Worst NFL Review Decision Ever?

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by APG

The player regains control of the ball but does not maintain possession of the ball through contact with the ground. In fact, the player didn't even get any body part inbounds have he regained control of the ball. As such you can't award a touchdown in this case....but rather a touchback.

He had two feet down in bounds with control. The only thing he didn't do was maintain possession after contacting the ground.

[zm1283]

Don't really care for the rule or NFL replay in general, but it was the correct call.

The comments below that story in the original link above confirm just how stupid the general public is.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by zm1283

Don't really care for the rule or NFL replay in general, but it was the correct call.

The comments below that story in the original link above confirm just how stupid the general public is.

Well this is one of those plays where the "common sense" view of it is that he had possession in the endzone, so it's not hard to imagine most people would see it that way.

[jTheUmp]

Absolutely the correct call.

Runner loses possession of the ball at approximately the 2 yard line, and doesn't survive the ground with control of the ball (as explained by APG).

The only thing he didn't do was maintain possession after contacting the ground.

And that's why it's a touchback rather than a touchdown.

Ball-buster of a play for the covering official, but that's why replay's there.

"most people" might not see it that way, but "most people" have no clue what the rules are.

[hbk314]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Absolutely the correct call.

Runner loses possession of the ball at approximately the 2 yard line, and doesn't survive the ground with control of the ball (as explained by APG).


And that's why it's a touchback rather than a touchdown.

Ball-buster of a play for the covering official, but that's why replay's there.

"most people" might not see it that way, but "most people" have no clue what the rules are.

I was responding to a post claiming he never made contact with the ground in bounds.

I basically said the same thing as far as "most people." As in this is a play that appears in every way to be a touchdown, but there's a part of the rule that makes it a touchback. It's one of the rules that doesn't necessarily align with "common sense."

[jTheUmp]

So you know the rule, understand the rule, and yet you still titled this thread "Worst NFL Review Decision Ever?"?

[APG]

Originally Posted by hbk314

He had two feet down in bounds with control. The only thing he didn't do was maintain possession after contacting the ground.

My mistake...I was going off of memory instead of going back and watching the play again.

Still, with the topic titled as it is, the wording in your original post, and your lack of understanding the rules at play on this type of play, it would have probably served you better to just ask about the rules at play that resulted in a reversal of the play instead of what you posted in the OP.