Question on a call from Chicago/New Orleans (1 Viewer)

[Evilgrin 72]

Did anyone else think the 2nd fumble (on the kick return) by New Orleans was a poor call? It seemed to me that the ball may have been dislodged on the way down, but it certainly appeared to me that Lewis maintained possession all the way down until after his knee and touched down. It looked like the ball was stripped when he was already on his back. I had no volume on the set at that point - how did they explain that ruling? Was the fact that the ball moved before he hit the ground the reason it was ruled a fumble, even if it just shifted and didn't come loose?

 

[guderian]

I'm a Saints fan and I don't have a problem with that call. "If" the call on the field had been "no fumble" and "if" it was reviewed, then perhaps they could have said that there was inconclusive evidence. It looked like the ball started to come lose before he was down, it looked like he "may" have then regained control, was downed and then the ball came out.

However, I don't think there was conclusive evidence that he regained/had control of the ball while he was down.

 

[snogger]

I think it was one of those whatever was called on the field stands.

It was loose, then trapped than loose again. Thinking had they called it a non-fumble that would have stuck also.

 

[mad sweeney]

Did anyone else think the 2nd fumble (on the kick return) by New Orleans was a poor call? It seemed to me that the ball may have been dislodged on the way down, but it certainly appeared to me that Lewis maintained possession all the way down until after his knee and touched down. It looked like the ball was stripped when he was already on his back. I had no volume on the set at that point - how did they explain that ruling? Was the fact that the ball moved before he hit the ground the reason it was ruled a fumble, even if it just shifted and didn't come loose?

There is a lot of discussion about it in the game thread.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

OK, I was wondering if there was any explanation given, because although the ball shifted, it seemed pretty clear to me that Lewis still had possession until after he was already on the ground.

They did a good job of correcting the call on the Ogunleye fumble recovery, though.

 

[DoubleG]

I'm a Saints fan and I don't have a problem with that call. "If" the call on the field had been "no fumble" and "if" it was reviewed, then perhaps they could have said that there was inconclusive evidence. It looked like the ball started to come lose before he was down, it looked like he "may" have then regained control, was downed and then the ball came out. However, I don't think there was conclusive evidence that he regained/had control of the ball while he was down.

As a Bears fan, I agree. If they had called him down, they wouldn't have reversed it either. I think the replay was inconclusive - either way. It really came down to the fact that they had called it a fumble.

 

[parasaurolophus]

another thing i found odd in this game was that there was no TV replay of the bernard berian TD until after they had kicked the extra point. They were too busy following berian as he ran back to his sideline.

It turned out to be the right call, but that could have been huge.

 

[Doug B]

I'm a Saints fan and I don't have a problem with that call. "If" the call on the field had been "no fumble" and "if" it was reviewed, then perhaps they could have said that there was inconclusive evidence. It looked like the ball started to come lose before he was down, it looked like he "may" have then regained control, was downed and then the ball came out.

See, to me, it was an easy, clear "no fumble" call. My view was that Lewis had the ball trapped against his body all the way to the ground. It moved a little ... maybe from his lower shoulder pad area to around his lower ribs. But the important thing was that Lewis' hand kept the ball trapped against his body until he was downed. If the ball had actually caught air (i.e. left Lewis's grip totally) before he was downed, that would be different.I was perplexed that the call was not overturned. The only thing I can think of is that the letter of the NFL rule must be that any slight movement of a carried ball counts as a "bobble" and as "lost control", regardless of whether the ball is trapped against the body or not.

 

[DPRugby]

I was surprised the on the field call was a fumble in the first place. At game speed the ball carrier was on his back before the ball comes out, I find it hard to fathom that the ref's noticed that the ball had shifted oh so little on the way down.

However, seeing the video I didn't think they'd overturn it because the ball did start to move and there wasn't enough video to clearly show Lewis gain possesion again.

 

[saintfool]

another thing i found odd in this game was that there was no TV replay of the bernard berian TD until after they had kicked the extra point. They were too busy following berian as he ran back to his sideline. It turned out to be the right call, but that could have been huge.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you there. Let's say Payton had challenged it and somehow won the challenge. It's still the Bears ball on the 1 or 2. Not a real big swing.

the saints had made 2 goal line stands earlier in the game. 1x in the 1st quarter with 6 plays within 8 yards of the goal and a FG. 2nd time was 4 plays within 10 yards of the goal and resulting in another FG . I don't know that the outcome would have been as conclusive as you seem to think.

 

[rick6668]

another thing i found odd in this game was that there was no TV replay of the bernard berian TD until after they had kicked the extra point. They were too busy following berian as he ran back to his sideline. It turned out to be the right call, but that could have been huge.

I was wondering about this as well.Did they not show the replay on the big screen until after the extra point as well to not give the players/coaches on the sideline a look at it?

 

[parasaurolophus]

another thing i found odd in this game was that there was no TV replay of the bernard berian TD until after they had kicked the extra point. They were too busy following berian as he ran back to his sideline. It turned out to be the right call, but that could have been huge.

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with you there. Let's say Payton had challenged it and somehow won the challenge. It's still the Bears ball on the 1 or 2. Not a real big swing.

the saints had made 2 goal line stands earlier in the game. 1x in the 1st quarter with 6 plays within 8 yards of the goal and a FG. 2nd time was 4 plays within 10 yards of the goal and resulting in another FG . I don't know that the outcome would have been as conclusive as you seem to think.

True, good point.

There was also the possibility of it not being a catch. Whoever knows for sure? Luckily there was no debate.

 

[bullitt]

I'm confused, how could it have been huge, it was a catch and he was not touched.

 

[John Mamula]

i thought the fumble on the KO return was pretty garbage.

his knee hit before the ball was out.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I'm confused, how could it have been huge, it was a catch and he was not touched.

Hence why I said it turned out not to matter. It could have been huge because lets say he was down at the 1 or heaven forbid he didn't actually catch the ball, The Saints didnt get a fair chance to see the replay to see if they should challenge it.

 

[saintfool]

i will also say that the Rex Grossman call for a timeout when they didn't have any should have resulted in some penalty.

 

[Doug B]

i will also say that the Rex Grossman call for a timeout when they didn't have any should have resulted in some penalty.

Since it's not against the rules I don't see how that could happen.

People might be thinking of basketball, where calling a time-out when your team is out of them is, indeed, a technical foul (e.g. Chris Webber in the 1993 Final Four). Totally different matter, but I bet it's what's in the back of some people's heads.

 

[BroadwayG]

another thing i found odd in this game was that there was no TV replay of the bernard berian TD until after they had kicked the extra point. They were too busy following berian as he ran back to his sideline. It turned out to be the right call, but that could have been huge.

I was wondering about this as well.Did they not show the replay on the big screen until after the extra point as well to not give the players/coaches on the sideline a look at it?

The answer is yes. However, coaches have people upstairs that have their own access to play footage and radio down to the HC whether to challenge or not.