the worse officiating crew from the 2002 season?

These guys were a joke! They missed the 5 calls in the first half that should have been called.

How many times were they going to let Charles "never should have gotten the Heisman" Woodson hold receivers cuz he was getting burned go on?

Arrgggghhh!!!

[stkelly52]

Originally posted by Chief Rum
The fact of the matter is that it wasn't clear whether he would land inside or outside of the bounds. The fact that both sides are "clear" to different people (you and me) shows that that it could at least be called questionable.

And if it's questionable and he's pushed, the decision of whether he would have landed in or out is moot--he was pushed out. Catch and conversion good.

Chief Rum

Are you sure that is the rule? I have always heard that it must be clear that the player was going to land in bounds for it to count, and that if it isn't clear then he is ruled out of bounds.

[EagleFan]

Originally posted by Chief Rum
What do you thhink I was watching, Sir Fozz? A replay of the Golden Girls? :)

The fact of the matter is that it wasn't clear whether he would land inside or outside of the bounds. The fact that both sides are "clear" to different people (you and me) shows that that it could at least be called questionable.

And if it's questionable and he's pushed, the decision of whether he would have landed in or out is moot--he was pushed out. Catch and conversion good.

Chief Rum

The rule is that it's in the judgement of the ref if he would have come down in bounds. That's ludicrous to say that once he's pushed it's a catch. By that you're saying he could be in the air three feet out of bounds and get pushed and get awarded the catch. the ref made the judgement call, he was right there and saw the receiver's position and momentum. Would it have been close, yeah. Would he have been in bounds, no-one will know.