PDA

View Full Version : Bengals just got cheated...



TeamBoone
11-30-2006, 09:46 PM
If that wasn't pass interferance in the end zone, I don't know what is!

max venable
11-30-2006, 10:28 PM
Wish I could see it.

dougdirt
11-30-2006, 10:33 PM
TB, I am just guessing, but that ball looked to be 'uncatchable'. Even for Henry, that ball landed a few yards out of the back of the endzone.

TeamBoone
11-30-2006, 10:34 PM
I guess I don't agree. If the guy wasn't all over him, I think he would have had it.

NDRed
11-30-2006, 10:34 PM
Is there a video of it

max venable
11-30-2006, 10:35 PM
How 'bout those Bengals posting six consecutive shut-out quarters? Nice.

blumj
11-30-2006, 10:49 PM
Well, what the hell is PI these days anyway? No one seems to know anymore, least of all the refs. Every game there's at least 2 or 3 calls or non-calls that confound everyone.

pedro
12-01-2006, 12:35 AM
whay wasn't that fumble return a touchdown?

TeamBoone
12-01-2006, 01:03 AM
whay wasn't that fumble return a touchdown?

Good question; one I asked myself during the game... I walked into the kitchen after it happened and when I came back, discovered it didn't count but missed the explanation.

wolfboy
12-01-2006, 01:04 AM
I was wondering the same thing. I was on the phone when the play happened. What I saw from the replay was that the ball was fumbled, and Kilmer picked it up and ran it in for the TD. :confused:

cincy09
12-01-2006, 01:06 AM
I was wondering the same thing. I was on the phone when the play happened. What I saw from the replay was that the ball was fumbled, and Kilmer picked it up and ran it in for the TD. :confused:

When a punt is muffed it cannot be returned by the defense. Same goes for a kickoff, the fumble can be recovered but not advanced.

TeamBoone
12-01-2006, 01:09 AM
Well that's a crappy rule!!

But thank you for the explanation.

Playadlc
12-01-2006, 01:36 AM
If Baltimore fielded the punt cleanly, than the Bengals could have returned it for a TD.

The only reason the Bengals couldn't return the fumble was because the Baltimore reciever never fully had possesion of the punt.

DoogMinAmo
12-01-2006, 01:50 AM
I think the bigger foul was the no call on Mason with a minute left. Granted, we all have come to expect Toasty James to get beat, but he was just cleared out there. Maybe I just wanted the shutout too much?

Good game, but Oakland reaks of a trap.

Yachtzee
12-01-2006, 01:51 AM
I heard the rule, but is there any explanation why? I always thought that, once the receiving team touched it, it was a live ball. Oh well. You learn something new every day.

ghettochild
12-01-2006, 07:20 PM
i can't find anything in the nfl rulebook about it, but i know on kickoffs, that is true.

on punts, the returner must have full possession of the ball for it to be a true fumble. if the returner does not have full possession of the ball and fumbles, and does not recover, the ball is therefore muffed and the punting team grabs possession.

texasdave
12-04-2006, 02:57 PM
TB, I am just guessing, but that ball looked to be 'uncatchable'. Even for Henry, that ball landed a few yards out of the back of the endzone.

I have never understood what the ball being "uncatchable" has to do with pass interference. Especially since I have seen pass interference called on the opposite side of the field from where the pass was thrown. Keep it simple and consistent. Either the defender interferes with the receiver or he doesn't.