PDA

View Full Version : Raiders just got cheated.



RBA
11-26-2006, 07:54 PM
Chargers got the ball and rolled up from the ground. He was not touched; so play was still live. He throws the ball to the ground in celebration and Raiders recover because the ball is still live. Refs rule it an illegal forward pass and Chargers retain possession.

Play will be shown over and over again all this week. You decide.

Chip R
11-26-2006, 08:31 PM
I guess that's payback for the Holy Roller play.

NDRed
11-26-2006, 08:44 PM
I'm a Raiders fan and that was a fourth and 2 play, plus i thought the Raiders declined it

GAC
11-26-2006, 08:45 PM
Chargers got the ball and rolled up from the ground. He was not touched; so play was still live. He throws the ball to the ground in celebration and Raiders recover because the ball is still live. Refs rule it an illegal forward pass and Chargers retain possession.

Play will be shown over and over again all this week. You decide.

I already have.

I hate the Raiders, so it was a legit call. :evil:

kaldaniels
11-26-2006, 09:06 PM
The refs made the right call. Please change the thread title, as it is a bit misleading.

kaldaniels
11-26-2006, 09:09 PM
Odd, but correct, call brings confusion in S.D. game

...While the call was questioned on the field, NFL Supervisor of Officials Mike Pereira confirmed to ESPN's Chris Mortensen that the call was correct -- and not without precedent.

It is illegal to intentionally fumble a ball forward and, by rule, an illegal forward fumble is an incomplete pass. That makes it a dead ball. A 5-yard penalty is then assessed from the spot.

Jackson spinning the ball forward when he was not down by contact constituted an intentional illegal forward fumble and thus an illegal forward pass. Had he spun it backward, it would have been a live fumble.

A similar call was made when Plaxico Burress did the same thing with the Steelers on Oct. 1, 2000.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2676820

NDRed
11-26-2006, 09:19 PM
The announcer said that you have to be able to defend the play for it to be a foward pass.

SanDiegoRed
11-26-2006, 09:34 PM
9-2 for my Chargers! I will take it:jump:

kaldaniels
11-26-2006, 09:34 PM
The announcer said that you have to be able to defend the play for it to be a foward pass.

What does that mean...there were Raiders players right there, surely they could "defend" it. A bonehead move by the WR, but he was saved by the rulebook. Correct call refs.

RBA
11-26-2006, 10:02 PM
Odd, but correct, call brings confusion in S.D. game

...
A similar call was made when Plaxico Burress did the same thing with the Steelers on Oct. 1, 2000.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2676820

A similar call was made? The Plaxico Brurres play was ruled a fumble. How can it be a similar call?

Betterread
11-26-2006, 10:27 PM
A similar call was made? The Plaxico Brurres play was ruled a fumble. How can it be a similar call?

You are correct, it was ruled a fumble and Burress went on and on about feeling remorseful (vrs. Jacksonville). So, the precedent cited for this ruling was in error - was the erroneous citation made by the official or by the writer? By the way, I haven't seen the play. I am just taking issue at the meagre logic provided in print to justify the decision.

RBA
11-26-2006, 10:32 PM
1. His arm wasn't going forward.
2. He spun the ball into the ground ahead of him.
3. Anyone now can make the case that a fumble that goes forward is actually a forward pass (legal or illegal).

NDRed
11-26-2006, 10:47 PM
But didn't they decline the penalty

RBA
11-26-2006, 10:58 PM
But didn't they decline the penalty

No.

NDRed
11-26-2006, 11:08 PM
If you saw the play on the first of three calls they said the Raiders declined the penalty and i don't see any reason to accept it.

Chip R
11-26-2006, 11:09 PM
What goes around, comes around. :lol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roller_(football)#Reaction

RBA
11-26-2006, 11:13 PM
What goes around, comes around. :lol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roller_(football)#Reaction


And the rules were changed so if the Offensive Team recovers their own forward fumble they can't advance the ball from the fumble. The Defense can still claim the fumble and advance it the other way. I don't see your point.

RBA
11-26-2006, 11:26 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/templates/brands/chronicle/images/chronicle_logo.gif (http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/)

http://www.sfgate.com/templates/columnists/ratto/bylinelogo.gif Ray Ratto



A call against the Raiders -- what else is new



Ray Ratto (rratto@sfchronicle.com)
Sunday, November 26, 2006 06 23 PM

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/11/27_t/sp_raiders26314pc_t.gif (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2006/11/27/RATTO.TMP&o=0)
<LI class=print>Printable Version (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/11/27/RATTO.TMP&type=printable)
Email This Article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/11/27/RATTO.TMP&type=friend&emailcolor=%232827F6&origin=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi%3Ff%3D%2Fc%2Fa%2F2006%2F11%2F27%2FRATT O.TMP)






(11-26) 18:23 PST San Diego -- The last word, the one that best explained that groining the Raiders just took here, came from the man who made it all possible, San Diego wide receiver Vincent Jackson. So Vince, old sock, did you throw that ball forward like referee Mike Carey said you did?
"Yeah."
Did you mean to throw a forward pass?
"Heh heh heh."
Yeah, "heh heh heh" about covers it, I'd say. The Illegal Forward Pass. A strange play with a preposterous ruling, even less defensible than The Tuck Play, and just as likely to create a rules change as The Holy Roller, the play which Charger players, officials and fans all declared this the make-up call for, if you don't mind the dangling preposition.
Yes, the Raiders managed to find that place between victory and defeat Sunday, in a 21-14 loss to the AFC West-leading Chargers. That place, of course, being defeat with an officiating twist to it. And this, boys and girls, was no mere twist, but a triple axel turning into a sit spin and ending with a full hip-hop head-spin.
But let us cover the basics for those of you who haven't begun your day with Comrade White's story.
The Chargers, who had been awful all day (and in large part made that way by the Raiders) and were trailing 14-7 with 11:53 to play, completed a 13-yard pass over the middle from Philip Rivers to Vincent Jackson, who went down, apparently untouched by a Raider, jumped up and in his exuberance spun the ball onto the ground in self-celebration.
The ball, which was clearly live, was fallen upon by several Raiders, the last of whom was Fabian Washington. Thus, clearly a fumble. Even the Chargers thought so.
"When I saw Vince get up and spin the ball like that," Rivers said, "me and (Antonio) Gates and everyone all sort of went 'No-o-o-o-o' in slow motion."
They didn't need to, though, because after first declaring the ball for Oakland, the officials huddled again and determined that what Jackson actually had done was attempt an illegal forward pass ... to the ground ... with no Charger in a position to catch the ball, and no strategic advantage in doing so.
So yeah, "heh heh heh" covers it pretty well.
In fairness, the Raiders had begun to hit the wall offensively (as in no first downs in the final 23 minutes), and they did still have time to overcome the plainly silly ruling (they were still ahead, 14-7, even after the call), and they did get run off the field in the final 11 minutes. All that, they will have to deal with in meetings this week. That is, when they're not declaring their renewed hatred for the NFL, its officials, and its refusal to answer Amy Trask's e-mails.
But the Chargers, who had already come from well behind the past two weeks against Cincinnati and Denver, knew that they hadn't really earned this one nearly so much.
"I'm about to have a heart attack after these three games," LaDainian Tomlinson said. "I'm just glad the refs made the right call."
All the Chargers said that, almost as though they'd been coached by their lead attorney, Marty Schottenheimer. But almost all of them also said they, too, thought Jackson had carelessly showboated the ball, and perhaps the ball game, away.
"It was just a silly mistake," Jackson said after a few minutes of earnest stonewalling. "I thought I was down, but I didn't hear the whistle. I was very relieved when they made the right call."
And when the Chargers finally sprung Tomlinson, first for the option pass touchdown to Gates that tied the game, then the 10-yard burst for the winner. They were very relieved indeed.
"And thankful," Jackson said. "It's Thanksgiving, right?"
Well, yes it is, for the entire city that has had to live with Bill King's brilliant explanation of the Holy Roller all the way down to the official telling John Madden to "get your big butt off the field. And he does." It is likely that Chargers play-by-play man Josh Lewin made no such references to Schottenheimer's seater during the delay.
So what have we got as a result of all this? The Chargers are 9-2, and the Raiders are 2-9 with a bullet. They get to wipe away all the hard feelings about a game they had controlled, if not dominated, by blaming Carey, and some illegal forward pass rule tucked away in the deepest recesses of the rulebook that, just like the Holy Roller, will result in a new rule within a year or two clarifying just what in the hell an actual forward pass directly into the ground should look like.
In other words, they got the next best thing to a win -- a loss with an explanation that damns an official and the men and women who pay them. If we know the Raiders, they will hold onto this loss for awhile, almost as long as they will hold on to the Tuck Play, or the Rob Lytle Fumble, or the Immaculate Reception, or all the other malignant outrages that keep them going in lost seasons like this.
And if somehow the Illegal Forward Pass also achieves closure for the city and county of San Diego after all these years, well, you know the Raiders are always happy to lend a hand.
Even if all San Diego ever sees is the one finger.
E-mail Ray Ratto at rratto@sfchronicle.com (rratto@sfchronicle.com).

RBA
11-26-2006, 11:39 PM
Oh well. Raiders weren't going anywhere anyway, so I guess we can get a good laugh out of it. I don't think the call was correct, but life goes on.

NDRed
11-26-2006, 11:39 PM
Who was he throwing to? there was nobody near the ball

kaldaniels
11-26-2006, 11:40 PM
A final note...watch NFL Total Access or whatever that show on the NFL network is called this week...the head referee always comes on and explains controversial plays. He will go over the play and cite the rule book.

RBA
11-26-2006, 11:58 PM
Who was he throwing to? there was nobody near the ball

Obviously he was trying to pass it to the Raider players. So he should be fined and investigated for possible throwing of a game for financial benefit. :laugh:

Rojo
11-27-2006, 05:30 AM
3. Anyone now can make the case that a fumble that goes forward is actually a forward pass (legal or illegal).

Only if they could convince the refs that it was intentional.

And, yes, I'm a Chargers fan. 9-2, baby!

SanDiegoRed
11-27-2006, 07:17 PM
A Charger fan in Frisco? And here I thought I was lonely in Virginia being a Chargers Fan

Rojo
11-28-2006, 10:05 PM
I lived for 10 years in San Diego. Three months after I moved to SF, Chargers got squashed by the Niners in the Superbowl.

NDRed
12-10-2006, 05:52 PM
The Raiders did get cheated because in the New England vs Miami today. There was a direct snap to Kevin Faulk he ran to the the right and Brady ran to the left Kevin Faulk threw it foward to Brady. Then Brady threw it when he was like two yards behind the line of scrimmage. So the result was a loss of down and five yards back from the line off scrimmage. Since this play took place on first down the next play was 2 and 15.