That's how I feel about this. Why give the zebras even one extra look at it. Even if on all accounts Watson retained possession, I've seen zebras turn a blind eye or two. Unless Reich was lying about being told that. It was getting very chippy out there. Colts sucker pushed one of our line men way past the whistle.
Definitely felt the game started to change with those back to back 3 and outs in the second half. The key was stopping them from getting 4+ yards on first down runs. 2nd and 9/2nd and 8 is so much better for the D than 2nd and 4 which is what it was seemingly all game outside of a couple of drives. Big boy game up front by the DTs and ILBs!
Yep. Possession is a fickle thing in the NFL. So is determining when a play is over. Dumb move on all accounts. If I'm Watson I jump up, immediately get to the LOS, and call a play. I bet BOB wouldn't let him do that though.
They didn't review it. We know that now. They looked at it but if they wanted more time BOB cant stop that. They're the officials You've never seen a review of wrestling for a ball. Have you?
Actually, they can only stop the game IF they're going to review it. What BOB gave them was time to decide if they were going to review it. They didn't; but they could have. They could have discussed during the timeout that they the recovery was not inconclusive; therefore initiating the ability to review. It's at their discretion and with the game on the line, I could have totally seen them going to the review to get it right.
Reviewed it for what. Have you ever seen a review of wrestling for a ball? Thats a judgement. They were standing right there
Yes I have. It is a judgement call. You shouldn't give them time to think about it more. They were standing there but didn't have the best angle. They could have wanted a better look because 1) primetime game 2) game changing play 3) playoff on the line. It's a moot point, don't feel like going back and forth anymore. Guys that watch football for a living have said they shouldn't have called the timeout. It could have cost them; but it didn't. Hallelujah. Amen. Goodbye.
When have you seen it. I watch a lot of football Both guys have their arms on the ball. What would the film show? No possession till its whistled. Nothing to see before. They aren't looking at that when they blow the whistle?
Possession is a reviewable play, that's not even up for debate so I'm just gonna stop here. But here's a nice article on the play. Florio's not writing this about a play that is not reviewable. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...should-have-triggered-a-formal-replay-review/
Possession was challenged and reviewed. It wasn't overturned but it was reviewed. Like I said, whether its reviewable is not up for debate.
We don't have a clear recovery therefore the ruling stands The review is of the fumble They couldn't overturn the call because its incredibly difficult to say who ha https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...to-cowboys-nfl-needs-more-centralized-replay/ Blakeman defended the decision after the game as well. Part of the problem here is the play was initially not ruled a fumble Edit: the play isnt called a fumble. They couldn't overturn it cause its incredibly difficult to determine any possession after the fact because whistle is blown and players react But tjats neither here nor there. Pederson is challenging a non fumble call. Not the same
