Lions League admits errors on Lions-Saints fumble

[News Bot]

Sunday’s game between the Steelers and Broncos included a bad call on an apparent fumble that allowed the Steelers to force an overtime period from which the Broncos emerged with a memorable win. Saturday night’s game between the Lions and Saints included a bad call on an apparent fumble that could have allowed the Lions…

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Source: ProFootballTalk.com

 

[morningwood]

The bottom line is that the whistle was blown before either team recovered the ball -- the Lions should have never been awarded possession of the ball. I am not sure how that happened.

 

[GreenBlood]

The bottom line is that the whistle was blown before either team recovered the ball -- the Lions should have never been awarded possession of the ball. I am not sure how that happened.

The bottom line is that the whistle never should have been blown in the first place. No matter what they did, it would have been a bad call. If you want to talk about what SHOULD have happened, it should have been a Detroit TD. Count yourself lucky they blew it dead at all.

 

[ExpatPacker]

The bottom line is that the whistle was blown before either team recovered the ball -- the Lions should have never been awarded possession of the ball. I am not sure how that happened.

The bottom line is that the ref made the wrong call and it was a potential game-changer. I'm not saying the Lions would have won, but it could have turned out different.

 

[morningwood]

The bottom line is that the whistle never should have been blown in the first place. No matter what they did, it would have been a bad call. If you want to talk about what SHOULD have happened, it should have been a Detroit TD. Count yourself lucky they blew it dead at all.

I find it hard to feel lucky about a possesion change that clearly occurred after the whistle.

 

[GreenBlood]

I find it hard to feel lucky about a possesion change that clearly occurred after the whistle.

The whistle was erroneous. It was CLEARLY a fumble. What part of that eludes you?

 

[morningwood]

The whistle was erroneous. It was CLEARLY a fumble. What part of that eludes you?

Not every fumble results in a change of possession.


If you read the following, which was taken from the above quoted article, you might have a better understanding:

“Referee Tony Corrente ruled the play was a fumble and a recovery by Detroit,” the league said in a statement emailed Sunday night to PFT. “However, during the play and before Detroit recovered the fumble, another official blew the whistle believing it was an incomplete pass. Because the ruling on the field was a fumble, and the whistle came before the recovery, the play is dead because of the inadvertent whistle and the Saints should have retained possession of the ball. New Orleans would then have had the choice to put the ball in play at the spot where possession was lost or to replay the down. Inadvertent whistles are not reviewable.”

 

[GreenBlood]

Not every fumble results in a change of possession.


If you read the following, which was taken from the above quoted article, you might have a better understanding:

“Referee Tony Corrente ruled the play was a fumble and a recovery by Detroit,” the league said in a statement emailed Sunday night to PFT. “However, during the play and before Detroit recovered the fumble, another official blew the whistle believing it was an incomplete pass. Because the ruling on the field was a fumble, and the whistle came before the recovery, the play is dead because of the inadvertent whistle and the Saints should have retained possession of the ball. New Orleans would then have had the choice to put the ball in play at the spot where possession was lost or to replay the down. Inadvertent whistles are not reviewable.”

Yeah, strictly by the rules, the Saints got the short end. Looking from the perspective of actuality, the Lions also got the short end because if the line judge hadn't screwed up, it would have been a TD. Either way, someone was getting screwed. I'm really not sure why you're whining about it. Your season is still alive for another 6 days.

 

[GreenBlood]

Because the ruling on the field was a fumble, and the whistle came before the recovery, the play is dead because of the inadvertent whistle and the Saints should have retained possession of the ball. New Orleans would then have had the choice to put the ball in play at the spot where possession was lost or to replay the down.

Actually, this rule in general is a problem. If an official wants to affect the outcome of a game, all he has to do is blow the play dead as soon as someone fumbles.

 

[morningwood]

Well, as long as the distinction between a fumble and a change of possession no longer eludes you I guess the discussion was worth it. I don't consider explaining football to you to be whining, it's more in the nature of community service.

 

[morningwood]

Actually, this rule in general is a problem. If an official wants to affect the outcome of a game, all he has to do is blow the play dead as soon as someone fumbles.

I think it's pretty obvious the official thought it was an incomplete pass and blew the whistle based on that belief. You can't simply not have rules that place discretion with the officials based on the chance that one might want to affect the outcome of the game.

I don't know if you gave that much thought before posting, but wow.

 

[GreenBlood]

Well, as long as the distinction between a fumble and a change of possession no longer eludes you I guess the discussion was worth it. I don't consider explaining football to you to be whining, it's more in the nature of community service.

So now you're going to get personal? Now you're going to direct insults? Fine. I can play that game too. I've been very diplomatic so far but if you want to be a pompous ***, expect to be treated as one. Here's what it boils down to:

TWO mistakes were made on that play. The first mistake was the line judge effectively override the referee (who was standing 8 feet from the QB) by blowing his damn whistle. And the second mistake was nobody on the officiating crew remembering if the ball was picked up before or after the whistle, so they made a call and stuck with it. You come on here and act as if he never fumbled the ball at all. And before you spout off about not all fumbles result in a change of possession, there was a single Saints player that had a chance in hell of recovering that football.

Now if you're too stupid to follow along and see both sides of this coin, then there's nothing more that can be done for you. I suggest you spend more time trolling the Niners forum about the upcoming game before you miss out.

 

[GreenBlood]

I think it's pretty obvious the official thought it was an incomplete pass and blew the whistle based on that belief.

Have you ever done any officiating?

He should have deferred to the official who was closest to the play (the referee).

 

[morningwood]

Seriously? Are you going to try to play the victim here? You were clearly trying to be inflammatory and insulting:

The whistle was erroneous. It was CLEARLY a fumble. What part of that eludes you?

The problem is you were also wrong. And now you're mad.

I hope you don't do any officiating. Among other things, I think you lack the temperament.

 

[GreenBlood]

Seriously? Are you going to try to play the victim here? You were clearly trying to be inflammatory and insulting:

Wow. You're really reaching to justify yourself, aren't you? You mean to tell me that "what part of that eludes you?" is now to be considered an insult? Seriously? Let me clarify it for you. It's NOT an insult. It's simply another way of asking someone "Why are you having trouble understanding this?"

The problem is you were also wrong.

No.... no, I'm not. It was, without question, a fumble. The line judge ******** up and blowing his whistle doesn't change the fact that Brees definitely fumbled the ball. It means because of his screw-up they now have to pretend it was an incomplete pass, but it doesn't change reality. But here's the thing. While conferring, the crew probably didn't know for sure whether the whistle came before or after the Lions picked up the ball. So they had to make a call and since the referee clearly saw that it was a fumble, he most likely decided to err on the side of reality and give the ball to the Lions. No matter what they did, the line judge put them in a no-win situation. One team or the other was going to rightfully pissed off about the outcome.

And now you're mad.

Merely responding in kind, my friend.

I hope you don't do any officiating. Among other things, I think you lack the temperament.

Aw... now you've gone and done it. Now my feelings are hurt! How will I EVER be able to continue officiating high school football now that some dunderhead Saints fan thinks I don't have the temperament? And here I was thinking that the fairly high marks I've gotten from coaches and fellow officials over the last 6 years and being selected to officiate playoff games the last 2 years actually MEANT something.

 

[morningwood]

No.... no, I'm not. It was, without question, a fumble. The line judge ******** up and blowing his whistle doesn't change the fact that Brees definitely fumbled the ball. It means because of his screw-up they now have to pretend it was an incomplete pass, but it doesn't change reality.

Who has to now pretend it was an incomplete pass?

BTW, how is that you still have not caught on to the fact that I never questioned whether it was a fumble?

 

[GreenBlood]

BTW, how is that you still have not caught on to the fact that I never questioned whether it was a fumble?

So you admit that no matter what, one team or the other was going to get screwed?

 

[morningwood]

So you admit that no matter what, one team or the other was going to get screwed?

I guess you could say that anytime a play is called incorrectly "one team or the other" is going to get "screwed." Kinda vague. Why don't you just come out and say what it is that you want to say? I am sure if your argument is persuasive enough that you can convince me.

 

[GreenBlood]

I guess you could say that anytime a play is called incorrectly "one team or the other" is going to get "screwed." Kinda vague. Why don't you just come out and say what it is that you want to say? I am sure if your argument is persuasive enough that you can convince me.

It's very simple. The Saints were screwed because the play was ruled a fumble but they didn't know for sure if the erroneous whistle blew before or after the ball was picked up. Apparently, they thought it was after it was picked up, but they got that wrong. OTOH, the Lions were screwed because the whistle never should have been blown in the first place and in all likelihood it cost them a touchdown. So both teams were essentially simultaneously screwed on the same play.

Now, there's no love on this board for the Lions. I despise the Lions as long as Schwartz is there! So I have no bias toward them.