[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Unit14

I'm not blaming the officials on the field. I'm not blaming anybody. There was enough evidence to say there was a fumble, but since the whistle had blown and the runner was ruled down by contact, they didn't know who should be awarded the ball.

So, why not say "Coach, there was a fumble, but since the play was whistled dead, we can't base any decision on what happened next, since the play was dead. So, save your challenge and subsequent timeout for another time." Or, after reviewing say "After further review, the ruling on the field stands, but since the play had been whistled dead, the bears are not charged a timeout.

Because, truly, the challenge was correct.

Because they would violate the rule. And the officials have no idea what the video would show or would not show. And if I remember correctly, the officials did not blow the whistle at the time of the play. They seemed to wait or it was not clear there was a whistle blown when I watched the play live. I am under the impression they are asked to officiate plays this way. If the coach never challenges, then this is not a problem. The problem is if there is a challenge they must review the challenge and the rules apply if they lose. I do not see how the officials could have done that without violating a major rule.

Peace