Pittsburg/Miami Fumble
 

After watching the clip of this play several times, it appears to me that the correct call should have been an inadvertant whistle which in the end would still award the ball to Pittsburg. Watching the clip you can see the linesman coming in indicating a touchdown and I'm sure blowing his whistle, when the reverse view shows the ball is out and has been recovered yet.

Saying we don't know who recovered the ball only makes me think that they decided to say that instead of IW, because why would the officials all stop doing their job unless they also heard the whistle and saw the touchdown signal?

Also, I believe the NFL has a rule about fumbling forward especially into the end zone (the Snake from Oakland rule). I'm not sure if this rule applies here because I don't know all the details that goes alone with this rule...does anyone know the rule and if it would have applied to this play?

BTW, I don't have a dog in the race...did not care who won but the rules interpretation of this play interests me.

If the play would have happened under the two minute warning or was a fourth down play/try, then the fumbler is the only Team A member who would of been allowed to recover and advance ball. If another player on team A would of recovered the ball, it would revert back to the spot of the fumble or the recovery spot, whichever is worse. As the play occurred outside the two minute warning and was not on fourth down/a try, then a recovery by the Steelers would of resulted in a touchdown.

The rule about fumbling forward says that if the ball is fumbled forward and out of fumbles, it reverts back to the spot of the fumble.

Also, aside from the officials erroneously saying the ball crossed the plane of the endzone, the play was handled correctly.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5726781

Had another "early" whistle in Monday night's game. Ball popped out and the defense recovered.

How can it be an IW if in his opinion the ball broke the goal line before the fumble, therefore making it a dead ball and play over?

No, it wasn't clear on video who recovered the ball. If it was clear then they would have given them the ball. This is not an IW.

How was it not clear? A Dolphin handed the ball to the referee.

I see B pick up a dead ball and hand it to an official every week. We know it was dead at that point. What we don't know is who had it when it became dead.

How many times have you seen the ball given back to the fumbling team because the officials had no idea who had the ball when it became dead?

I think this is the second time I've seen it. I agree that they should have kept working when the ball came loose, but they didn't. Guessing that the Dolphins recovered it doesn't correct the first error. You wouldn't make a guess as to how a play would have ended if you had an IW either.

Because he was wrong. The ball was loose, it wasn't a TD and he shouldn't have blown.

Whether it was an IW or not under NFL rules, I don't know. But that is pretty much the way it was treated.

Not THAT often. Maybe twice that I can remember. You know all the pileups are scrums and the ball changes hands 20 times in there... what is nearly always ruled is who has it when they finally get to the bottom of the pile, which, in this case, was the Dolphins.

What kind of question is that? How can it be an IW if in my opinion the ballcarrier was down on my side and I blow the whistle, only to learn the ball is nowhere near me? Answer: It can, and it is. Ditto the sitch here. HL THOUGHT the play was over, but it wasn't.

It's nearly always ruled that way, but they also nearly always work to unpile the players and find the ball.

The question I have here is do the rules allow an instant replay review change the result of the play to an inadvertent whistle?

Who ends up with the ball does not matter. It was not clear who recovered the ball. There was a big pile on the ground with people diving for the ball; it was not clear who recovered the ball.

This play was no different than any other challenge on a fumble in the NFL when the initial call was no fumble. It has to be clear which team recovers the ball in order to give them the ball. Normally it is clear, this time it was not.

The problem is that the Replay System requires indisputable visual evidence to award the ball.

I remember Mike Pereira on officials review talking about the change that allowed more fumbles to be reviewed and he was clear that there was no way they were going to use Instant Replay to award possession in a scrum situation.

You just contradicted yourself. It is different because of exactly what you posted. It was not clear which team recovered the ball.

Because the play was initially ruled a TD, the officials didn't dig to see who recovered the ball. I saw it and realized that even before the reply. I knew that even if it was ruled a fumble, Pittsbirgh was going to get th ball back.

And that's waht was different compared to 99% of the fumble reviews in the NFL.

No, you don't get it. Every type of review where the ball is ruled dead but was possible a fumble is the same. When the referee looks at the video it must be clear who recovered the ball. In this play the ball was under a pile of players.

NFL Rulebook

The Replay System will cover the following play situations only

2. Runner ruled down by defensive contact when the recovery of a fumble by
an opponent or a teammate occurs during the continuing action of the play.
Note 1: If the ruling of down by contact is changed, the ball belongs to the recovering
player at the spot of the recovery of the fumble, and any advance is nullified.
Note 2: Continuing action is any action that occurs through the recovery of the fumble.
Note 3: If the Referee does not have indisputable visual evidence as to which player
recovered the fumble, the ruling of down by contact will stand.
Note 4: This does not apply to quarterback pass/fumbles, complete/incomplete
passes, or the ruling of forward progress.

Oh, I get it just fine. While every review maybe the same, every play is NOT the same. In this play, the crew failed to determine who recovered the fumble, something that doesn't happen 99% of the time.

Did you not read what I wrote:confused: The referee has to be able to see on the video who recovered the ball

Note 3: If the Referee does not have indisputable visual evidence as to which player recovered the fumble, the ruling of down by contact will stand.

Look at the video NFL Videos: Steelers TD challenged and reversed

Now pretend that you are the referee. Do you have indisputable visual evidence as to which player recovered the fumble? What does Note 3 say happens when you don't have that?

Also at 15 seconds you can see the umpire and back judge going through the pile of players while the LJ approaches the pile. Just going to take a guess that one of them saw who had the ball at the end :rolleyes:

Yes, I read exactly what you wrote. It doesn't have anything to do with what I've posted.

The crew did not determine who recovered the fumble. This makes the play different than 99% of the fumble plays that are reviewed.

I don't know what to say. You clearly do not understand the NFL replay system. The crew digging through the pile and seeing who has the ball means nothing when it comes to overturning the call. You have to have indisputable video evidence who recovered the ball.

Maybe a quote from the referee who had to make the replay decision will help you..."I have to have clear video evidence of the team recovering the fumble," Steratore said after the game. "It is a pile of bodies in there, and you don't have a clear recovery."

Good. Maybe you'll STFU. :)

I understand the NFL replay system just fine. The crew did not determine who recovered the fumble. Therefore, it did not show up on the video. This makes it different than 99% of the other fumble reviews you see in the NFL.

I see where you have it wrong. The officials digging through a pile of players to find the ball does not constitute indisputable visual evidence. The player who ends up with the ball in a pile like that may not be the one who actually recovered the ball.

As soon as the ball disappears in a pile the call isn't going to get overturned.

I understand all the things you've posted. They have nothing to do with my point, and that is that this play is different because in 99% of the reviews, the referee is able to determine who recovered the ball. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. Thanks.

Ok that is fine. My point is that you do not understand what the NFL means when it says there must be "indisputable visual evidence as to which player recovered the fumble." If you did you would not have written several posts about the officials going through the pile to see who had the ball.

If the officials didn't determine who in the pile had the ball it is not a big deal as it has no significance within the rules. Think about if you were calling a false start and right as you go to blow the whistle the ball is snapped and muffed and there is a big pile for the ball. Are you going to dig through the pile and see who has the ball? Of course not, it doesn't mean anything; just enforce the false start and get on with the game.

You can make all the erroneous judgments about me that you want simply because I don't express my thoughts they way you would like for me to. I don'tgivea$hit.

My point is this play is different from 99% of the fumbles reviewed because there was no way to determine whor ecovered the ball. That's been my point from the beginning. Not all this other crap you keep brining up about how replays are handled.

Thanks for the discussion, I am now placing you on my ignore list. Take care.

You left a couple of words off of what your point was. Also you were talking about replay and I simply corrected the what you said that was wrong.

Your original point was because the officials didn't determine who recovered the ball that it wasn't going to get overturned. In actuality as soon as the ball went into the pile it wasn't going to get overturned.

You really can't take being wrong. It isn't a big deal that you don't know NFL rules. I know on Rivals Ask the Ref you are the smartest guy on there but over here other people actually know the rules better than you. You don't have to get so worked up about it.

I am with Cobra on this. The NFL has specific replay procedures which differ from what you or me would do in situations like this.

The ruling on the field was a TD so the crew did not need to determine who recovered the ball.

Once replay was invoked, only the video can determine who recovered. The Referee cannot consult with the crew to determine that point so even if the crew did unpile the bodies the NFL replay rules would still require the visual evidence to award possession.

In games without video replay rules, a crew could get together and discuss the call and if they determined the player was not in then they could then go to the inadvertant whistle as the result of the play.

Yes.

I understand the rule on the field was TD and play is over. But why did they not determine who recovered the ball on the field ?
just in case it was a fumble.

Who comes up with the ball at the bottom of the piles does not have any significance when it comes to replay so it really isn't necessary in any way.

When the referee watches the video there are 2 requirements that he must see in order to overturn the dead ball no fumble call: 1) Indisputable visual evidence that it was a fumble, and 2) Indisputable visual evidence of who recovered the ball.

In this play he had #1 but did not have #2. When a possible fumble goes in a pile of players like that it is not going to get overturned. If a reviewed possible fumble is out on the middle of the field many times one player will fall on the ball immediately after the fumble; it is clear who actually recovered the ball. If there is a pile of players going for the ball it takes quite some time to determine who actually has the ball. During that time the official is making his call (touchdown, down by contact..) and players let go of the ball. The players know the officials are not calling it a fumble so they don't worry about the ball. A team A player could have had the ball, heard the official call touchdown and therefore let go of the ball. A team B player then grabs the ball and ends up standing up holding the ball. The player who actually recovered the ball may not be the one who ends up with it.

Basically what it comes down to is if you are watching the replay on your TV and you can't see who recovered the ball then the call is not going to get overturned.

I don`t mean review.

Let`s say a fumble without a whistle. ball in pileup.
The refs have to determine which team belongs to the ball or not ?

Yes, the would then determine who has the ball.