JuSt CuZ
Footballguy
You really seem to dwell on that, lol.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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!
Referees and Rules? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter JuSt CuZ
- Start date
What about the no call when the LT tackled the DE (Ware?) from behind in front of two officials in the backfield and there was no call. Gruden was about to have a stroke.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Just used it as an example of people whining for days despite video and photographic evidence as well as an admission from the guy who did the holding.YOu seemed hung up on whining about it for a couple days.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
no dog in the race, but I can see how the refs thought he gave himself up.....he went to the ground on his own......and as he gets up he drops the ball just like most receivers do when a play is over......his action was more of an intentional dropping of the ball, it wasn't fumbling the ball....and he wasn't getting up to continue and try and advance down field....he was trying to get back to line up for the next play...now, could the refs have ruled the other way and say thought he didn't give himself up and make it just seem like a bonehead play....sure....and some people might not have said anything.....but I think it is pretty clear that Cruz's intention was for the play to be over....'JuSt CuZ said:So did anyone see the Giants/Cardinals game?Yup, I love these refs.
JuSt CuZ
Footballguy
This call give a lot of interpretation to the Refs, I thought this is what the league was trying to eliminate.no dog in the race, but I can see how the refs thought he gave himself up.....he went to the ground on his own......and as he gets up he drops the ball just like most receivers do when a play is over......his action was more of an intentional dropping of the ball, it wasn't fumbling the ball....and he wasn't getting up to continue and try and advance down field....he was trying to get back to line up for the next play...now, could the refs have ruled the other way and say thought he didn't give himself up and make it just seem like a bonehead play....sure....and some people might not have said anything.....but I think it is pretty clear that Cruz's intention was for the play to be over....'JuSt CuZ said:So did anyone see the Giants/Cardinals game?
Captain Hook
Footballguy
FWIW I watched most of the game and this really looked like he stumbled or slipped and was trying to get up and move.But that is minor compared to the refs call and the ruleWhiz tried to challenge and was told he couldn'tMike Perrera (sp?) said that he thought it was a fumbleEli Manning said after the game that he thought they lucked out because he thought it was a fumbleThen Adam Schefter comes on this morning and says the rule was called correctlyThis is one of many rules that most coaches and players in the game are completely aware of - and one I hope they change.I think the refs were wrong on the call - Cruz wasn't touched, slipped or stumbled, and fumbled the ball. That should have been ruled a fumble - he did NOT stay down which would be part of the "surrendered himself" part of the rule.no dog in the race, but I can see how the refs thought he gave himself up.....he went to the ground on his own......and as he gets up he drops the ball just like most receivers do when a play is over......his action was more of an intentional dropping of the ball, it wasn't fumbling the ball....and he wasn't getting up to continue and try and advance down field....he was trying to get back to line up for the next play...now, could the refs have ruled the other way and say thought he didn't give himself up and make it just seem like a bonehead play....sure....and some people might not have said anything.....but I think it is pretty clear that Cruz's intention was for the play to be over....'JuSt CuZ said:So did anyone see the Giants/Cardinals game?
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
not trying to split hairs here capt, but that is often what these things come down to....I agree that he stumbled and slipped....but I also think that as he is doing so he looks and sees that he is "most likely" going to be contacted when he hits the ground as he even looks and sees some AZ players around him....they were correct in not leeting Whiz challenge the call....I completely disagree that he "fumbled" the ball....it seems pretty clear that he just leaves the ball laying on the ground as he starts to get up.....I don't see anytning to show that he in any way "fumbled" the ball.....he intentionally laid/left the ball down and was getting up and heading back to line up for the next play which was probably going to be a spike the ball play....and the "he did not stay down" part is totally your opinion of what the rule should be.....not what the rule is in any way.....there is nothing in the rule that says the player has to stay down in order to "surrender himself".....I again stand by the fact that I think the officials made the right "judgement" call here, because that is what this is....a judgement call....in their judgement, they determined that Cruz was giving himself up.....and I think it is very easy to see why they deemed Cruz's actions to be giving himself up.....he went to the ground, intentionally let go of the ball (not fumbling it) and was getting up to move back to line up....he was not trying to advance and gain additional yardage in any way......he had very little regard for the ball as he thought the play was over.....why he thought the play was over (thought he was touched or giving himself up) doesn't matter......his actions ended the play in the judgement of the official......there is nothing that says you have to lay there for a certain amount of time or stay down....FWIW I watched most of the game and this really looked like he stumbled or slipped and was trying to get up and move.But that is minor compared to the refs call and the ruleWhiz tried to challenge and was told he couldn'tMike Perrera (sp?) said that he thought it was a fumbleEli Manning said after the game that he thought they lucked out because he thought it was a fumbleThen Adam Schefter comes on this morning and says the rule was called correctlyThis is one of many rules that most coaches and players in the game are completely aware of - and one I hope they change.I think the refs were wrong on the call - Cruz wasn't touched, slipped or stumbled, and fumbled the ball. That should have been ruled a fumble - he did NOT stay down which would be part of the "surrendered himself" part of the rule.no dog in the race, but I can see how the refs thought he gave himself up.....he went to the ground on his own......and as he gets up he drops the ball just like most receivers do when a play is over......his action was more of an intentional dropping of the ball, it wasn't fumbling the ball....and he wasn't getting up to continue and try and advance down field....he was trying to get back to line up for the next play...now, could the refs have ruled the other way and say thought he didn't give himself up and make it just seem like a bonehead play....sure....and some people might not have said anything.....but I think it is pretty clear that Cruz's intention was for the play to be over....'JuSt CuZ said:So did anyone see the Giants/Cardinals game?
Captain Hook
Footballguy
We will just disagree on this unless clarfied as a result of this game. The rule does say the player has to surrender himself and several NFL players and coaches and officials - NOT me - have said that is by sliding feet first or staying on the ground UNTIL the play is blown dead. HOW on earth are officials going to be able to tell which guys who get back up after falling on their own (for whatever reason) are "trying" to continue or heading back to the huddle.....and btw Cruz clearly did NOT turn back towards the rest of his team and IIRC - and certainly this will be shown several times this week - did not just "leave" the ball on the ground - he appeared to be reaching to regain it - we shall see
houndirish
Footballguy
Hook ... you might want to watch the play again. Cruz does nothing that resembles a fumble. He laid the ball on the ground and is in the process of getting up to go back to the huddle. It's only when the Arizona defender started hitting him that Cruz made any effort to go back towards the ball.
I thought this was a crap call when I first saw it and felt the Giants dodged a bullet. But when the rule was stated, it's clear the refs got it right. I applaud them for this as similar to other controversial calls in NFL history (ie. Tuck Rule), there probably aren't instances where refs are forced to make this call. The fact that they knowledgeable of it and got it right the first time is pretty impressive.
I also have to give thumbs up to Stinkin Ref and Shonuff for their remarkable patience with idiocy in this thread (that's not pointed at you Hook)
I thought this was a crap call when I first saw it and felt the Giants dodged a bullet. But when the rule was stated, it's clear the refs got it right. I applaud them for this as similar to other controversial calls in NFL history (ie. Tuck Rule), there probably aren't instances where refs are forced to make this call. The fact that they knowledgeable of it and got it right the first time is pretty impressive.
I also have to give thumbs up to Stinkin Ref and Shonuff for their remarkable patience with idiocy in this thread (that's not pointed at you Hook)
Captain Hook
Footballguy
Well I will watch it again but you must have seen something different than Eli and Ferrera did because they had the same thoughts that I did
houndirish
Footballguy
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
I think even a die hard Cardinal fan would admit that it is pretty clear he is dropping the ball on purpose....
JuSt CuZ
Footballguy
The point is intent. He was in the college mindset and made a mistake. He never gave himself up, only after he stumbled.
It was a fumble, and the fact it is such a huge story is the fact that its a bad rule and that was shown yesterday.
your either down by contact or your not, leaving the refs to much interpretation is the bad part.
It was a fumble, and the fact it is such a huge story is the fact that its a bad rule and that was shown yesterday.
your either down by contact or your not, leaving the refs to much interpretation is the bad part.
renesauz
IBL Representative
Yep...not sure that's where the argument lies though. The argument is what actually defines "giving oneself up". Nowhere is it clearly defined. A QB kneeling right after the snap is recognized as giving himself up...same with a foot first slide. Tripping and stumbling to the ground face first, and then IMMMEDIATELY getting up has never before been recognized as "giving oneself up". The only reason it was in this case is because he apparently left the ball on the ground on purpose (instead of fumbling it.)IN the end, it's a clear judgement call because the rules don't DEFINE "giveing oneself up". The fact that there is NO PRECEDENT for giving oneself up in this manner is the reason for the controversy. The closest approximations of this play have always, in the past, been ruled a fumble. Players are routinely told to play till the whistle. No whistle...play is alive.
It may have been a judgement call, but if it's the right judgement call (and I don't agree that it is), I think the rule itself demands better clarity. I'm 100% convinced that the only reason the WR left that ball is because he's a rookie and thought he was down when he went to the ground. He was NOT "giveing himself up" intentionally.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
most all of this is wrong.....you have no idea what his mindset was....in fact he tried to imply that he thought he had been touched...you say he never gave himself up.....and then you say he did...after he stumbled....which is it....did he or didn't he....it wasn't a fumble....as in getting it knocked away...it is pretty clear he puts the ball down on purpose...your right it is a big story and it may be a bad rule.....but there have always been rules in place in every level of football that you can give yourself up.....and you are wrong about either being down by contact or not as the rules clearly state that you can give yourself up....so you can be considered "down" without there being any contact.....the refs know players can do this....so it is left to their judgement.....in part to protect the players.....similiar sitaution to Westbrook taking a knee at the one.....when he takes a knee and clearly gives himself up, he is protected from getting blasted.....you don't have to slide, you don't have to take a knee.....
renesauz
IBL Representative
Westbrook didn't trip face first and immediately try to get up...he laid there until the whistle.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
he is not a rookie....I think he clearly acts as though he is giving himself up.....when he goes to the ground, he kind of covers up the ball, bringing it in to him....and then almost braces himself like he is expecting to get hit while he is down.....when he doesn't he starts to set the ball down and go back to lineup....nothing in his movements indictae that he is going to get up and try to get more yards....in fact him setting the ball down would be the last thing he would do if the plan was to get up and try to get more yards....
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
neither did Cruz....he actually stays there for a second and kind of braces himself like he is expecting to get blasted while he is down.....
renesauz
IBL Representative
To be fair, I'm not 100% certain the ref made a "bad" call. Like many of the biggest controversies, I think the problem lies more in the rule. The almost complete lack of precedent certainly doesn't help. If you've paid any attention to my posts in the past, I generally think the refs have a thankless job that they do pretty darn well on balance.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
I honestly think that as he was stumbling to the ground he realized he had several Cardinals around him and he was expecting to get blasted while on the ground....when nothing happened he for whatever reason felt the play was over and set the ball down to go back and lineup....even he really can't explain why he did what he did....I think he got bailed out by the fact that the referees interpreted his actions as giving himself up even if that wasn't his intent and I can clearly see why an official would think that was what he was trying to do....even if it wasn't....so the call is understandable....
Last edited by a moderator:
Captain Hook
Footballguy
the following posted at ESPN - NFC West blog by Mike Sando
The NFL released the following explanation for referee Jerome Boger's ruling that New York Giants receiver Victor Cruz did not fumble against the Arizona Cardinals in Week 4:
"In Sundays game between the New York Giants and Arizona Cardinals, the Giants faced a 1st-and-10 from the Arizona 48 with 3:10 remaining in the fourth quarter. Quarterback Eli Manning connected with wide receiver Victor Cruz for a 19-yard gain.
"Referee Jerome Boger announced the following: 'The ruling on the previous play was that the receiver gave himself up by going to the ground. That cannot be challenged. So there is no challenge allowed by Arizona. It is first down, New York.'
"The applicable rule in the 2011 NFL Rule Book is found on page 35.
"Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 states that 'An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: (e): when a runner is out of bounds, or declares himself down by falling to the ground, or kneeling, and making no effort to advance.' "This is a judgment call, in other words. There is no specific set of requirements a runner must satisfy when declaring himself down. That means a runner can be declared down even if he slips to the ground, provided the referee thinks the runner meant to declare himself down on the play.
The NFL released the following explanation for referee Jerome Boger's ruling that New York Giants receiver Victor Cruz did not fumble against the Arizona Cardinals in Week 4:
"In Sundays game between the New York Giants and Arizona Cardinals, the Giants faced a 1st-and-10 from the Arizona 48 with 3:10 remaining in the fourth quarter. Quarterback Eli Manning connected with wide receiver Victor Cruz for a 19-yard gain.
"Referee Jerome Boger announced the following: 'The ruling on the previous play was that the receiver gave himself up by going to the ground. That cannot be challenged. So there is no challenge allowed by Arizona. It is first down, New York.'
"The applicable rule in the 2011 NFL Rule Book is found on page 35.
"Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 states that 'An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: (e): when a runner is out of bounds, or declares himself down by falling to the ground, or kneeling, and making no effort to advance.' "This is a judgment call, in other words. There is no specific set of requirements a runner must satisfy when declaring himself down. That means a runner can be declared down even if he slips to the ground, provided the referee thinks the runner meant to declare himself down on the play.
Last edited by a moderator:
Captain Hook
Footballguy
I am NOT a "die hard Cardinals fan"
They are the NFL team in the metro area I live in so I read/hear/see a lot more about them than any other NFL team.
I still think he clearly stumbled and fell
What I don't agree with is that he gave himself up - nothing from the rule says he did.
If Cruz had regained his feet WITH the ball and moved a few steps forward (yes he for sure would have been blasted then) would he have had the ball marked there or back a few yards when he stumbled? Pretty sure we all know the answer to that which is the main reason I agree with those who think the rule should be more clearly defined and NOT be a judgment call for the referees.
They are the NFL team in the metro area I live in so I read/hear/see a lot more about them than any other NFL team.
I still think he clearly stumbled and fell
What I don't agree with is that he gave himself up - nothing from the rule says he did.
If Cruz had regained his feet WITH the ball and moved a few steps forward (yes he for sure would have been blasted then) would he have had the ball marked there or back a few yards when he stumbled? Pretty sure we all know the answer to that which is the main reason I agree with those who think the rule should be more clearly defined and NOT be a judgment call for the referees.
Stinkin Ref
IBL Representative
hey capt....the die hard AZ fan thing was not meant to be directed at you....serioulsy had no idea about where you are from until you posted this and I looked over at your bio stuff under your avatar...was simply stating that it is pretty clear what Cruz's intentions were by him dropping/leaving the ball on the ground, and that even die hard fans, or even AZ players and coaches for that matter can kind of see that he just left it there instead of actually fumbling it....and to me that is the biggest part of this play, because I honestly believe that had had he not made the action of leaving/intentionally dropping the ball on the ground, I think then there is the real possibility that the officials would not have ruled that he was giving himself up....if he gets up with the ball still secured in his possession, things might have been different...and as I said, I think he kind of got bailed out here because while I think he thought the play was over (for some unkown reason), I am not sure he was actually giving himself up...I think he had a total brainfart and was caught up in the moment and was more concerned about getting back and lining up for the next play...it seems that the only real solution is to maybe say that the player must just lay there until the whistle is blown, no moving, no trying to get up in any way....which could sometimes be awhile because the higher up you go, the officials are more apt and encouraged to "hold" their whistle.....in this situation, he is wanting to get up as quickly as possible because the clock is running....the totality of his actions, especially leaving the ball, lead the officials to believe his intent was to give himself up, so they ruled correctly....
Similar threads
