Running list of confirmed WRONG TD calls or reversals (1 Viewer)

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Refs are not having a good year so far, in my opinion. Lots of incorrect, and in some cases "what in the world are they thinking", calls. For this thread, though, let's keep a running list of the TDs that have been awarded or taken away incorrectly.

Awarded:

TEN @ JAX / Mike Sims Walker drops ball in endzone. Call on field is no catch. Changed to TD on reviews. Confirmed later to be an incorrect call.

Taken away:

NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Was it Walker or Calvin that was ruled out of bounds when he clearly wasn't and scored?

 

[Grahamburn]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.

That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me. He had full control in the end zone, two feet down, then fell on top of the defender who subsequently popped the ball out. I was always under the impression that two feet down and control in the end zone is a TD?

 

[RBM]

Murphy in week 1

 

[Cookiemonster]

The Logan fumble on the punt return for Pitts. Forward progress was clearly stopped, being dragged backwards by two defenders but held up off the ground. Ball is stripped for a TD when the play should have been dead.

 

[harryhood]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me. He had full control in the end zone, two feet down, then fell on top of the defender who subsequently popped the ball out. I was always under the impression that two feet down and control in the end zone is a TD?

Sounds like according to the new rule you could have possession take 5 steps, fall to the ground and loose control, and it is supposed to be incomplete. Makes about as much sense as a 15 yard penalty for a defensive linemen who gets pushed from behind into the lower leg of a QB.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me. He had full control in the end zone, two feet down, then fell on top of the defender who subsequently popped the ball out. I was always under the impression that two feet down and control in the end zone is a TD?

Yes. Calvin was the one I was thinking of. Walker play was incorrectly ruled a TD. Should have been incomplete. If going to the ground (by force or not) in the act of making a catch, posession must be maintained through the ground.

 

[Cookiemonster]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me. He had full control in the end zone, two feet down, then fell on top of the defender who subsequently popped the ball out. I was always under the impression that two feet down and control in the end zone is a TD?

Sounds like according to the new rule you could have possession take 5 steps, fall to the ground and loose control, and it is supposed to be incomplete. Makes about as much sense as a 15 yard penalty for a defensive linemen who gets pushed from behind into the lower leg of a QB.

Stupid, but yeah, pretty much. Santonio got called incomplete in the playoffs last year after making the catch @ about the 5, landing with both feet, turning, taking another two steps, diving for the goal line. Hit during his dive by a defender while reaching out with the ball for the goal line. Hits the ground, ball comes loose, ruled incomplete. Crock of ####.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me. He had full control in the end zone, two feet down, then fell on top of the defender who subsequently popped the ball out. I was always under the impression that two feet down and control in the end zone is a TD?

Perreira confirmed on NFL Total Access that it was incorrect and should not have been a TD.As to your question -- he did not have control of it upon being down.

 

[joffer]

That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me.

yeah, but it was against Tennessee

 

[GregR_2]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.That Sims-Walker play looked like a TD to me. He had full control in the end zone, two feet down, then fell on top of the defender who subsequently popped the ball out. I was always under the impression that two feet down and control in the end zone is a TD?

Sounds like according to the new rule you could have possession take 5 steps, fall to the ground and loose control, and it is supposed to be incomplete. Makes about as much sense as a 15 yard penalty for a defensive linemen who gets pushed from behind into the lower leg of a QB.

Taking 5 steps first probably wouldn't be considered going to the ground. Not unless they were completely off-balance, taken while falling and out of control. Even then it might not be considered it, not sure.The rule with the Sims-Walker play isn't a new one, it's been around for a few years since they got rid of the requirement of a "football move" to maintain possession. It was changed to having to maintain possession if you "go to the ground". What they've clarified this year is how long you have to maintain possession after going to the ground. According to Pereira, they are discriminating between plays where a player loses the ball when he initially goes to the ground (incomplete pass) versus a play where he maintains possession when he first goes to the ground and then subsequently loses the ball during a "second act" such as a defensive player knocking it out after he's hit the ground, or rolling across the ground subsequently after the first contact with the ground. In essence they are allowing more plays to be catches than they allowed in the past because they didn't emphasize this "second act" part. In the past, a guy could roll over 3 times and lose the ball on the third roll and it would be incomplete.The Sims-Walker play is an unfortunate one because he did end up going to the ground... but instead of hitting the ground in his first impact, he landed on a defensive player. Between the time of him landing on the defensive player and him hitting the ground, the ball was knocked free. Since he didn't have possession when he finally did hit the ground, that's a no catch by the rule. It's a little like a ball carrier who gets stood up and before he's ruled to have forward progress stopped to end the play, someone strips it out.I agree the rule chafes when applied to the Sims-Walker catch. It seems like if you land on a player instead of the ground, absorb that impact and then are just laying there for a bit and subsequent action by the defender knocks it free, that should be enough to count as catch. If he'd hit the ground instead of the defender and the ball came free in the same timing, it would be a catch. That's something I think most would agree the rule should allow, but it isn't something it allows as written. Frankly I'm not sure how they'd write it to fix this instance either.

 

[Resident A]

Taken away:NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

Taken away:

NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

I'm not a BE owner, but that was a TD to me.No defender made contact and he hit the pylon which is part of the endzone. His knee landed in bounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oYxLDv8N1w

 

[Cookiemonster]

Taken away:

NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

I'm not a BE owner, but that was a TD to me.No defender made contact and he hit the pylon which is part of the endzone. His knee landed in bounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oYxLDv8N1w

Agree. TD. Not a Braylon/Sanchez owner and had no interest in the game other than to watch a good football contest.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Taken away:NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

Sorry, Tattoo, but you are incorrect. The ball clearly crossed the pylon before he went out of bounds. It isn't debatable.I'm not playing FF this year and I hate the Jets.

 

[belljr]

Murphy in week 1

Oh boy here we go again....It was called correctly.The rule is bad

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

Murphy in week 1

Oh boy here we go again....It was called correctly.The rule is bad

The interpretation of the rule was bad, and IMO wrong.The words "to the ground" mean different things to different people. When the second foot comes down, I, and many reasonable people consider the receiver to have retained possession "to the ground." Moreover, when the NFL removed the "football move" interpretation of the rule, per Ed Hochuli, this was supposed to make the awarding of a reception more lenient.

 

[Doug B]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.

Nowhere near that cut & dried. Called OOB on the field by a ref who was very close to the play. No replay showed green between his foot and the white-chalk sideline. Replay was inconclusive, call on the field stood.

 

[Doug B]

The Sims-Walker play is an unfortunate one because he did end up going to the ground... but instead of hitting the ground in his first impact, he landed on a defensive player. Between the time of him landing on the defensive player and him hitting the ground, the ball was knocked free. Since he didn't have possession when he finally did hit the ground, that's a no catch by the rule. It's a little like a ball carrier who gets stood up and before he's ruled to have forward progress stopped to end the play, someone strips it out.

The defenders should count as "part of the ground" IMHO. The rule as applied is silly.

I agree the rule chafes when applied to the Sims-Walker catch. It seems like if you land on a player instead of the ground, absorb that impact and then are just laying there for a bit and subsequent action by the defender knocks it free, that should be enough to count as catch. If he'd hit the ground instead of the defender and the ball came free in the same timing, it would be a catch. That's something I think most would agree the rule should allow, but it isn't something it allows as written. Frankly I'm not sure how they'd write it to fix this instance either.

Agree with the bolded. All that needs to be rewritten is that a pileup of one or more defenders counts as "part of the ground". Compare the referees being "part of the court" in basketball.

 

[One]

The Sims-Walker play is an unfortunate one because he did end up going to the ground... but instead of hitting the ground in his first impact, he landed on a defensive player. Between the time of him landing on the defensive player and him hitting the ground, the ball was knocked free. Since he didn't have possession when he finally did hit the ground, that's a no catch by the rule. It's a little like a ball carrier who gets stood up and before he's ruled to have forward progress stopped to end the play, someone strips it out.

The defenders should count as "part of the ground" IMHO. The rule as applied is silly.

I agree and hope they get rid of the rule.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

Murphy in week 1

Oh boy here we go again....It was called correctly.The rule is bad

Have to agree with this post. Problem is...it is a flip of the coin to see which way the ref is going to call it each time.

 

[Hooper31]

Taken away:NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

Sorry, Tattoo, but you are incorrect. The ball clearly crossed the pylon before he went out of bounds. It isn't debatable.I'm not playing FF this year and I hate the Jets.

Oh yeah?I say it wasn't a touchdown, and the guy that made the decision is part of an ongoing blood feud with my family. He brutally murdered my brother in front me using a safety pin and a hunk of rotting beef jerky.So there.

 

[Yellow Line is Unoffcial]

Taken away:NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

I have no idea what you were watching. Out of bounds was never a issue. If he was out of bounds, that is what the ref would have said in his explaination. It was a blown call plain and simple. Even if it wasn't a TD (which it was) there was not enough evidence to overturn the play. BTW this was the same ref who blew the Sims-Walker play,

 

[UlyssesNorris]

Calvin had a TD in week one taken away saying he stepped out at the 3 yard line. He didn't.

Nowhere near that cut & dried. Called OOB on the field by a ref who was very close to the play. No replay showed green between his foot and the white-chalk sideline. Replay was inconclusive, call on the field stood.

You and I saw a different replay, apparently. I saw green.

 

[Wilbur Wood]

Taken away:

NYJ @ MIA / Braylon Edwards -- called a TD. Placed on 1 because his knee hit the ground. Which it did. The problem is that no defender touched him.

Braylon came down out of bounds. His upper body was over the plane of the GL, but the ball was not. That was the right call. Either you didn't watch the replay close enough or are a disgruntled Braylon owner.

I'm not a BE owner, but that was a TD to me.No defender made contact and he hit the pylon which is part of the endzone. His knee landed in bounds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oYxLDv8N1w

Agree. What especially irked me about that call was that to me (and the objective announcers doing the game) there was clearly not "indisputable" (or is it "irrefutable"?) evidence to overturn the call, yet they do so. Edwards clearly makes an inbounds catch then solely by his own inertia his knee hits the ground (not by contact with a defender) and while as of the nanosecond that his knee makes contact with the ground the ball appears to be short of the goal line his momentum is sliding forward and he makes contact with the pylon. Sometime after Edwards knee hits the ground (and thus after his momentum is propelling him forward) there is contact with a defender. So at best it is left "murky" as to where the ball exactly was when the defender makes contact with Edwards (which occurs after Edwards falls to the ground in the absence of defensive contact). Yet from all of this the ref discerns indisputable evidence for a reversal of the call on the field. This is not how replay is suppose to be applied and annoys me to a greater extent than simply blown calls do due to the delays and inability that the fan has in experiencing the ecstasy or agony of the live moment (it just aint' the same "buzz" to get the result from a zebra 3 minutes later and after a GEICO commercial).