The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Football
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 03, 2005, 02:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kirkland, Washington
Posts: 422
Send a message via ICQ to Jim S Send a message via AIM to Jim S
The play was NOT recversed in this case. The only thing about the play that I didn't like was the explanation after ther review.
The replays could have gone either way, especially the way some of the reviews have gone this year.
It really wasn't clear.
But here we have a Referee that clearly states that "the ball came loose and hit the ground after the player had it in his grasp", something that no one else saw.
That includes the side guy who originally called the play. Some one on the field who shall remain nameless told me that the side said it hit the ground before the player gained possession.
Part of the fans' problems with reviews are some of the "explanations" coming from some of the Rs. I think they would be a lot better off just stated that the review did not show enough to reverse the on-field call.
This was such a case. It looked like the Seattle player MAY have had his hands under the ball, but there wasn't enough evidence to change the call.
__________________
Jim Schroeder

Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2, Read Rule 2!
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:43am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1