PDA

View Full Version : League to look into rule after Chargers-Broncos non-fumble call



Shep
09-15-2008, 02:54 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3589407

NEW YORK -- The NFL will look into the inadvertent whistle rule that required officials to give the ball back to Denver in the final seconds of Sunday's game with San Diego.

League spokesman Greg Aiello said the NFL competition committee will look into the rule in the offseason, perhaps changing it as it did the "down by contact" rule.

The play occurred with the Broncos at the Chargers' 1-yard line in the final minute. Denver quarterback Jay Cutler dropped back to pass, and the ball slipped out of his hands, bounced off the grass and into the arms of San Diego linebacker Tim Dobbins.

Referee Ed Hochuli ruled it an incomplete pass. Replay ruled it a fumble, but it was spotted at the 10-yard line, where the ball hit the ground, and given to Denver because the rules did not permit possession to be awarded to San Diego because the whistle had blown.

Denver went on to score, convert a two-point conversion and win 39-38.

Until March 2007, down by contact plays were not reviewable. That rule was changed so that they were reviewable, and if a fumble occurred even after the whistle blew, the team recovering it got possession.

"All we can do to fix it is put the ball at the spot that it hit the ground, which is why we moved it back to the 10-yard line and the down counts and it becomes third down," Hochuli said after the game Sunday.

That explanation wasn't good enough for Chargers coach Norv Turner.

"On the last play, it was clearly a fumble," Turner fumed. "Ed came over, the official, and said he blew it. And that's not acceptable to me. This is a high-level performance game and that's not acceptable to have a game decided on that play."

Even Cutler acknowledged as much. "Fumble, I think," he said after the game, and blamed the slick, new ball for it slipping from his hand.

Information from The Associated Press was used in this report.

haroldthebarrel
09-15-2008, 02:58 PM
they probably looked into the non calls on STs after we lost to the Chiefs due to missed block in the back calls.

They should at least look into this. One great thing about football is that it always evolves.

Shep
09-15-2008, 03:02 PM
they probably looked into the non calls on STs after we lost to the Chiefs due to missed block in the back calls.

They should at least look into this. One great thing about football is that it always evolves.

Yep, I smell another Tuck Rule coming.

claymore
09-15-2008, 03:02 PM
I still say it was an incomplete pass. :D

MOtorboat
09-15-2008, 03:02 PM
I still say it was an incomplete pass. :D

Because that's what it was...

OB
09-15-2008, 03:08 PM
I understand looking into it but if the whistle doesnt end a play - then what will? You have to have something to end a play -

There is always going to be a factor for human error in sports - if you start making every play reviewable - whats the point in playing?

jrelway
09-15-2008, 03:17 PM
im enjoying some sportscenter and nfl live today..they keep praising shanny, cutler, marshall and royal. Then they show Norv on the podium shaking while he speaks. Even the sports anchors are saying they had chance"s" to stop the broncos after that bad call.

sacmar
09-15-2008, 03:49 PM
Let 'em look and change whatever they want....one thing won't change bronc 2-0 chargers 0-2.

honz
09-15-2008, 05:02 PM
This isn't the first time an inadvertent whistle has not allowed the refs to overturn an obvious call after reviewing it...this case is just getting a lot of pub since it was at the end of a game. It is going to be really hard to change this rule because when the whistle blows the play is over, and some players may stop playing or slow down. I just can't see them changing this rule...a blown whistle means the play is over and potentially changes what might happen the rest of the play.

SmilinAssasSin27
09-15-2008, 05:39 PM
The unfortunate thing for SD was the fact that CLEARLY nobody else was recovering the fumble. There isn't even the excuse that a Bronco may have let up, thus resulting in the SD recovery. This kind of thing has happened a million times, but never this clear that one team was done wrong. Oh well...I'm still smiling.

omac
09-15-2008, 06:46 PM
I understand looking into it but if the whistle doesnt end a play - then what will? You have to have something to end a play -

There is always going to be a factor for human error in sports - if you start making every play reviewable - whats the point in playing?

Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing. I thought it was Crowder, but someone posted it was Abdullah, who recovered a fumble and started running towards the endzone, but the whistle stopped him. Imagine with a new rule, the whistle blows, yet he still keeps on running towards the endzone, and the opposing team continue chasing him anyway. :D

The refs would be blowing their whistles again and again, yet the players won't stop just in case.

Tned
09-15-2008, 07:03 PM
Yep, I smell another Tuck Rule coming.

No, not really a "Tuck Rule", but the same "continuation of play" that they implemented a few years back on down by contact.


League spokesman Greg Aiello said the NFL competition committee will look into the rule in the offseason, perhaps changing it as it did the "down by contact" rule.


I was very surprised when the Ref said that by rule, it was Denver's ball. The reason is that I didn't realize the "continuation of play" rule they implemented in '06 or '07 was only for down by contact, so I thought that the same would apply.

For those that aren't familiar. After a big blown call, like the one in the SD game, occurred in a playoff game or cost a team a chance at the playoffs (I can't remember), the competition committee looked at it.

It used to be that the Down by contact plays could not be reviewed for fumbles, once the whistle was blown. Meaning, if a ref blew a whistle indicating down by contact, but it turned out the player fumbled before being down, and the other team recovered, the ball remained with the fumbling team.

In '06 or '07, they instituted a "continuation of play" rule, that basically stated that if a ball came loose, even if the official indicated that the player was down by contact (by blowing his whistle and pointing to the ground as they do) that players on both teams could/should continue to play through the whistle to get control of the ball. If the play was challenged (as to whether it was down by contact or fumbled) and the other team had recovered the ball, then this "continuation of play" after the whistle was blown would determine who got the ball.

In this "continuation of play" the recovering team could not advance the ball, but possession would change.

I didn't realize it was only for down by contact, so even though the whistle blew and the ref called incomplete pass, I thought the Broncos would lose the ball, because in the "continuation of play" through the whistle SD recovered.

Now, this is a tough situation. The competition committee brought in this continuation of play thing to try and "get it right", but it does bring in a down side and that is that now players have to ignore the whistle and keep playing any time there is a loose ball. Many, probably most, of the time the player is down by contact when the ball comes out, but you have mad scrambles to get the loose ball, 'just in case'. When the rule change first went in, I thought it was bad to have a rule that told players to ignore the whistle and keep playing.

Tned
09-15-2008, 07:06 PM
I understand looking into it but if the whistle doesnt end a play - then what will? You have to have something to end a play -


It currently doesn't end the play on "down by contact" plays. Something I think is dangerous for players. Some play through the whistle, some don't.

Hawgdriver
09-15-2008, 07:17 PM
There's no question officiating has to get better. "The human element" isn't how games should be won or lost. Having the game be dictated by the vagaries of the split second judgment of one man isn't the best answer. With all of the modern tools available, there is no question the NFL officiating process can improve without sacrificing pace of play.

They can start by using only bionic refs that see the world in matrix-like slow-motion clarity...

Yeah, it's a tough issue. Does anyone have any ideas on how to improve officiating? The whistle is crucial because an early whistle helps avoid player injuries. IMO maybe the empty hand rule needs to be changed to help the ref make the right call and also keep injuries down.

Hawgdriver
09-15-2008, 07:19 PM
It currently doesn't end the play on "down by contact" plays. Something I think is dangerous for players. Some play through the whistle, some don't.

I agree, that's asking for injury. I would rather sacrifice a bad bounce for player safety.

Retired_Member_001
09-15-2008, 08:01 PM
It's hard to predict what the NFL will do. Will they deny it was wrong so they don't have to admit they were wrong, or will the issue an official apology to the Chargers and fine the ref. Who knows? All I know is that they can't over turn the win, what they can do though, is make all the refs hate us in future games.

LRtagger
09-15-2008, 08:16 PM
maybe they should also look into the slick balls they put into play. That is the third or fourth time I have seen that happen already this year. It happened last week in our game.

It's not like SD made some awesome defensive play that made Cutler fumble. A slick ball slipped out of his hands. Sure Denver got lucky that they got to keep the ball, but SD would have been the lucky team had they recovered a fumble that they didnt even cause.

LRtagger
09-15-2008, 08:30 PM
speaking of which it just happened to Romo on MNF. Fumbled in the endzone, Eagles get a TD.

Broncolingus
09-15-2008, 08:41 PM
speaking of which it just happened to Romo on MNF. Fumbled in the endzone, Eagles get a TD.

...yeah, the league better look into that.

dogfish
09-15-2008, 11:46 PM
It's hard to predict what the NFL will do. Will they deny it was wrong so they don't have to admit they were wrong, or will the issue an official apology to the Chargers and fine the ref. Who knows? All I know is that they can't over turn the win, what they can do though, is make all the refs hate us in future games.

when hoculi explained the call, he did admit that it should have been ruled a fumble and not blown dead. . . as much as we all love to criticise officials (my self included), i do think that the NFL refs are a damn sight better than the NBA or NHL. . . at least the NFL has shown some willingness to admit mistakes (like after the polamalu INT was overturned in the pitt-indy playoff game in '05, i believe it was), and when mistakes are made they're often willing to consider rule changes or modifications, rather than just sweeping it under the rug. . . they're sure not perfect, but i'll take that approach over the blatant denial and stonewalling that you often see from officials in other sports, IMO. . .

Bronco Bible
09-16-2008, 08:51 AM
Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing. I thought it was Crowder, but someone posted it was Abdullah, who recovered a fumble and started running towards the endzone, but the whistle stopped him. Imagine with a new rule, the whistle blows, yet he still keeps on running towards the endzone, and the opposing team continue chasing him anyway. :D

The refs would be blowing their whistles again and again, yet the players won't stop just in case.

And if a player makes a tackle they risk a 15 yard penalty:coffee:

MOtorboat
09-16-2008, 08:54 AM
The DeSean Jackson incident last night is the exact same rule. Because the play was blown dead at the spot where he let go of the ball (the one yard line), that's where the team who had possession of the ball gets it.

NightTrainLayne
09-16-2008, 09:42 AM
The DeSean Jackson incident last night is the exact same rule. Because the play was blown dead at the spot where he let go of the ball (the one yard line), that's where the team who had possession of the ball gets it.

Exactly. Had one of the Cowboys picked it up and recovered it, it would have remained Eagles Ball at the one-yard line.

Same call, same rule, but no controversy because the Cowboys stopped on the blown whistle.

MOtorboat
09-16-2008, 09:44 AM
Exactly. Had one of the Cowboys picked it up and recovered it, it would have remained Eagles Ball at the one-yard line.

Same call, same rule, but no controversy because the Cowboys stopped on the blown whistle.

And they aren't whining today. Mostly because it was Jackson being a bonehead, not in the heat of battle in the last minute.

Northman
09-16-2008, 09:53 AM
Exactly. Had one of the Cowboys picked it up and recovered it, it would have remained Eagles Ball at the one-yard line.

Same call, same rule, but no controversy because the Cowboys stopped on the blown whistle.

There's no crying because Dallas still won. Had the Eagles won there still would be no crying because the Chargers are supposed to be SB Champs this year. :lol:

Bronco Bible
09-16-2008, 11:33 AM
There's no crying because Dallas still won. Had the Eagles won there still would be no crying because the Chargers are supposed to be SB Champs this year. :lol:

I guess Shanny did not get the memo;)

HighPlainsBronc
09-16-2008, 08:35 PM
This isn't the first time an inadvertent whistle has not allowed the refs to overturn an obvious call after reviewing it...this case is just getting a lot of pub since it was at the end of a game. It is going to be really hard to change this rule because when the whistle blows the play is over, and some players may stop playing or slow down. I just can't see them changing this rule...a blown whistle means the play is over and potentially changes what might happen the rest of the play.

I remember a couple of times in games past that the very same rule bit the Broncos in the butt.

One of the times a Broncos player had picked up the fumble and ran it in for a score, Alas, there had been a blown whistle and the opposing team kept the ball.

If I remember correctly it was instrumental in the Broncos losing the game. I think it was like a 3 point loss. I guess sometimes that call works for you and sometimes it doesn't.

It all averages out.

Hoshdude7
09-16-2008, 08:37 PM
I remember a couple of times in games past that the very same rule bit the Broncos in the butt.

One of the times a Broncos player had picked up the fumble and ran it in for a score, Alas, there had been a blown whistle and the opposing team kept the ball.

If I remember correctly it was instrumental in the Broncos losing the game. I think it was like a 3 point loss. I guess sometimes that call works for you and sometimes it doesn't.

It all averages out.

Chicago game last year?

HighPlainsBronc
09-16-2008, 08:44 PM
Chicago game last year?

I simply don't remember when it was, but I've seen it more than once. LOL

It is just part of the game. I'm just glad the ball bounced our way for a change.

Retired_Member_001
09-17-2008, 08:14 AM
when hoculi explained the call, he did admit that it should have been ruled a fumble and not blown dead. . . as much as we all love to criticise officials (my self included), i do think that the NFL refs are a damn sight better than the NBA or NHL. . . at least the NFL has shown some willingness to admit mistakes (like after the polamalu INT was overturned in the pitt-indy playoff game in '05, i believe it was), and when mistakes are made they're often willing to consider rule changes or modifications, rather than just sweeping it under the rug. . . they're sure not perfect, but i'll take that approach over the blatant denial and stonewalling that you often see from officials in other sports, IMO. . .

I definitely agree here. The one thing I hate about the NBA is the refs. Even watching neutral games, you see bad calls and the league never does anything about it. However, in the NFL, all the calls are explained and I think for the fans sake, that is nice.

I still fear that in Week 17, the refs will favour the Chargers.

omac
09-17-2008, 10:07 AM
I definitely agree here. The one thing I hate about the NBA is the refs. Even watching neutral games, you see bad calls and the league never does anything about it. However, in the NFL, all the calls are explained and I think for the fans sake, that is nice.

I still fear that in Week 17, the refs will favour the Chargers.

Let them; Norv will probably look for more excuses when they lose. :coffee:

haroldthebarrel
09-17-2008, 10:57 AM
The NBA still has the Michael Jordan rule. The stars rarely get called especially in crunch time. And you can forget about a traveling violation.

I like how the NFL does things. They attempt to be responsible.
What I dont like is the arbitrary calls to protect the qb. But since it has been decided to protect them at all costs thats what we are stuck with.
And no way you can have people playing after the call with that mindset. Warren took Brees out of the season on a fumble. Everybody would take a shot at the qb if it was a loose ball and the qb were diving for it.

People forget that Brady got his opportunity because of injury to the star. He is not the only qb to get a shot due to injuries.

Lonestar
09-17-2008, 11:29 AM
I definitely agree here. The one thing I hate about the NBA is the refs. Even watching neutral games, you see bad calls and the league never does anything about it. However, in the NFL, all the calls are explained and I think for the fans sake, that is nice.

I still fear that in Week 17, the refs will favor the Chargers.

The NFL has the best refs but they do indeed make mistakes, I do not fear the refs in the LAST game this year in SAN I fear the Chargers unless they are re decimated by injuries they will be looking for blood.. They were robbed in the last game and they owned us both games last year..

It is going to be an ugly game lots of emotions probably a good time to have the Best of the best refs at that game.. Maybe even bring in a couple extras to keep the peace..

Maybe even a couple extra ambulances on premises..