49ers/Seahawks

[APG]

Originally Posted by youngump

I'm not sure why it's necessarily like this. Why wouldn't it be a review of whether Bowman fumbled or was down. By that I mean we have two possible mistakes on this play.
Mistake 1, ruling that Seattle fumbled and recovered their own fumble in the ensuing melee. (What you assume the mistake was).
Mistake 2, ruling that Seattle fumbled San Francisco recovered and then fumbled.
I suppose since they didn't award Seattle a first down they made mistake one, but it's an awfully weird result that because the error was worse it's not reviewable.

Mistake 1 is not reviewable in the field of play. If it involved a boundary line (meaning whether a player recovering the ball was inbounds or OOB or if the ball went OOB or stayed inbounds, etc) or if this play occurred in the endzone, then you could review this.

Mistake 2...the ruling on the field wasn't that there were two fumbles. The only way they could review Bowman's "recovery" is if in the field of play, they ruled he completed the process of the recovery and was a runner and that the next fumble wasn't part of the process of recovering the ball from the initial fumble.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Dakota

What's wrong with allowing an official, located in either the press box or in a central location, to recognize when something needs to be reviewed regardless of what the "replay" rule provides for with all of the coach's challenges and such. IOW, treat it just like another pair of eyes in the officiating crew on the field of play.

You mean like the college replay system? I just heard the crew did rule a fumble on the field and ultimate recovery by Seattle. The pile-up recoveries are not reviewable and never will be, but what the officials didn't know is it was a clear recovery before the pile. That's why I wonder if it could have been reviewed had the referee known how clear it appeared on video.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

You mean like the college replay system? I just heard the crew did rule a fumble on the field and ultimate recovery by Seattle. The pile-up recoveries are not reviewable and never will be, but what the officials didn't know is it was a clear recovery before the pile. That's why I wonder if it could have been reviewed had the referee known how clear it appeared on video.

I wouldn't be surprised if the NFL added this type of play (recovery of any fumble) to the list of reviewable plays next year (as was mentioned by Mike Pereira on the broadcast last night). What'll end up happening is you're going to hear a lot of "the ruling on the field stands."

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by Mad Mike

Gene's crew was terrible last night. They missed the roughing the kicker. They called an unsportsmanlike PF on SF for a shove out of bounds. On the same play, they missed an ineligible downfield with a double tight end set. At :20 left in the second quarter, both guys on the right end of the line went down field on a pass play when one of them was "covered up". No flag for that, but the same LJ who should have nailed that called a bogus PF foul. The take away at the goal line was atrocious. The FJ and SJ who are focused on the goaline were in position to rule on this and they blew it. The BJ looking in a the play would have had a clear shot to see the SF defender with the ball in his position at the end of the play. I did not see them talking to each other on this one and instead, they were digging in the pile!

If the BJ is looking at the runner at this point he's looking at the wrong this. That is not his responsibility. Based on this post I assume you aren't an official. You only site 4 plays, 2 of which are tough judgement calls. There are approximately 160 plays in a game with multiple things happening on many plays. If they only made 4 errors that is not a "terrible" game.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by ajmc

"Problem solved" and "Game Improved" are not always the same thing.

As technology continues to improve the potential for precision, not all the potential enhancements will benefit the game. Over the past 125+ years Football (at all it's levels) has become, far and away, the most popular sport in America, and is growing elsewhere. A considerable part of that success is derived from the dynamic excitement and drama of teams dealing with and responding to the periodic element of human mistakes, by players, coaches and at times officials.

Ultimately, various technologies will likely be able to reduce, if not eliminate, a majority of these unpredictable risks. That does not automatically translate to the game being "better", more "exciting", more "popular" or more "successful".

If absolute precision is your objective, go buy yourself an XBox, or whatever new technology will give YOU absolute control over all factors of the game, but leave the game, which includes all sorts of potential human failings, to struggle along for the next 125+ years of growing success.

When something clearly isn't broken, excessive "tinkering" can cause a lot more unexpected consequences than perceived improvements.

I agree with most of this. I'm a fan of replay in general, but to think it has to make everything perfect is not a good goal.

I think the primary reason so many fans get so passionate about these calls - gambling. It has been one of the key contributors to the success of the league, and I think it has fueled the screams for perfection. This includes fantasy leagues to an extent. It's one thing if your favorite team loses a game or a chance at a championship. It's another if a team loses a game which results in a lost bet. Or a call reverses a score that would have resulted in your player not earning points that would have helped you win a championship.

[HLin NC]

On the PF shove OOB, I noted that the player struck the box man and or box. Not hard but it's a safety thing, IMO.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

On the PF shove OOB, I noted that the player struck the box man and or box. Not hard but it's a safety thing, IMO.

The box should have been dropped when he got near them. The safety as related to the chains is the responsibility of the crew, not the players. The players shouldn't be expected to pullup if they tackle or take other action near the chains.

(Full disclosure: I'm a Seahawks fan.)

I wondered about this call as well. All I can think is that the official thought the push unnecessary, since it was clear the catch was not made. But regardless, I wonder why this was called a dead ball PF. The ball was not yet dead at the time of the contact. If I recall correctly, it was popped up and still in flight.

And I too thought the running into the kicker was a bad call. We I saw it full speed, I thought perhaps it was running into the kicker. But when I saw the replay, I shook my head (as a Seahawks fan) thinking "Crap, SF gets to keep the ball." I was shocked that they didn't call roughing.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Rich

Watching Harbaugh's antics during the game, I found myself rooting for the Seahawks harder than any game that doesn't involve the Eagles (love them) or Cowboys (despise them).

I used to be a great fan of Arizona (the Wildcats, not Cardinals), despite my alma mater. Tomey was a class act, and when I worked in the athletic department in college, had a run in with him in the pre-game.

But when Baby Stoops came to AZ, his sideline antics instantly turned me off. I went from a fan to an absolute hater. And the fact that the P12 crews let him run onto the field screaming, sometimes down near the goalline, without a flag irked me. I was thrilled when he got canned. And I've since watched a few OU games, and he still rants and raves there.

I get they are passionate. But when it explodes into jackass behavior, the league(s) and owners/administrators should reign them in.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Suudy

I used to be a great fan of Arizona (the Wildcats, not Cardinals), despite my alma mater. Tomey was a class act, and when I worked in the athletic department in college, had a run in with him in the pre-game.

But when Baby Stoops came to AZ, his sideline antics instantly turned me off. I went from a fan to an absolute hater. And the fact that the P12 crews let him run onto the field screaming, sometimes down near the goalline, without a flag irked me. I was thrilled when he got canned. And I've since watched a few OU games, and he still rants and raves there.

I get they are passionate. But when it explodes into jackass behavior, the league(s) and owners/administrators should reign them in.

Allowing the officials to flag that garbage would be a necessary starting point.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rich

That's OK. Watching Harbaugh's antics during the game, I found myself rooting for the Seahawks harder than any game that doesn't involve the Eagles (love them) or Cowboys (despise them).

That's funny, Denver radio was talking about how classy Harbaugh was after the game. Of course, the way coaches act on the sideline never seems to affect public perception of class.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Suudy

I wondered about this call as well. All I can think is that the official thought the push unnecessary, since it was clear the catch was not made. But regardless, I wonder why this was called a dead ball PF. The ball was not yet dead at the time of the contact. If I recall correctly, it was popped up and still in flight.

This was probably why the discussion during the dead ball was so long after the flag was thrown.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Adam

Allowing the officials to flag that garbage would be a necessary starting point.

They aren't allowed?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by APG

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]

Originally Posted by Suudy

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.