Bad calls by the REAL Refs today? (1 Viewer)

[RUSF18]

What the hell would full time refs do from February to August? A couple weeks of formal training/rules refreshing but then what?

 

[RUSF18]

Just as an aside, I know a guy who is an aspiring official and is moving up in the college game. He's done FCS and some lower level FBS back-up type stuff. I asked him about the whole full-time ref thing, and while also mentioning the generally high-paying jobs most of these guys have on the side, he said career longevity is a big issue. If you want NFL refs to have more accountability and harsher penalties for poor performance, so they can be downgraded/replaced at the league's discretion, you're talking about the possibility of being out on your ### 5 years down the road because of a 3% error rate. Who would want to quit being a mid six figures lawyer on the side for a 15 year peak shelf life as an NFL ref with very little job security? Maybe if they were pulling seven figures in the NFL.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Just as an aside, I know a guy who is an aspiring official and is moving up in the college game. He's done FCS and some lower level FBS back-up type stuff. I asked him about the whole full-time ref thing, and while also mentioning the generally high-paying jobs most of these guys have on the side, he said career longevity is a big issue. If you want NFL refs to have more accountability and harsher penalties for poor performance, so they can be downgraded/replaced at the league's discretion, you're talking about the possibility of being out on your ### 5 years down the road because of a 3% error rate. Who would want to quit being a mid six figures lawyer on the side for a 15 year peak shelf life as an NFL ref with very little job security? Maybe if they were pulling seven figures in the NFL.

Who cares if someone would quit their high-paying lawyer gig to be a ref full-time? That's the whole point. You get different people. People that don't already have a high-paying lawyer gig to fall back on if they screw up in their secondary job that they half care about.

You just described the exact reason that the quality of officiating would have improved. People that actually need to hold on to their job and are going to be unemployed if they do poorly are much more likely to put the time and care in to do a better job then a bunch of rich guys who can do it half-heartedly because they don't really need the job in the first place. You know, the way every other salaried job in the country works.

 

[Neofight]

Just as an aside, I know a guy who is an aspiring official and is moving up in the college game. He's done FCS and some lower level FBS back-up type stuff. I asked him about the whole full-time ref thing, and while also mentioning the generally high-paying jobs most of these guys have on the side, he said career longevity is a big issue. If you want NFL refs to have more accountability and harsher penalties for poor performance, so they can be downgraded/replaced at the league's discretion, you're talking about the possibility of being out on your ### 5 years down the road because of a 3% error rate. Who would want to quit being a mid six figures lawyer on the side for a 15 year peak shelf life as an NFL ref with very little job security? Maybe if they were pulling seven figures in the NFL.

Who cares if someone would quit their high-paying lawyer gig to be a ref full-time? That's the whole point. You get different people. People that don't already have a high-paying lawyer gig to fall back on if they screw up in their secondary job that they half care about.

You just described the exact reason that the quality of officiating would have improved. People that actually need to hold on to their job and are going to be unemployed if they do poorly are much more likely to put the time and care in to do a better job then a bunch of rich guys who can do it half-heartedly because they don't really need the job in the first place. You know, the way every other salaried job in the country works.

Bingo. I'm not sure I understand the friend of the previous posters line of reasoning. Is it that only rich, predominantly middle aged (that's being generous) men should be NFL officials? Why the hell would these guys sweat anything? The simple fact is these guys being a bunch of lawyers has certainly helped their plight. Poor fellas.

ETA: I'm certain there are plenty of capable men and women out there that could dedicate a span of 10-15 years of their lives focusing on officiating full time and then still find meaningful work in a follow-up career, whether that be within the NFL (offsite officials for reviews should be just one avenue) or teaching other officials at various levels. Or maybe having an entirely different career at the point when they are no longer able to officiate at the highest level. The compensation would be commensurate to the work and dedication.

 

[RUSF18]

Just as an aside, I know a guy who is an aspiring official and is moving up in the college game. He's done FCS and some lower level FBS back-up type stuff. I asked him about the whole full-time ref thing, and while also mentioning the generally high-paying jobs most of these guys have on the side, he said career longevity is a big issue. If you want NFL refs to have more accountability and harsher penalties for poor performance, so they can be downgraded/replaced at the league's discretion, you're talking about the possibility of being out on your ### 5 years down the road because of a 3% error rate. Who would want to quit being a mid six figures lawyer on the side for a 15 year peak shelf life as an NFL ref with very little job security? Maybe if they were pulling seven figures in the NFL.

Who cares if someone would quit their high-paying lawyer gig to be a ref full-time? That's the whole point. You get different people. People that don't already have a high-paying lawyer gig to fall back on if they screw up in their secondary job that they half care about.

You just described the exact reason that the quality of officiating would have improved. People that actually need to hold on to their job and are going to be unemployed if they do poorly are much more likely to put the time and care in to do a better job then a bunch of rich guys who can do it half-heartedly because they don't really need the job in the first place. You know, the way every other salaried job in the country works.

Bingo. I'm not sure I understand the friend of the previous posters line of reasoning. Is it that only rich, predominantly middle aged (that's being generous) men should be NFL officials? Why the hell would these guys sweat anything? The simple fact is these guys being a bunch of lawyers has certainly helped their plight. Poor fellas.

ETA: I'm certain there are plenty of capable men and women out there that could dedicate a span of 10-15 years of their lives focusing on officiating full time and then still find meaningful work in a follow-up career, whether that be within the NFL (offsite officials for reviews should be just one avenue) or teaching other officials at various levels. Or maybe having an entirely different career at the point when they are no longer able to officiate at the highest level. The compensation would be commensurate to the work and dedication.

All well and good, I understand what you guys are saying. But again I'll ask, where are you finding all of these people that are going to replace the current ranks of officials, beyond the normal attrition levels? It is a long journey to becoming an official in the NFL and it's not something that can be learned only in a classroom.

Also again, what do you think these refs should be doing for the half of the year where there's no football? Running wind sprints to get in better shape? Should the NFL restart the Europe league and send guys over there so they're making calls year round?

 

[Sarnoff]

This SEA/SF crew is terrible. Steratore should have spent the week reviewing the NFL rulebook instead of trying to ref NCAA basketball games. Looks like he forgot about half the material.

 

[Sarnoff]

Push out of bounds that wasn't which went Seattle's way.

Didn't know the difference between running into and roughing the kicker goes Seattle's way.

Now Bowman breaks his leg going down with possession and the refs are blind to it, call goes Seattle's way.

Turrible.

 

[jonessed]

Push out of bounds that wasn't which went Seattle's way.

Didn't know the difference between running into and roughing the kicker goes Seattle's way.

Now Bowman breaks his leg going down with possession and the refs are blind to it, call goes Seattle's way.

Turrible.

You can't push someone in the back like that after the play is over.

The only bad call that mattered was the roughing the kicker .

 

[flapgreen]

Ugly

 

[bucksoh]

Push out of bounds that wasn't which went Seattle's way.

Didn't know the difference between running into and roughing the kicker goes Seattle's way.

Now Bowman breaks his leg going down with possession and the refs are blind to it, call goes Seattle's way.

Turrible.

You can't push someone in the back like that after the play is over.

The only bad call that mattered was the roughing the kicker .

R you F-N-Serious WOW. The Refs were horrible.

 

[General Tso]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

 

[Dragon1952]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Although...... the biggest call that went against the 49ers actually turned out to benefit them as they got another TO on the very next play and ended up with the ball on the 15 instead of the 1.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

http://saintsreport.com/forums/attachments/f2/72301d1390188065-reason-behind-seattles-success-image.jpg

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Did you watch the first half. Seattle got jobbed on a couple soft penalties that killed drives.

The only relevant call that went against the 49ers in the 2nd half was roughing vs running into the kicker. The turnover on the 1 yard line actually worked out better for them after the next play.

 

[Bills_Fan11]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Did you watch the first half. Seattle got jobbed on a couple soft penalties that killed drives.

The only relevant call that went against the 49ers in the 2nd half was roughing vs running into the kicker. The turnover on the 1 yard line actually worked out better for them after the next play.

I can't recall a time where most football fans thought a running kicker call should've been roughing, ha. Pereira is the only reason anyone is talking about it.

 

[Mark Davis]

Gene Steratore should be reprimanded and more for that. The missed calls were terrible, but human error is one thing, not knowing the rules is another. He flagged the running into the kicker play yet the head referee in an NFC Championship game doesn't know that hitting the plant leg is an automatic 15 yards? To me that is incompetence.

 

[General Tso]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Did you watch the first half. Seattle got jobbed on a couple soft penalties that killed drives.The only relevant call that went against the 49ers in the 2nd half was roughing vs running into the kicker. The turnover on the 1 yard line actually worked out better for them after the next play.

1. When the refs miss a turnover at the 1 yard line, it's big. Just because Carroll had a complete brain fart and went for it on 4th down and fumbled it, doesn't mean it wasn't a bad call on a very important play. Plus, let's give the Niners some credit for stuffing that run and forcing the fumble.2. The push off out of bounds was atrocious. And I believe that was in the first half. That was the most blatantly obvious bad call I saw.

3. The refs called an incomplete pass on 2nd and 12 when it should have been a catch by Boldin leaving a manageable 3rd and 3. Tha was a huge play at the time.

Once again, I've got no dog in this fight. Just calling it as I saw it, and it looked to me to be very lopsided.

 

[MAC_32]

Clucking about the refs always makes me chuckle, keep it up fellas, you're missing a good game out there.

 

[MAC_32]

Gene Steratore should be reprimanded and more for that. The missed calls were terrible, but human error is one thing, not knowing the rules is another. He flagged the running into the kicker play yet the head referee in an NFC Championship game doesn't know that hitting the plant leg is an automatic 15 yards? To me that is incompetence.

HE'S A WITCH

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

 

[General Tso]

Clucking about the refs always makes me chuckle, keep it up fellas, you're missing a good game out there.

Uh, it's a thread about bad calls by the refs. Were you expecting something else in here?

 

[General Tso]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

 

[Mark Davis]

Gene Steratore should be reprimanded and more for that. The missed calls were terrible, but human error is one thing, not knowing the rules is another. He flagged the running into the kicker play yet the head referee in an NFC Championship game doesn't know that hitting the plant leg is an automatic 15 yards? To me that is incompetence.

HE'S A WITCH

He's incompetent. I can give you the definition of what that means if you don't know it. An NFL Referee failing to assess a penalty that he sees correctly falls into that category. The other calls they missed, human error. There were a lot of them but that is the nature of the game. Not knowing the proper call and yardage is incompetence at a high level.

 

[Mark Davis]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

Harbaugh addressed this in his postgame press conference. He asked what would happen if he challenged and Steratore told him he would lose a timeout and they would not review it. The on field call was a fumble. While incorrect, the NFL rules do not allow them to review it. It's being corrected for next year but Steratore was actually correct on this point. Too bad he didn't know the basics in the difference in roughing and running into the kicker.

 

[MAC_32]

Clucking about the refs always makes me chuckle, keep it up fellas, you're missing a good game out there.

Uh, it's a thread about bad calls by the refs. Were you expecting something else in here?

my expectations were met, the red river is flowing mightily...

 

[MAC_32]

Gene Steratore should be reprimanded and more for that. The missed calls were terrible, but human error is one thing, not knowing the rules is another. He flagged the running into the kicker play yet the head referee in an NFC Championship game doesn't know that hitting the plant leg is an automatic 15 yards? To me that is incompetence.

HE'S A WITCH

He's incompetent. I can give you the definition of what that means if you don't know it. An NFL Referee failing to assess a penalty that he sees correctly falls into that category. The other calls they missed, human error. There were a lot of them but that is the nature of the game. Not knowing the proper call and yardage is incompetence at a high level.

BURN HIM

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

That's just it, he was down by contact - with the ball. What happened after that in the scrum should not have mattered, whether INT or FL it was Bowman with the ball and he was down. Should have been 9ers ball, should have been reviewable for Bowman being down by contact.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

Harbaugh addressed this in his postgame press conference. He asked what would happen if he challenged and Steratore told him he would lose a timeout and they would not review it. The on field call was a fumble. While incorrect, the NFL rules do not allow them to review it. It's being corrected for next year but Steratore was actually correct on this point. Too bad he didn't know the basics in the difference in roughing and running into the kicker.

Are you hanging everything on that call. I really think in most games that's a 50/50 call. It was so soft. If the commentator hadn't been going on about it for the next hour, nobody would be talking about it. You can really tell who the commentators are pulling for in the way they react to calls. Seattle had a holding penalty on them in the first half after they threw for a 15 yard play. Instead of 1st and 10 at the SF 40 yard line, it was 2nd and 18 at the Seattle 35. SF rushed 3 on that play and the guy who got called for a hold had a double team on the rusher. The rusher fell down and the Seattle guy fell on top of him. Horrible call, but no mention by the announcers.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

That's just it, he was down by contact - with the ball. What happened after that in the scrum should not have mattered, whether INT or FL it was Bowman with the ball and he was down. Should have been 9ers ball, should have been reviewable for Bowman being down by contact.

You do realize that Seattle turned the ball over on the next play? The play had no significance in the game's outcome. It could have, but it didn't.

 

[stbugs]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different.

As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

 

[Mark Davis]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

Harbaugh addressed this in his postgame press conference. He asked what would happen if he challenged and Steratore told him he would lose a timeout and they would not review it. The on field call was a fumble. While incorrect, the NFL rules do not allow them to review it. It's being corrected for next year but Steratore was actually correct on this point. Too bad he didn't know the basics in the difference in roughing and running into the kicker.

Are you hanging everything on that call. I really think in most games that's a 50/50 call. It was so soft. If the commentator hadn't been going on about it for the next hour, nobody would be talking about it. You can really tell who the commentators are pulling for in the way they react to calls. Seattle had a holding penalty on them in the first half after they threw for a 15 yard play. Instead of 1st and 10 at the SF 40 yard line, it was 2nd and 18 at the Seattle 35. SF rushed 3 on that play and the guy who got called for a hold had a double team on the rusher. The rusher fell down and the Seattle guy fell on top of him. Horrible call, but no mention by the announcers.

Nope, Kap spit the bit in the 4th quarter. Ultimately it falls on that but yeah some of the calls that occurred certainly steered the outcome. You have to play through it and overcome.

For the record, the NFL rulebook states when it's the plant foot that is contacted it is a 15 yard penalty. Steratore saw the contact and threw the flag. He incorrectly assessed it as 5 yards. This isn't the old college definition of the penalty which is discretionary. It's not 50/50, it's spelled out. I'm sorry you feel the announcers were one sided but the roughing penalty isn't an interpretive call.

 

[MAC_32]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different. As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

if Carolina didn't play like #### over the last 35 minutes they might have won.

 

[General Tso]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different. As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

One problem, I'm not a SF fan.

 

[stbugs]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different. As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

if Carolina didn't play like #### over the last 35 minutes they might have won.

Oh, agreed, but it doesn't help when they dominated the first half, yet weren't leading because SF got a FG given to them on the first drive instead of a punt on a personal foul, then SF got a 33 yard FG attempt instead of a 48 (while Dawson has been solid, not a gimme) due to a personal foul that they didn't call on SF later, and then didn't call a personal foul, didn't call 12 men in the huddle on a TD with 14 seconds left in the half. That is, assuming FGs could be missed, allowing SF to get 13 points instead of potentially getting 0 to 6 points. Add in the fact that Carolina might not go for it on 4th down at the goal line or call different plays, the penalties on Carolina and not on SF absolutely helped determine the outcome of the game.

Yes, the Panthers blew it hard in the second half, but they are built to protect leads, not come back from 10 down, so the refs took them completely out of their game plan. So again, glad Seattle won.

 

[MAC_32]

Or you could have just scored a td one of those times from the one yard line, but go ahead and hold a grudge against the refs.

 

[stbugs]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different. As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

One problem, I'm not a SF fan.

Awesome, thanks for that nugget when I already saw the total unbiased part before. I didn't really care anyway, although not surprised you thought Sherman was a tool in the other thread.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different. As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

if Carolina didn't play like #### over the last 35 minutes they might have won.

Oh, agreed, but it doesn't help when they dominated the first half, yet weren't leading because SF got a FG given to them on the first drive instead of a punt on a personal foul, then SF got a 33 yard FG attempt instead of a 48 (while Dawson has been solid, not a gimme) due to a personal foul that they didn't call on SF later, and then didn't call a personal foul, didn't call 12 men in the huddle on a TD with 14 seconds left in the half. That is, assuming FGs could be missed, allowing SF to get 13 points instead of potentially getting 0 to 6 points. Add in the fact that Carolina might not go for it on 4th down at the goal line or call different plays, the penalties on Carolina and not on SF absolutely helped determine the outcome of the game.

Yes, the Panthers blew it hard in the second half, but they are built to protect leads, not come back from 10 down, so the refs took them completely out of their game plan. So again, glad Seattle won.

Look away 9er fans. Nothing to see here.

Lets just keep going with the 49ers were screwed by bad officiating.

 

[stbugs]

Or you could have just scored a td one of those times from the one yard line, but go ahead and hold a grudge against the refs.

Whatever dude. Just posting the ironic nature of this. Stopping being an ### all the time. Duh, yeah, would have been nice to score a TD. Still doesn't change the fact that the refs completely changed the game in the first half.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

That's just it, he was down by contact - with the ball. What happened after that in the scrum should not have mattered, whether INT or FL it was Bowman with the ball and he was down. Should have been 9ers ball, should have been reviewable for Bowman being down by contact.

You do realize that Seattle turned the ball over on the next play? The play had no significance in the game's outcome. It could have, but it didn't.

Yes of course, just mystified by what looked like a simple strip of the ball and Bowman taking it an holding it when he went down. I have no idea why that would not be reviewable.

 

[MAC_32]

Or you could have just scored a td one of those times from the one yard line, but go ahead and hold a grudge against the refs.

Whatever dude. Just posting the ironic nature of this. Stopping being an ### all the time. Duh, yeah, would have been nice to score a TD. Still doesn't change the fact that the refs completely changed the game in the first half.

and I'm sure you have been on the other side too, but all anyone remembers is that time we got ####ed in that game we played like #### anyway. How many teams played great games in playoff like spots only to get totally ####ed by the refs?

 

[stbugs]

Totally unbiased observer here... The NFC Championship Game was horribly officiated. I saw three plays with my own eyes live that looked wrong, and as it turns out all three were wrong. And all three went against the 49ers. Feel bad for the Niners and their fans. Tough to play against 13 men.

Ironic your post since Carolina played against 12 and the refs didn't call that and that whole first half was a horrendous bunch of calls that all went SF's way. Heck, even all the goal line stands as you said above where Carolina got stuffed might have been different. If SF doesn't get gifted a FG on a personal foul, they are up 3-0 and Carolina may decide to kick a FG instead of go for it. Maybe the play calling is a bit different. Heck, with a lead at halftime, the whole second half is different. As a Carolina fan, any complaining by SF fans makes me laugh. I was glad to see Seattle win just based on last week.

if Carolina didn't play like #### over the last 35 minutes they might have won.

Oh, agreed, but it doesn't help when they dominated the first half, yet weren't leading because SF got a FG given to them on the first drive instead of a punt on a personal foul, then SF got a 33 yard FG attempt instead of a 48 (while Dawson has been solid, not a gimme) due to a personal foul that they didn't call on SF later, and then didn't call a personal foul, didn't call 12 men in the huddle on a TD with 14 seconds left in the half. That is, assuming FGs could be missed, allowing SF to get 13 points instead of potentially getting 0 to 6 points. Add in the fact that Carolina might not go for it on 4th down at the goal line or call different plays, the penalties on Carolina and not on SF absolutely helped determine the outcome of the game.

Yes, the Panthers blew it hard in the second half, but they are built to protect leads, not come back from 10 down, so the refs took them completely out of their game plan. So again, glad Seattle won.

Look away 9er fans. Nothing to see here.

Lets just keep going with the 49ers were screwed by bad officiating.

Agreed. I wouldn't have complained if as you posted above the calls didn't matter, but that first PF was on 4th down where SF would have had to punt or +3 SF due to points. Second took a 48+ yard FG to 33. Maybe another +3. Last drive was a TD with 14 seconds left and they didn't call the head butt on Boldin for 15 yards or the 12 men in the huddle. So, with an extra 15+ yards to go and less than 14 seconds and they are likely kicking a FG. +4 for the refs.

Handing a team +7 to +10 points is a lot different than missing a call, which results in SF getting the ball back on the next play with a net +15 yards. It was in essence a positive play for SF, yet they got screwed? LOL.

 

[stbugs]

Or you could have just scored a td one of those times from the one yard line, but go ahead and hold a grudge against the refs.

Whatever dude. Just posting the ironic nature of this. Stopping being an ### all the time. Duh, yeah, would have been nice to score a TD. Still doesn't change the fact that the refs completely changed the game in the first half.

and I'm sure you have been on the other side too, but all anyone remembers is that time we got ####ed in that game we played like #### anyway. How many teams played great games in playoff like spots only to get totally ####ed by the refs?

Honestly, that was the first time I actually felt the refs completely changed the outcome of the game (ETA: at the start of the game, i.e. not a bad call at the end of a really tight game), hence my post. To a team like Carolina that is all about ball control and defense (see the 10-9 win at SF, we don't put up lots of points against good Ds), giving the opposing team a lead at half time and the ball to start the second half is a huge difference from a decent lead at half.

It's over, already happened, I don't hold a grudge because it is done. I just laughed at complaints about SF even on a call that netted them an extra 15 yards.

 

[General Tso]

For the record, I'm not saying the Niners lost today because of the refs. No, they lost because their young QB turned the ball over 3 times in the 4th quarter.

But this is a thread about ball calls made by officials - not just in today's game but the whole season. And the refs today stunk.

 

[MAC_32]

For the record, I'm not saying the Niners lost today because of the refs. No, they lost because their young QB turned the ball over 3 times in the 4th quarter.

But this is a thread about ball calls made by officials that happened in games my team lost and I'm not happy about it and need to blame someone while I drown my sorrows and can just tell myself...maybe next year...

 

[MAC_32]

Ok, that's probably enough, back to your regularly scheduled menstruation session...

 

[Sarnoff]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

That's just it, he was down by contact - with the ball. What happened after that in the scrum should not have mattered, whether INT or FL it was Bowman with the ball and he was down. Should have been 9ers ball, should have been reviewable for Bowman being down by contact.

You do realize that Seattle turned the ball over on the next play? The play had no significance in the game's outcome. It could have, but it didn't.

Just because the outcome of the play ended up being irrelevant, doesn't mean that 1) the refs get to avoid all blame for a bad call, and 2) the league rule regarding reviewable plays doesn't need revision to include exactly this situation.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Yes of course, just mystified by what looked like a simple strip of the ball and Bowman taking it an holding it when he went down. I have no idea why that would not be reviewable.

Whether it was a fumble is reviewable -- but the refs got that part right. It was a fumble.

The part they botched is determining who recovered the fumble. The rules say that's not reviewable. I'm not sure why. Maybe because possession often changes hands several times at the bottom of the pile and replay would generally be worthless to straighten that out.

In cases like today's situation, though, where the refs missed something on the field that was extremely obvious on replay, it really should be reviewable (and likely will be next year).

If I were the replay official up in the booth today, I would have buzzed down to the ref and told him, "The play isn't officially reviewable, but why don't you guys pretend to huddle up for a second and then rule that the 49ers recovered the fumble? It will save you a lot of grief. You're welcome in advance."

 

[mad sweeney]

Yes of course, just mystified by what looked like a simple strip of the ball and Bowman taking it an holding it when he went down. I have no idea why that would not be reviewable.

Whether it was a fumble is reviewable -- but the refs got that part right. It was a fumble.

The part they botched is determining who recovered the fumble. The rules say that's not reviewable. I'm not sure why. Maybe because possession often changes hands several times at the bottom of the pile and replay would generally be worthless to straighten that out.

In cases like today's situation, though, where the refs missed something on the field that was extremely obvious on replay, it really should be reviewable (and likely will be next year).

If I were the replay official up in the booth today, I would have buzzed down to the ref and told him, "The play isn't officially reviewable, but why don't you guys pretend to huddle up for a second and then rule that the 49ers recovered the fumble? It will save you a lot of grief. You're welcome in advance."

That last paragraph is bunk. In no situation ever would I want anyone except the person who has ultimate authority to make a decision like that making a determination and going outside the rules. I don't think anyone would legitimately want a third party doing that. I agree that this play should be reviewable and it sounds like it likely will be next year, but the refs need to be free of that kind of manipulation. I can't blame the refs for not seeing what happened in the pile and it's unfortunate that as the rules stand it isn't reviewable. There are many times when a fumble is recovered, the recoverer is down as seen by replay, but by the times the refs can get to it, it's changed possession.

 

[mad sweeney]

Can someone explain what happened on the Bowman fumble recovery on the 1 yard line - was it because it was called down?

If so I get the called down part, what I don't get is I could have sworn the NFL changed this replay rule a few years back.

I thought even if there's a whistle the play can be reviewed?

So what happened there?

The ball was clearly recovered by the Niners who was down by contact. He then lost the ball in the scrum because is leg was broken and he had more important things on his mind. Seattle ultimately recovered it. A recovered fumble (unless in the end zone) is not reviewable.

Someone very astutely mentioned in the game thread that it wasn't a fumble, but rather an interception. I think Harbaugh should've challenged the play under that context. I think in that case the play wold have been reviewable.

That wasn't very astute since it's completely incorrect. The WR had the ball, made a football move and had the ball taken out of his hands. It was a catch and a fumble, the fumble just didn't hit the ground.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Yes of course, just mystified by what looked like a simple strip of the ball and Bowman taking it an holding it when he went down. I have no idea why that would not be reviewable.

Whether it was a fumble is reviewable -- but the refs got that part right. It was a fumble.

The part they botched is determining who recovered the fumble. The rules say that's not reviewable. I'm not sure why. Maybe because possession often changes hands several times at the bottom of the pile and replay would generally be worthless to straighten that out.

In cases like today's situation, though, where the refs missed something on the field that was extremely obvious on replay, it really should be reviewable (and likely will be next year).

If I were the replay official up in the booth today, I would have buzzed down to the ref and told him, "The play isn't officially reviewable, but why don't you guys pretend to huddle up for a second and then rule that the 49ers recovered the fumble? It will save you a lot of grief. You're welcome in advance."

That last paragraph is bunk. In no situation ever would I want anyone except the person who has ultimate authority to make a decision like that making a determination and going outside the rules. I don't think anyone would legitimately want a third party doing that. I agree that this play should be reviewable and it sounds like it likely will be next year, but the refs need to be free of that kind of manipulation. I can't blame the refs for not seeing what happened in the pile and it's unfortunate that as the rules stand it isn't reviewable. There are many times when a fumble is recovered, the recoverer is down as seen by replay, but by the times the refs can get to it, it's changed possession.

I agree with Maurile. The important thing is getting the call right, especially when the correct call is 100% obvious to every observer.