49ers/Seahawks

Raymond

APG wrote
All reviewable aspects of the play would be reviewable...since the Bowman aspect of the play dealt with a fumble recovery in the field, it wouldn't be reviewable...even with the roundabout challenge...

I have yet to see clear evidence that Kearse ever had possession, as in "caught the pass". Harbaugh should have challenged the ruling that is was a completion in the first place. That review would reveal that Bowman intercepted the ball and was subsequently down by contact, and that there never was a fumble.

Adam

Suudy wrote
They aren't allowed?

I'm guessing they'd throw the flag if they'd be supported.

Lack of support is tantamount to not being "allowed" IMO.

HLin NC

The players shouldn't be expected to pullup if they tackle or take other action near the chains.

They should if the opponent is already OOB.

[deleted]

BadNewsRef wrote
I have yet to see clear evidence that Kearse ever had possession, as in "caught the pass". Harbaugh should have challenged the ruling that is was a completion in the first place. That review would reveal that Bowman intercepted the ball and was subsequently down by contact, and that there never was a fumble.

I thought Harbaugh should do this too, but the guys at FootballZebras said what APG said: Bowman's recovery of the ball and being down by contact is not a reviewable aspect of the play, no matter how you challenge it.

Welpe

HLin NC wrote
They should if the opponent is already OOB.

But in this play, the Seattle player was still inbounds when he was shoved.

I truly think, despite looking through the prism of a Niner fan, that this was a flag I'd rather not throw. There wasn't enough there in that situation to justify a flag IMO.

Suudy

Welpe wrote
But in this play, the Seattle player was still inbounds when he was shoved.

Agreed.

Welpe wrote
I truly think, despite looking through the prism of a Niner fan, that this was a flag I'd rather not throw. There wasn't enough there in that situation to justify a flag IMO.

And, despite being a Seahawks fan, this is a flag I'd rather not throw. I don't think the official was worried about safety regarding the down box (and I think the down box guy should have been pulling back and dropping at that point). The only thing I can think he was considering was that the pass was obviously not going to be caught. And that was dubious, IMO.

Suudy

Adam wrote
I'm guessing they'd throw the flag if they'd be supported.

Lack of support is tantamount to not being "allowed" IMO.

Fair enough. The P12 officials have, IMO, become the lower tier of DI officiating. And it is allowing behavior like this that has been a part of it. Whether that is an "upper management" issue, such as not supporting officials, poor training, or poor recruiting, or just a string of bad luck or aging officials, I'm not sure.

bisonlj

Welpe wrote
But in this play, the Seattle player was still inbounds when he was shoved.

I truly think, despite looking through the prism of a Niner fan, that this was a flag I'd rather not throw. There wasn't enough there in that situation to justify a flag IMO.

Definitely still in bounds but out of the play. There was no need for him to contact his opponent, but he decides to get a shove in by extending his arm and knocking him into the sideline. This was completely unnecessary. Maybe it was too technical but don't do something stupid if you don't want to risk getting flagged. My initial reaction when I saw it was "I can see that." I'm sure opinions are mixed through. This is not a black and white play.

Andy

bisonlj wrote
Definitely still in bounds but out of the play. There was no need for him to contact his opponent, but he decides to get a shove in by extending his arm and knocking him into the sideline. This was completely unnecessary. Maybe it was too technical but don't do something stupid if you don't want to risk getting flagged. My initial reaction when I saw it was "I can see that." I'm sure opinions are mixed through. This is not a black and white play.

These were my thoughts as well at the time of the play.

I am not a football official, but do officiate other sports.

ajmc

bisonlj wrote
Definitely still in bounds but out of the play. There was no need for him to contact his opponent, but he decides to get a shove in by extending his arm and knocking him into the sideline. This was completely unnecessary. Maybe it was too technical but don't do something stupid if you don't want to risk getting flagged. My initial reaction when I saw it was "I can see that." I'm sure opinions are mixed through. This is not a black and white play.

"Completely unnecessary" sounds right. How close is too close, how "completely unnecessary" does it take to lead to retaliation, which leads to loss of control?

It was dumb, excessive and RIGHT IN FRONT OF AN OFFICIAL, who apparently chose not to be dragged down a different, endless "what if" road.

bisonlj

ajmc wrote
"Completely unnecessary" sounds right. How close is too close, how "completely unnecessary" does it take to lead to retaliation, which leads to loss of control?

It was dumb, excessive and RIGHT IN FRONT OF AN OFFICIAL, who apparently chose not to be dragged down a different, endless "what if" road.

It's a judgement call and that's why he gets paid the big bucks. His supervisor will let him know if he likes his judgement on this play and they will move on.

ajmc

bisonlj wrote
It's a judgement call and that's why he gets paid the big bucks. His supervisor will let him know if he likes his judgement on this play and they will move on.

Very true, but very often when an NFL officials, sticks his finger in the water during a championship game, the ripples find their way to an eromous number of football fields downstream, and this ripple seems to be whispering, "Stupid, unnecessary behavior can cause unanticipated consequences" which is never a bad ripple to send downstream.

« Previous Page