This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
What if the score was 17-16? Would that have made the call worse?HTF is giving up 39 points a "flawless game"? Fine, you don't want to pin the last 8 points on them? Well then HTF is giving up 31 points a "flawless game"? This is why this topic has gotten so out of hand, posts like this are completely irrational.SD played a flawless game and they lose because the REF makes a mistake. What else could SD have done to win the game?
Flawless? How about not giving up the first 31 points? Let's not go overboard here.
No.What if the score was 17-16? Would that have made the call worse?HTF is giving up 39 points a "flawless game"? Fine, you don't want to pin the last 8 points on them? Well then HTF is giving up 31 points a "flawless game"? This is why this topic has gotten so out of hand, posts like this are completely irrational.
I think his tongue was in his cheek when he was typing this...reminds me of a line some officials use..."I will ref a perfect game as soon as a player plays a perfect game and a coach coaches a perfect game".....although as officials we are expected to be perfect 100% of the time AND get better.....HTF is giving up 39 points a "flawless game"? Fine, you don't want to pin the last 8 points on them? Well then HTF is giving up 31 points a "flawless game"? This is why this topic has gotten so out of hand, posts like this are completely irrational.
No -- just like if someone drives drunk but doesn't crash into anybody it's not a big deal. (Or is it?)
Are you implying that the Chargers defense was drunk?
You're right that Hochuli feels worse than anybody about this. I do wish people would lay off him.Whatever the penalty is for making a horrible call -- not getting to work the playoffs or whatever -- he needs to pay that penalty. But aside from that, people should try to be sympathetic. He's not the only one in the world who's made a mistake before. He's not a bad guy (as far as I know). He's not even a bad ref, usually.
I think he's implying that you're drunk.
There's a difference between expecting perfection and expecting competence. I'd say Hochuli's call is neither. Continuing my analogies to last night's game, his screwup was akin to DeSean Jackson's- it was that egregious. Imagine the fallout if Jackson's had happened in the final minute and cost the Eagles the game.That said, Hochuli has a bit more of a track record as a ref than DeSean Jackson has as a WR.I think his tongue was in his cheek when he was typing this...reminds me of a line some officials use..."I will ref a perfect game as soon as a player plays a perfect game and a coach coaches a perfect game".....although as officials we are expected to be perfect 100% of the time AND get better.....HTF is giving up 39 points a "flawless game"? Fine, you don't want to pin the last 8 points on them? Well then HTF is giving up 31 points a "flawless game"? This is why this topic has gotten so out of hand, posts like this are completely irrational.
Fifteen of those points were directly set up by obviously wrong calls. So I guess in a sense they gave up 24 points. Still not great, but not nearly as bad as 39.
Well, no need to imply - I am! And I'm blowing whistles like mad. The neighbors and my dog are very annoyed, but I'm having fun, so . . .
There's a report that Hoculi didn't show up for his film study and nobody knows where he is. Perrera has notified law enforcement because he was last seen leaving his house last night extremely depressed with a gun and a bucket of wings.
Nice catch.I think his tongue was in his cheek when he was typing this...reminds me of a line some officials use..."I will ref a perfect game as soon as a player plays a perfect game and a coach coaches a perfect game".....although as officials we are expected to be perfect 100% of the time AND get better.....HTF is giving up 39 points a "flawless game"? Fine, you don't want to pin the last 8 points on them? Well then HTF is giving up 31 points a "flawless game"? This is why this topic has gotten so out of hand, posts like this are completely irrational.
I think I'm going to hit him up with my own fake hate email just so I can get that response direct from him as an isouveneier.
Have you decided when you're finally coming out of the closet?
They DID make the play they needed to win the game but it was screwed up by Ed. They shouldn't have had to do it again. The Chargers and Broncos are obviously responsible for how the game went up until the point of the call but at that point the refs changed the outcome of the game. Everything that happened before that was already done and he changed the ending of the story. He did make a mistake and it was an easy mistake to make given the full speed version he saw from most likely a bad angle and I don't think he should be overly criticized for it. Whether it was an easy mistake that anyone could make does not mean he didn't cost them the game. Their defense playing like crap is immaterial because they made the plays that they needed to do to win and should have been off the field after that play.
They're going to reverse it on Thursday at tomarken's mother's birthday party?
Not yet, but don't worry, you'll be the first to know.
I better collect from my book before he hears about this.They're going to reverse it on Thursday at tomarken's mother's birthday party?
Because the Broncos won and the Chargers didn't.The bad call wasn't the Broncos' fault. If the league reversed things now, they'd be robbing the Broncos of the opportunity to win the game on the field in the last minute. The bad call wasn't made as time expired. It was made with over a minute left. The Broncos could have caused a fumble on the next play and scored a touchdown. They at least deserve the opportunity to try. But it's too late to get everyone back on the field for the final minute of play. It's over.
Holy sh** - you're absolutely right!How we've had 23 threads and 842 posts on this subject and those two things haven't been talked about is mind-boggling. But I'm sure glad you caught them.
yeah...i don't think i've seen it brought up at all that SD still could have stopped him...some incredible insight there 
Which is essentially my point. Bad calls happen, and they are an unfortunate part of the game. If the referee (who we'll say is a representative of the NFL) caused Denver to win and the Chargers to lose, then the NFL would have the authority and the responsibility to set it right.But the bad call did not cause the Chargers to lose. The Chargers let the Broncos get into the end zone five times. Six if you count the game-winning two point conversion. If the Chargers had stopped any one of those touchdowns they likely would have won the game. Both the Chargers and the Broncos had sixty minutes to score as many points as they could, and prevent their opponent from scoring.
because he cant just make up rules on the fly. He blew it, but must stick with his botched call, thats the rule. They will revisit the rule after the season, but he can't change the rule for this game this instance. He ruled it incomplete, he has to stick to it.
Amen. It is like nobody has ever made a mistake before. Ed is a good man, has taken his lumps, admitted his mistake, and now it is time for everyone to forgive and cut him some slack.
And yes, bad calls by the refs led to 15 points for the Broncos and 0 for the Chargers.And yes, without the last bad call, the Chargers would have shut out Denver's offense in the second half.
by saying that the bad calls led to 15 points, are you assuming that Denver wouldn't have scored on their second posession of the first half, even if they had started from the 20? Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back, I don't think that is a fair assumption to make. Had that call gone the other way (and I'm not 100% sold that it was the wrong call), it's very probable that SD would have punted, Denver would have taken over around their own 20, and drove 80 yards for the score.Of course, this is all hypothetical, but really the argument that Denver wouldn't have scored 15 without the benefit of the ref's blown calls is rooted in hypothetics as well.And yes, bad calls by the refs led to 15 points for the Broncos and 0 for the Chargers.And yes, without the last bad call, the Chargers would have shut out Denver's offense in the second half.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm pretty sure the ball first hit within a yard of where it was released.
Well, let's see.First off, you say San Diego probably would have punted if the interception call went the other way. Despite the fact that had it gone the other way, San Diego would have had a 3rd and 1 play on a day when they averaged 8.8 yards per play and converted 6 of 10 third downs. On a day when they punted exactly one time. I'm not following your logic here.by saying that the bad calls led to 15 points, are you assuming that Denver wouldn't have scored on their second posession of the first half, even if they had started from the 20? Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back, I don't think that is a fair assumption to make. Had that call gone the other way (and I'm not 100% sold that it was the wrong call), it's very probable that SD would have punted, Denver would have taken over around their own 20, and drove 80 yards for the score.Of course, this is all hypothetical, but really the argument that Denver wouldn't have scored 15 without the benefit of the ref's blown calls is rooted in hypothetics as well.And yes, bad calls by the refs led to 15 points for the Broncos and 0 for the Chargers.And yes, without the last bad call, the Chargers would have shut out Denver's offense in the second half.
first of all, had the call gone the other way, yes, SD would have had a 3rd and 1. I'm not saying they would have failed to convert, but somewhere along the lines it is very possible that the drive stalled, much like Denvers first drive. maybe they would have gotten a FG, I have no idea. For the sake of my argument, I'm stating that SD would have punted (justification to follow.)Den's first drive was bogged down by penalties. After that play, drives 3,5, and 6 were all in the first half, two of which were 80 yard TD drives. At halftime, I assume SD made some defensive adjustments because Denver bogged down there, but we aren't talking about 2nd half drives here. I see no reason at all to assume that they wouldn't have been able to go the distance for the eventual TD anyways.Well, let's see.First off, you say San Diego probably would have punted if the interception call went the other way. Despite the fact that had it gone the other way, San Diego would have had a 3rd and 1 play on a day when they averaged 8.8 yards per play and converted 6 of 10 third downs. On a day when they punted exactly one time. I'm not following your logic here.by saying that the bad calls led to 15 points, are you assuming that Denver wouldn't have scored on their second posession of the first half, even if they had started from the 20? Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back, I don't think that is a fair assumption to make. Had that call gone the other way (and I'm not 100% sold that it was the wrong call), it's very probable that SD would have punted, Denver would have taken over around their own 20, and drove 80 yards for the score.Of course, this is all hypothetical, but really the argument that Denver wouldn't have scored 15 without the benefit of the ref's blown calls is rooted in hypothetics as well.And yes, bad calls by the refs led to 15 points for the Broncos and 0 for the Chargers.And yes, without the last bad call, the Chargers would have shut out Denver's offense in the second half.
Secondly, you say Denver would have driven from their own 20 for the score anyway... despite the fact that on their previous drive, they took over on their own 20 and ultimately had to punt. And let's look at all of Denver's results when taking over close to their own 20:
Drive 1: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 41 and punted
Drive 3: Started on their own 20, drove 80 yards for a TD
Drive 5: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 34 and kicked a 52 yard FG
Drive 6: Started on their own 20, drove 80 yards for a TD
Drive 7: Started on their own 24, "drove" to the DEN 27 and punted
Drive 8: Started on their own 20, "drove" to the DEN 27 and punted
Drive 9: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 4, and threw an end zone interception
Drive 10: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 1, and fumbled... but due to the blown call subsequently drove for a TD
So... in 8 drives begun at their own 20 or 24 yard line, they scored 3 TDs, one of which was a result of the blown call. Yeah, I can see why you'd automatically assume they would have driven for the TD anyway.
On top of all that, you say you aren't convinced the interception call was the wrong call... did you not see the replay?
The fact is, Denver only had to drive 29 yards for the score after the botched interception call. Even limiting the view to the first half, when Denver took possession on their 20, they scored TDs 50% of the time - 2 of 4 drives. So there is absolutely no reason to simply state it as a given that they would have scored a TD anyway. The reasonable view is that the odds of them scoring a TD from their 20 would have been around 50%.Meanwhile, your view that San Diego's drive would have likely bogged down also has no real basis. San Diego scored points on 7 of 10 possessions. Of the 3 they did not score on, one was the botched interception call and one was the final possession when they took over with 24 seconds left on their own 18 yard line. IMO it is fair to say they scored on 7 of 8 possessions that fit the parameters of their first drive yesterday, had they not lost the ball on a bad call.first of all, had the call gone the other way, yes, SD would have had a 3rd and 1. I'm not saying they would have failed to convert, but somewhere along the lines it is very possible that the drive stalled, much like Denvers first drive. maybe they would have gotten a FG, I have no idea. For the sake of my argument, I'm stating that SD would have punted (justification to follow.)Den's first drive was bogged down by penalties. After that play, drives 3,5, and 6 were all in the first half, two of which were 80 yard TD drives. At halftime, I assume SD made some defensive adjustments because Denver bogged down there, but we aren't talking about 2nd half drives here. I see no reason at all to assume that they wouldn't have been able to go the distance for the eventual TD anyways.Well, let's see.First off, you say San Diego probably would have punted if the interception call went the other way. Despite the fact that had it gone the other way, San Diego would have had a 3rd and 1 play on a day when they averaged 8.8 yards per play and converted 6 of 10 third downs. On a day when they punted exactly one time. I'm not following your logic here.by saying that the bad calls led to 15 points, are you assuming that Denver wouldn't have scored on their second posession of the first half, even if they had started from the 20? Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back, I don't think that is a fair assumption to make. Had that call gone the other way (and I'm not 100% sold that it was the wrong call), it's very probable that SD would have punted, Denver would have taken over around their own 20, and drove 80 yards for the score.Of course, this is all hypothetical, but really the argument that Denver wouldn't have scored 15 without the benefit of the ref's blown calls is rooted in hypothetics as well.And yes, bad calls by the refs led to 15 points for the Broncos and 0 for the Chargers.And yes, without the last bad call, the Chargers would have shut out Denver's offense in the second half.
Secondly, you say Denver would have driven from their own 20 for the score anyway... despite the fact that on their previous drive, they took over on their own 20 and ultimately had to punt. And let's look at all of Denver's results when taking over close to their own 20:
Drive 1: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 41 and punted
Drive 3: Started on their own 20, drove 80 yards for a TD
Drive 5: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 34 and kicked a 52 yard FG
Drive 6: Started on their own 20, drove 80 yards for a TD
Drive 7: Started on their own 24, "drove" to the DEN 27 and punted
Drive 8: Started on their own 20, "drove" to the DEN 27 and punted
Drive 9: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 4, and threw an end zone interception
Drive 10: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 1, and fumbled... but due to the blown call subsequently drove for a TD
So... in 8 drives begun at their own 20 or 24 yard line, they scored 3 TDs, one of which was a result of the blown call. Yeah, I can see why you'd automatically assume they would have driven for the TD anyway.
On top of all that, you say you aren't convinced the interception call was the wrong call... did you not see the replay?
Now, my series of imaginary events that I just constructed are exactly as plausable and realistic as assuming that had both of those calls gone the other way, Denver would have failed to score those 15 points. Here's my proof: neither one happened. The statement that two erroneous calls directly lead to 15 points fails to account for the fact that those 15 points may have occurred without the bad calls. One TD was more likely to occur than the other, but there is a possibility that both could have happened anyways.
As far as the other call - my impression is this: both guys had hands on the ball when Chambers hit the ground. Chambers had one hand on the ball, Champ had two. Chambers must not have had complete control of the ball at the point his elbow hit the ground, otherwise Champ wouldn't have been able to wrestle it out. I suppose the rule probably reads that when both players have an equal grasp of the ball in a case like that, possession goes to the offense. However, possession clearly wasn't equal. Counting the # of hands on the ball, champ had 67% of possession, so it really wasn't equal ownership. Now, I don't have a rulebook to say if that's the appropriate interpretation or not, but that is how I would argue it - that, and possession = 9/10 of the law. Champ got up with the ball, that's what the refs saw initially and called it that way, and instant replay would not have overturned it.
Why is it "very probable" that SD would have punted? They punted only once the entire game.ETA: What JWB said.
I'm gonna stop with my original argument - it wasn't going anywhere and in all of my ramblings, I've kind of forgotten what my point was anyways, so I'll concede and I'll chalk it up to me being up too late.Yes, i'll admit that Denver would not have scrored the final 8. I posted earlier in several threads that SD got hosed - I have no doubt about that. The opposite side of the coin is true though - had the fumble stand and SD won, I'd be here arguing that SD came away with a cheap, lucky win because it took a KR for a TD, an int at the 1, and an unforced fumble for them to keep Denver down. Frankly, I feel like both teams deserved the win, and I feel like all of the focus on the bad call neglects all of the good things that Denver did in that game.The fact is, Denver only had to drive 29 yards for the score after the botched interception call. Even limiting the view to the first half, when Denver took possession on their 20, they scored TDs 50% of the time - 2 of 4 drives. So there is absolutely no reason to simply state it as a given that they would have scored a TD anyway. The reasonable view is that the odds of them scoring a TD from their 20 would have been around 50%.Meanwhile, your view that San Diego's drive would have likely bogged down also has no real basis. San Diego scored points on 7 of 10 possessions. Of the 3 they did not score on, one was the botched interception call and one was the final possession when they took over with 24 seconds left on their own 18 yard line. IMO it is fair to say they scored on 7 of 8 possessions that fit the parameters of their first drive yesterday, had they not lost the ball on a bad call.first of all, had the call gone the other way, yes, SD would have had a 3rd and 1. I'm not saying they would have failed to convert, but somewhere along the lines it is very possible that the drive stalled, much like Denvers first drive. maybe they would have gotten a FG, I have no idea. For the sake of my argument, I'm stating that SD would have punted (justification to follow.)Den's first drive was bogged down by penalties. After that play, drives 3,5, and 6 were all in the first half, two of which were 80 yard TD drives. At halftime, I assume SD made some defensive adjustments because Denver bogged down there, but we aren't talking about 2nd half drives here. I see no reason at all to assume that they wouldn't have been able to go the distance for the eventual TD anyways.Well, let's see.First off, you say San Diego probably would have punted if the interception call went the other way. Despite the fact that had it gone the other way, San Diego would have had a 3rd and 1 play on a day when they averaged 8.8 yards per play and converted 6 of 10 third downs. On a day when they punted exactly one time. I'm not following your logic here.by saying that the bad calls led to 15 points, are you assuming that Denver wouldn't have scored on their second posession of the first half, even if they had started from the 20? Hindsight is 20/20, but looking back, I don't think that is a fair assumption to make. Had that call gone the other way (and I'm not 100% sold that it was the wrong call), it's very probable that SD would have punted, Denver would have taken over around their own 20, and drove 80 yards for the score.Of course, this is all hypothetical, but really the argument that Denver wouldn't have scored 15 without the benefit of the ref's blown calls is rooted in hypothetics as well.And yes, bad calls by the refs led to 15 points for the Broncos and 0 for the Chargers.And yes, without the last bad call, the Chargers would have shut out Denver's offense in the second half.
Secondly, you say Denver would have driven from their own 20 for the score anyway... despite the fact that on their previous drive, they took over on their own 20 and ultimately had to punt. And let's look at all of Denver's results when taking over close to their own 20:
Drive 1: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 41 and punted
Drive 3: Started on their own 20, drove 80 yards for a TD
Drive 5: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 34 and kicked a 52 yard FG
Drive 6: Started on their own 20, drove 80 yards for a TD
Drive 7: Started on their own 24, "drove" to the DEN 27 and punted
Drive 8: Started on their own 20, "drove" to the DEN 27 and punted
Drive 9: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 4, and threw an end zone interception
Drive 10: Started on their own 20, drove to the SD 1, and fumbled... but due to the blown call subsequently drove for a TD
So... in 8 drives begun at their own 20 or 24 yard line, they scored 3 TDs, one of which was a result of the blown call. Yeah, I can see why you'd automatically assume they would have driven for the TD anyway.
On top of all that, you say you aren't convinced the interception call was the wrong call... did you not see the replay?
Now, my series of imaginary events that I just constructed are exactly as plausable and realistic as assuming that had both of those calls gone the other way, Denver would have failed to score those 15 points. Here's my proof: neither one happened. The statement that two erroneous calls directly lead to 15 points fails to account for the fact that those 15 points may have occurred without the bad calls. One TD was more likely to occur than the other, but there is a possibility that both could have happened anyways.
As far as the other call - my impression is this: both guys had hands on the ball when Chambers hit the ground. Chambers had one hand on the ball, Champ had two. Chambers must not have had complete control of the ball at the point his elbow hit the ground, otherwise Champ wouldn't have been able to wrestle it out. I suppose the rule probably reads that when both players have an equal grasp of the ball in a case like that, possession goes to the offense. However, possession clearly wasn't equal. Counting the # of hands on the ball, champ had 67% of possession, so it really wasn't equal ownership. Now, I don't have a rulebook to say if that's the appropriate interpretation or not, but that is how I would argue it - that, and possession = 9/10 of the law. Champ got up with the ball, that's what the refs saw initially and called it that way, and instant replay would not have overturned it.
On top of that, Denver scored last in the half, scoring a TD with 2 seconds left in the first half. So if they had to drive 80 yards for that TD instead of 29 yards, more than likely they would not have gotten that last possession, or at least they wouldn't have had time to drive 80 yards for the TD. I realize because of the timing of the play in question, all of this is hypothetical, but your hypothetical that the Broncos would have scored a TD anyway, and though you didn't state it explicitly, that the Broncos still would have scored all 31 first half points, seems much less likely than my hypothetical that they would have scored less points. If you don't see that, I guess I'll just agree to disagree with you.
Aside from all that is the play itself. If you think Bailey had two hands on it and Chambers didn't when Chambers was officially down, then you must not have actually seen the play. This is the best replay I could find for it: Chargers Robbed by Officials
ETA: I don't get the point of you linking to your previous post about Hochuli and saying Instant Replay would not have overturned it. I am 100% certain that replay showed that Chambers was down before Bailey possessed the ball. Your link doesn't address this in any way, so I have no idea what your basis could be for saying that it would not have been overturned if replay was used.
And as for your statement that Denver could have scored those 15 points if both calls went the other way, come on. Even a major Denver homer like yourself can't really justify that Denver would have scored 8 points if the fumble call was called correctly. It's okay, you can admit that.
so IR wouldn't have helped. That's probably a stupid rule, and the competition committee should think about that one too. Was it a bad call to start with? i have no idea, as I don't know the rule book inside and out. I know what the announcers said, but I've never trusted the announcers to be right. I wonder if Cross saying that it was clearly a mistake makes everyone echo that sentiment. Again, I have no idea, but what I saw was Champ with two hands on the ball and chambers with one. I'm probably looking at this one with predominantly orange glasses, but it's not 100% clear to me that champ was not in possession of the ball when Chambers's elbow hit.
They knew that the machine was malfunctioning prior to the game and were working to fix it. I'm sure Denver rigged it that way, knowing that the Chargers would need to use a challenge first.
That is really hard to believe, but I guess I have to concede it. I actually taped the NFL replay of the game and watched that play several times in real time and slow motion. IMO that play went like this:1. Chambers caught the ball and possessed it with two hands
