Why wasn't the OAK/BUF Hail Mary reviewed? (1 Viewer)

[Lash]

Denarious Moore looked to have co-possession (or at least enough to be reviewable) and another BUF DB pulled him off his part of the ball AFTER the whistle

after watching on DVR a few times, i probably would've let the call stand but...

is co-possession reviewable?

is that a booth error not calling down?

can an opposing player pull a player off of co-possession after the players are "down"?

man i would've hated to be that referee had not the other BUF DB separated DMoore from the ball before he ran over there to see

 

[SacramentoBob]

It was a clear INT.

 

[Vision6]

The refs seemed determined to see Buffalo win but that was a clear INT.

 

[aschleder]

I agree. I have no idea what the exact ruling is, but I'd love some clarification.

From what I could tell (they only showed one replay), it looked like the DB touched the ball first, but both he and Moore came down with the ball. If I remember correctly, the same thing happened in the Jets/Cowboys game last weekend. Cromartie was inside, put his hands on the ball first, but Austin reached in and also had possession before coming down. The ref said that if both players come down with the ball, it goes to the offense.

Now, I know I'm biased because I was forced to start Denarius Moore and would have loved the extra 11 points, but I found it interesting that it wasn't reviewed or even mentioned. Was anybody able to get an explanation?

 

[smapdi]

Because it was clearly an INT

Searcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replay

They reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

 

[aschleder]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Actually, it looked like they called in the review so Stevie Johnson could get off the field. The Bills called a timeout, the booth had 2+ minutes to call in a review, the Bills lined up, Stevie started limping off the field but the Bills couldn't call another time out, and then the refs blew the whistle so they could review a call that was not even remotely controversial. I don't think they were seriously worried about the Bills having the first down.

 

[GroveDiesel]

The refs seemed determined to see Buffalo win but that was a clear INT.

Show me one bad call against the Raiders. Go ahead.I bet you won't mention Kyle Williams getting held with a chokehold from behind on both of the last throws of the game either.

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Yup. The replay showed that Searcy clearly had control of the ball first and retained possession all the way to the ground. Just because Moore put his hands on the ball after Searcy got it doesn't mean that it's simultaneous possession.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Actually, it looked like they called in the review so Stevie Johnson could get off the field. The Bills called a timeout, the booth had 2+ minutes to call in a review, the Bills lined up, Stevie started limping off the field but the Bills couldn't call another time out, and then the refs blew the whistle so they could review a call that was not even remotely controversial. I don't think they were seriously worried about the Bills having the first down.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Actually, it looked like they called in the review so Stevie Johnson could get off the field. The Bills called a timeout, the booth had 2+ minutes to call in a review, the Bills lined up, Stevie started limping off the field but the Bills couldn't call another time out, and then the refs blew the whistle so they could review a call that was not even remotely controversial. I don't think they were seriously worried about the Bills having the first down.

It wasn't even the same play. You have no idea what you are talking about. Steve Johnson came out of the game a full 4 plays earlier than when the replay assistant reviewed the spot on Nelson's catch.

 

[Bills Fan]

Actually, after the teams left the field, they did reivew it.

 

[urbanhack]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Some people are seeing what they want to see in here.

 

[Garrett]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Yeah, I agree. The defender clearly established and maintained control before the WR ever came into the picture.

 

[aschleder]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Actually, it looked like they called in the review so Stevie Johnson could get off the field. The Bills called a timeout, the booth had 2+ minutes to call in a review, the Bills lined up, Stevie started limping off the field but the Bills couldn't call another time out, and then the refs blew the whistle so they could review a call that was not even remotely controversial. I don't think they were seriously worried about the Bills having the first down.

It wasn't even the same play. You have no idea what you are talking about. Steve Johnson came out of the game a full 4 plays earlier than when the replay assistant reviewed the spot on Nelson's catch.

Alright, I apologize if I sound petty. I remember Stevie coming off the field earlier. But when the announcers said that Stevie was coming off the field, I was surprised because I thought he was already out. I assumed that he tried to go back in but he couldn't. I have no replay and couldn't go back to see if Stevie had tried coming back in for the play or not; I was just going off what I heard the announcers say.Also, I think I'm just shell-shocked by the Raiders crazy collapse.

 

[Chief]

Oakland local post game show on KPIX mentioned that the play WAS BEING REVIEWED and that they would report what the final outcome was. I didn't stick around as I seemed clear that there never was simultaneous possession. If I was wrong, I would be pleasantly surprised.

 

[smapdi]

I don't see how you can say that Refs favored the Bills and were giving them the game.

I can't even list how many times Kyle Willams got held. Not just petty little jersey pulls for a moment; full out tackling him. I couldn't believe the number of times I saw Bills' d-linemen being tackled by the OAK linemen.

The officiating wasn't pretty today but I think it was equally crappy for both sides.

 

[renesauz]

Not sure why there'd be any controversy. Defender caught the ball cleanly, and it was only on his way to the ground a half second later that the Oakland receiver put his own hands on the ball. After they hit the ground, defender ripped it away from receiver.

Ball started with defender, ended with defender...belongs to defender. No brainer.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Actually, after the teams left the field, they did reivew it.

The play was actually reviewed after CBS had switched off the game. The refs came to the conclusion that it was an INT.

 

[abishagenaden]

The commentators also mentioned there was (offensive) holding on the play, so it wouldn't have mattered if OAK had caught the ball instead right?

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Sorry OP, but I can't see the co-possession you are talking about. Clearly an INT imo.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Because it was clearly an INTSearcy went up and had that ball the entire way. I thought that looked pretty clear on the initial replayThey reviewed the Bills 4th down spot on the previous drive so I think that shows that the booth thought it wasn't even worth their time. Clearly an INT

Actually, it looked like they called in the review so Stevie Johnson could get off the field. The Bills called a timeout, the booth had 2+ minutes to call in a review, the Bills lined up, Stevie started limping off the field but the Bills couldn't call another time out, and then the refs blew the whistle so they could review a call that was not even remotely controversial. I don't think they were seriously worried about the Bills having the first down.

It wasn't even the same play. You have no idea what you are talking about. Steve Johnson came out of the game a full 4 plays earlier than when the replay assistant reviewed the spot on Nelson's catch.

Alright, I apologize if I sound petty. I remember Stevie coming off the field earlier. But when the announcers said that Stevie was coming off the field, I was surprised because I thought he was already out. I assumed that he tried to go back in but he couldn't. I have no replay and couldn't go back to see if Stevie had tried coming back in for the play or not; I was just going off what I heard the announcers say.Also, I think I'm just shell-shocked by the Raiders crazy collapse.

You're partially right, he did go back out there and come back off the field when they called for the review, just like the rest of the players. And he stayed in after the review.I do agree that it was a stupid review since it seemed obvious he caught it and the spot seemed obvious, but there's no way the review official up in the booth looked down and called for a review just because Stevie was hurting.

 

[Garrett]

Actually, after the teams left the field, they did reivew it.

The play was actually reviewed after CBS had switched off the game. The refs came to the conclusion that it was an INT.

Coming from a Raider fan, yeah, it was obvious.Nothing to see here, it was INT.The defender clearly took control of the ball before any offensive player was even in the picture.

 

[cr8f]

It was a clear INT.

If they get "confimed" they call it a touchdown. They reviewed it quickly enough they determined it didn't need a further review.

 

[bleachercreacher]

During halftime of the Patriots game they showed a video of the refs coming back out and saying that the play was reviewed and confirmed.

 

[jon_mx]

By the Calvin Johnson rule, I thought the Bills winning touchdown should have been incomplete. He dropped the ball barely after his second foot hit the ground to celebrate. He did not complete the "process".

 

[mad sweeney]

By the Calvin Johnson rule, I thought the Bills winning touchdown should have been incomplete. He dropped the ball barely after his second foot hit the ground to celebrate. He did not complete the "process".

Did he go to the ground? Nope. Then why would a rule about maintaining possession while going to the ground apply to it?

 

[UnknownCoach]

The question is if its a reviewable play why wasnt it reviewed? A legitimate question.

The answer is the refs did review the play but the network had already stopped showing the game.

The review showed a clear INT. The network could see that already so they didnt hesitate long to move away from the game. So the refs did do their job, it just wasnt shown.

 

[socrates]

I disagree that is was a clear INT. While the defender clearly had the initial grab, just as a receiver must maintain possession, so must the defender. If before possession by the defender was established, it became a simultaneous possession, it would have been a TD. All of that being said, while I did think it should have been immediately reviewed (apparently it was reviewed), I believe the outcome was the correct one. I did not see anything that would warrant overturning the call.

 

[jon_mx]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

The refs will probably find a way to make it benefit the Patriots.

 

[mad sweeney]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

 

[Limp Ditka]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

 

[mad sweeney]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.

NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

Yeah, that's part of the joke. See wrong_mx's first post.I don't like the auto-review for reasons like Sproles' TD, but also because just as many would-be TDs aren't auto reviewed when they should be. Seems silly to not auto-review if it's not ruled a TD and force a coach to waste a challenge on it.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

The refs seemed determined to see Buffalo win but that was a clear INT.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The refs seemed determined to see Buffalo win but that was a clear INT.

 

[bonesman]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

The Hernandez TD was reviewed. I was surprised it was upheld.

 

[mad sweeney]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

The Hernandez TD was reviewed. I was surprised it was upheld.

All TDs are reviewed. I think was talking about it being Reviewed.

 

[bonesman]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

The Hernandez TD was reviewed. I was surprised it was upheld.

All TDs are reviewed. I think was talking about it being Reviewed.

Oh REviewed. I thought he meant reviewed.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

The Hernandez TD was reviewed. I was surprised it was upheld.

All TDs are reviewed. I think was talking about it being Reviewed.

Oh REviewed. I thought he meant reviewed.

 

[mad sweeney]

Sometime this year, this co-possession rule is going to prove to be dumb. If the situation was a little different today, it would have been today. I would hate to see a game decided by this co-possession rule on a final hail mary.

Even with the CJ rule in effect?

CJ rule doesn't seem to be in effect. See Aaron Hernandez TD today, which I don't think they reviewed.Also, the should have reviewed the Sporles TD in the NO / CHI game, and didn't.NFL officials really seemed to have screwed the pooch today on these two

The Hernandez TD was reviewed. I was surprised it was upheld.

All TDs are reviewed. I think was talking about it being Reviewed.

Oh REviewed. I thought he meant reviewed.

Not REviewed, Reviewed. The booth reviews every TD. If it isn't clear on their review, they can buzz down to the ref to Review it.