OK… now they’re explaining the call, that it was about possession, and not control. They say he had control, but not necessarily possession - that’s how they’re explaining the overrule.
Thank you, Howie Long. And let’s not forget the first reversal last week … Letting Suh play.
Usually Mike Peirra (sp?-- the ex ref dude for Fox) makes me want to poke my ears out but his explanation of the rule and play were extremely helpful.
Glad Dallas lost
Seattle did a great job of bottling up Lacy back in September. I hope that formula sticks this time around.
I’ve got no dog in this fight; I like both Denver and Indy.
So Seahawks vs Packers for the title. Should be a helluva game.
The REAL question is: Who/What is the “New York Bozo”?
FWIW… I don’t think the Packers can beat Seattle next week with Rodgers still hurt, although he looked awesome in the 4th quarter. I’d love to be proven wrong.
I’m trying to watch the game, but the announcer keeps saying Payton May-ning and I can’t focus on anything other than that -__-
Serious question … Do y’all think there will be some kind of ref come-to-Jesus meeting/changes in the offseason? Too many times this year I’ve seen refs overturn (or not) things that others, including Mike Perriera, saw differently. How can there be so much wiggle room in rules interpretation?
Vinateri misses a field goal??? Wow.
Wow, Manning is way off his game today.
Manning looks like he is 50 and feeling every day of it.
Just got back from some errands. I was hoping to see a Packers/Broncos Superbowl, so I hope he perks up.
I was wondering about the 'New York Bozo" audible too, Scout. Well those Wisconsin wedge heads can insult NY all they want; the best cheddar is still made in Noo Yack!!!
MODERATOR’S NOTE: Links to images are NOT allowed. If CC inserts asterisks into a word or a link, it means it should be DELETED. This is specifically stated in the Terms of Service.
And now, Mike Carey goes against the final ruling. They’ve got to do better than this.
The whole point in reviewing turnovers automatically is to get it right. If they don’t rule it a fumble then there is no review. They could have gone that route. Now they seem to default to the turnover (as in the Thomas “interception”) then trust the automatic review to reverse if necessary. That’s what people said they wanted. Same with the coach challenges. The idea was to get it right after the whole Fail Mary controversy. Now they let a play run out and then review it. If they whistle something dead right away then any potential advance on the part of the other team would be void even if it ultimately goes their way.
^^^ referencing the goal line play by Earl Thomas in the Seahawks game that turned out to be incomplete upon review. They let it play out then ultimately reversed it.
After all . . . what’s the point in having a review system if you aren’t willing to accept things being overturned. In most cases, also, people want the official with the best view to ultimately be the one to say what he saw even if another threw a flag. If the guy staring at the play saw something different then in a neutral situation I would think most people would want his opinion to count more than a guy 20 yards away or someone who had an obscured view.
How is that not interference?
What I am saying is that, upon review, people who should know disagree about the interpretation. The guys on the fields don’t agree with Perriera or Carey, the experts hired to know the rules.