49ers/Seahawks

[zm1283]

What I can't figure out is how one out of seven guys wasn't watching the ball while it was being ripped out of the receiver's hands.

And yes the replay rules are stupid too.

[Rich]

There's a football mentality of getting in and digging the pile and seeing who came up with the ball.

Unfortunately, in this situation the ball was clearly possessed by SF and the play was over.

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).

[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.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Adam

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

They aren't allowed?

[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.

[Suudy]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

[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.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by zm1283

What I can't figure out is how one out of seven guys wasn't watching the ball while it was being ripped out of the receiver's hands.

And yes the replay rules are stupid too.

There shouldn't be more than 2 or 3 guys looking toward the ball at this point and it's very possible all 3 were shielded. The wings are definitely looking in here but both have players between them. The U is looking in this area, but not always looking at the runner. His focus is usually on blocking at this point. Anyone else looking at the runner is watching the wrong thing. It would be nice if this specific play could be reviewed because it's obvious he got the ball and was then down. If you see this on the field and then there's a pile you still reward the ball to B even if A comes out with it.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

There shouldn't be more than 2 or 3 guys looking toward the ball at this point and it's very possible all 3 were shielded. The wings are definitely looking in here but both have players between them. The U is looking in this area, but not always looking at the runner. His focus is usually on blocking at this point. Anyone else looking at the runner is watching the wrong thing. It would be nice if this specific play could be reviewed because it's obvious he got the ball and was then down. If you see this on the field and then there's a pile you still reward the ball to B even if A comes out with it.

Did the play start inside of the five yard line? If not, the U is going to be in the backfield with the referee and may not have had a look on the play.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by APG

Did the play start inside of the five yard line? If not, the U is going to be in the backfield with the referee and may not have had a look on the play.

It started outside the 5 yard line.

I understand recoveries can't be reviewed, but as a coach I would have asked for some other type of review: incomplete pass b/c receiver never had possession. Then all elements of the play would be reviewable, and it would be clear Bowman had the ball and was down by contact.

Separate play:

Has the NFL put out an explanation yet as to why Seattle didn't get charged with roughing the kicker when Seattle #42 contacted Andy Lee's plant leg?

[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.

[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."