PDA

View Full Version : Brown's Dawson's Game Tying Field Goal



GAC
11-18-2007, 10:19 PM
Have you ever seen anything as strange at a game's end?

I was ready to chew through nails just watching this Brown's defense. Especially in the 4th quarter up by 13. This secondary couldn't stop an 85 yr old woman on one of those Scooters. They are downright terrible. They should be ashamed of their performance this year.

Thank God for our offense and special teams. They are the sole reason we are a surprising 6-4 at this stage.

But I thought there was no was Dawson was going to make a 51 yd FG kicking into the wind. The game was over and they deserved to lose it.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271118033

The officials called the kick no good. Several Cleveland players, however, insisted Dawson's kick hit the curved center support behind the crossbar. They gathered in the end zone, pointing at the spot where the football struck before bouncing back.

They were right. After a lengthy discussion, the officials ruled the kick passed through the uprights and called the teams back onto the field.

Referee Pete Morelli had announced over the public address system that he would "take a look at this play" before he went to the review booth and manned the headphones to replay assistant Howard Slavin. According to league spokesman Greg Aiello, Slavin told Morelli that he couldn't show him the kick because field goals are not reviewable under the rules.

Morelli proceeded to further discuss the kick with his crew and Aiello said one of the back judges, Keith Ferguson, "felt more strongly" that the ball had crossed through the goal posts. Morelli based his reversal on Ferguson's opinion.

Referring to the initial call, Morelli said, "It was a ruling by one of the officials. The other official informed me that the ball hit the back of the extension of the goal post. ... We determined that was what it struck. Therefore, it made the field goal good."

------------------------

And thank God for Joshua Cribbs. What an asset on special teams.

I'm glad they got the call right, and glad we won; but even after the win, Crennel wasn't showing much of a celebratory expression on his face. He knows his defense sucks big time and could have very easily cost us the game.

WMR
11-18-2007, 10:20 PM
I talked about it in the Bengal thread. Crazy stuff.

macro
11-19-2007, 12:36 AM
CBS did a game recap and showed the Baltimore players celebrating and called it a huge victory for the Ravens. I turned the TV off shortly after that. Then I get on the Web tonight and see the score posted everywhere that Cleveland won. I thought I might be losing my mind.

:laugh:

Chip R
11-19-2007, 12:42 AM
I would think something like this is exactly what you could use replay for.

deltachi8
11-19-2007, 01:12 AM
I caught about the last 10 minutes of the game and OT...what an terrifically fun game to watch. Even those who had no interest in the game at the sports bar all cheered when the field goal was declared good.

If the Browns were not in the same division as my Steelers, I would probably like them a bunch. Fun team to watch.

Highlifeman21
11-19-2007, 08:38 AM
I would think something like this is exactly what you could use replay for.

IIRC, didn't multiple sources say that play wasn't reviewable?

If a FG isn't reviewable, I sure as heck don't know what should be allowed.

MaineRed
11-19-2007, 08:58 AM
The league doesn't want to get into reviewing kicks that are higher than the uprights. Those calls need to be made by the guys on the field. On those super high kicks there is always an angle that will make it look good. Of course higher goalpost would solve that but I don't see that happening. Not sure why though.

Because of this the league has said no to reviewing kicks without thinking of this particular situation that has probably never happened before. The refs stand under each upright and unless I've forgotten something never butcher the call. From where they stand it is easy to tell if it was "through" the uprights. Yesterday was just a very rare instance.

bucksfan2
11-19-2007, 11:55 AM
If you go by the NFL rule book Baltimore should have won that game. Whether or not the call was right is another point. Look back to the Seattle Cincy game when the official ruled a fumble was an incomplete pass in which Seattle would have lost about 15 yards but the official ruled the play wrong and then ruled that the play was unchallangeable. If I am Baltimore I protest that game. Not because of the actual play but because the officiating crew operated outside of the NFL guidelines.

WMR
11-19-2007, 11:59 AM
If you go by the NFL rule book Baltimore should have won that game. Whether or not the call was right is another point. Look back to the Seattle Cincy game when the official ruled a fumble was an incomplete pass in which Seattle would have lost about 15 yards but the official ruled the play wrong and then ruled that the play was unchallangeable. If I am Baltimore I protest that game. Not because of the actual play but because the officiating crew operated outside of the NFL guidelines.

I think they've got a pretty darn valid point of contention.

MaineRed
11-19-2007, 01:34 PM
Referee Pete Morelli had announced over the public address system that he would "take a look at this play" before he went to the review booth and manned the headphones to replay assistant Howard Slavin. According to league spokesman Greg Aiello, Slavin told Morelli that he couldn't show him the kick because field goals are not reviewable under the rules.

Morelli proceeded to further discuss the kick with his crew and Aiello said one of the back judges, Keith Ferguson, "felt more strongly" that the ball had crossed through the goal posts. Morelli based his reversal on Ferguson's opinion.

Referring to the initial call, Morelli said, "It was a ruling by one of the officials. The other official informed me that the ball hit the back of the extension of the goal post. ... We determined that was what it struck. Therefore, it made the field goal good."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271118033

You could see one ref made the call. It is pretty standard procedure for both refs to give the signal of good or no good and clearly only one ref made the call. You could see the guy on the left was not confident with the decision.

Baltimore has no beef if the above is true.

bucksfan2
11-19-2007, 03:07 PM
Once the head official went over the replay booth the integrity of the call was lost. When the official announced that the field goal was no good and the game was over the game is then over. If they were going to discuss the play it should have been done right then. The longer they waited the less likely they were going to make an unabaided decision.

Look I understand that the field goal was good. But what I am not willing to accept is when officials opperate outside of the rules of the NFL. If a FG is ruled as a non challangeable play then once you rule it was no good you can not take that ruleing back. The call could very well effect the playoffs however the horriable Justin Smith personal foul against Tampa costs the bengals a playoff berth last season.

Here is my thinking. The ball hits the goal post, bounces down and hits the support, and then bounces out. The two officials in position decide that the FG is not good. The head official announces that the game is over. Once he goes to the replay booth is where my problems start with. First of all the challenge has to come from the booth with less than 2 minutes to go in the game. Therefore the official had no buisness being at the replay booth. He can't decide at his discression when he is going to use the replay booth. Part of the joys of sports is the human element. You cant circumvent the rules that are in place when you feel it is necessary. There is the problem I have with the decesion.

Chip R
11-19-2007, 03:39 PM
Once the head official went over the replay booth the integrity of the call was lost. When the official announced that the field goal was no good and the game was over the game is then over. If they were going to discuss the play it should have been done right then. The longer they waited the less likely they were going to make an unabaided decision.

Look I understand that the field goal was good. But what I am not willing to accept is when officials opperate outside of the rules of the NFL. If a FG is ruled as a non challangeable play then once you rule it was no good you can not take that ruleing back. The call could very well effect the playoffs however the horriable Justin Smith personal foul against Tampa costs the bengals a playoff berth last season.

Here is my thinking. The ball hits the goal post, bounces down and hits the support, and then bounces out. The two officials in position decide that the FG is not good. The head official announces that the game is over. Once he goes to the replay booth is where my problems start with. First of all the challenge has to come from the booth with less than 2 minutes to go in the game. Therefore the official had no buisness being at the replay booth. He can't decide at his discression when he is going to use the replay booth. Part of the joys of sports is the human element. You cant circumvent the rules that are in place when you feel it is necessary. There is the problem I have with the decesion.

I'd agree if the ref actually saw the replay and reversed the call after "consulting" with the other officials. It doesn't appear that he did that, though. He did make a mistake in attempting to look at the call since it isn't something that can be reviewed. It appears that the replay official didn't show the referee the replay so he had no idea of knowing whether the FG was good or not. He consulted the other officials without seeing a replay and they reversed the call.

Matt700wlw
11-19-2007, 04:48 PM
I've never pulled for Cleveland to do anything good...

Yesterday I did.


I feel dirty.

redsmetz
11-19-2007, 06:27 PM
I showed my wife the clip and she wasn't quite picking up what happened. Later on when I was in the kitchen, I saw our banana hanger thingy and was able to demonstrate what happened on that. Wow, what a life saver.

UKFlounder
11-19-2007, 06:51 PM
I say, somewhat seriously I believe, that they need to put a crossbar on top of the goal posts & say the kick has to go inside the box to be good. There would be no more questions about the high kicks over the goal posts & wondering if they were good, and it would make field goal kicking tougher, with fewer "gimme" field goals.

I know it's a pipedream, but...

(And if a scoring play is not reviewable, then there really is no reason to have replay.)

WMR
11-19-2007, 06:57 PM
I say, somewhat seriously I believe, that they need to put a crossbar on top of the goal posts & say the kick has to go inside the box to be good. There would be no more questions about the high kicks over the goal posts & wondering if they were good, and it would make field goal kicking tougher, with fewer "gimme" field goals.

I know it's a pipedream, but...

(And if a scoring play is not reviewable, then there really is no reason to have replay.)

That would be interesting!

mole44
11-19-2007, 07:01 PM
Once the head official went over the replay booth the integrity of the call was lost. When the official announced that the field goal was no good and the game was over the game is then over. If they were going to discuss the play it should have been done right then. The longer they waited the less likely they were going to make an unabaided decision.

Look I understand that the field goal was good. But what I am not willing to accept is when officials opperate outside of the rules of the NFL. If a FG is ruled as a non challangeable play then once you rule it was no good you can not take that ruleing back. The call could very well effect the playoffs however the horriable Justin Smith personal foul against Tampa costs the bengals a playoff berth last season.

Here is my thinking. The ball hits the goal post, bounces down and hits the support, and then bounces out. The two officials in position decide that the FG is not good. The head official announces that the game is over. Once he goes to the replay booth is where my problems start with. First of all the challenge has to come from the booth with less than 2 minutes to go in the game. Therefore the official had no buisness being at the replay booth. He can't decide at his discression when he is going to use the replay booth. Part of the joys of sports is the human element. You cant circumvent the rules that are in place when you feel it is necessary. There is the problem I have with the decesion.
Aw, you're just upset the Bengals are in the basement. Don't worry, you start to get used to it. Trust me, as I Browns fan, I know. Of course that is, if you hang around that long. But I'm sure with another 8-8 season, you'd come back.

bucksfan2
11-20-2007, 09:22 AM
Aw, you're just upset the Bengals are in the basement. Don't worry, you start to get used to it. Trust me, as I Browns fan, I know. Of course that is, if you hang around that long. But I'm sure with another 8-8 season, you'd come back.

Not an upset Bengals fan. I just see a huge inconsistancy with the officiating in the NFL. Why have a policy if you are not going to operate within the policy. They got the call right and I completely understand that. But my thinking is once the official went over to the replay booth he was in the wrong. He can't just go over there whenever he feels it necessary.

MaineRed
11-20-2007, 01:35 PM
Why not? It is where you have to go to have communication with the people upstairs and by all accounts that is all he did. It would have been wrong if the replay official allowed him to view the attempt and then changed his call of that. That is when policy would have been broken. But not if what they say happened is accurate.

The league is responsible for all reviews in the final 2 minutes. The official is an employee of the league. He went and communicated with another league employee and was told by that employee that the call would have to be made on the field. Which after some discussion it was.

Yes the call was changed. That is no big deal though. Lots of times a guy is credited with a catch and then gets it waved off by an official with a better look.

If anyone is wrong it is the first official who said the goal was no good. The other ref under the goalpost was not down with that but the other guy was in a hurry to make the call.

bucksfan2
11-20-2007, 02:58 PM
Why not? It is where you have to go to have communication with the people upstairs and by all accounts that is all he did. It would have been wrong if the replay official allowed him to view the attempt and then changed his call of that. That is when policy would have been broken. But not if what they say happened is accurate.

The league is responsible for all reviews in the final 2 minutes. The official is an employee of the league. He went and communicated with another league employee and was told by that employee that the call would have to be made on the field. Which after some discussion it was.

Yes the call was changed. That is no big deal though. Lots of times a guy is credited with a catch and then gets it waved off by an official with a better look.

If anyone is wrong it is the first official who said the goal was no good. The other ref under the goalpost was not down with that but the other guy was in a hurry to make the call.

It is my understanding that a review within the last 2 minutes of a game comes from the booth. I am also under the assumption that at no times is the head field official allowed to go to the replay booth unless a coach challenges the play or a review comes from the booth. You can't have the official go to the replay booth at his whim. That would be a horriable precident to start.

As for over turning playes it is true that playes do get over turned. However most of those plays are over turned by an official within a short time frame. I have never witnessed a huddle of officials take 5+ minutes to overturn a reception.

My problem is with the process that the ref's went through to determine the final call of the FG. The NFL has strict guidlines for the review process. I am also at a loss for when the official ruling was that the FG was no good. If the play was not reviewable then how did the ruleing change?

registerthis
11-20-2007, 04:49 PM
If the play was not reviewable then how did the ruleing change?

Sounds like a referee who had a better view of the kick convinced the other referee that his initial call was incorrect.

Think baseball, such as when a foul ball is ruled a home run after a conference by the umpires.

MaineRed
11-20-2007, 05:00 PM
That is exactly what happened registerthis. The official did not look at a replay. Why? Because of he strict protocol that you keep claiming they broke.

No precedent was set. Maybe the head official lost his head for a moment but the guy in charge of showing him the replay didn't. He didn't view the replay. Simple as that.

If you actually saw the game you would have clearly seen the main discussion was between the two guys who were under the goalpost. One guy said no good. The other clearly wasn't done discussing it yet. When they were able to come together with the other officials they determined what happened and then gave a correct interpretation.

Why do I get the feeling bucksfan2 would be heavily involved in the thread that surely would have been started about how idiotic the refs were for butching the call if the ref had come back from talking to the replay judge and said:

"OK, I broke a rule by walking over the replay booth, even though the kick was in fact good, Baltimore wins becuase I'm an idiot"

I'm sure that would have gone over REAL well.

GAC
11-20-2007, 08:44 PM
If you go by the NFL rule book Baltimore should have won that game. Whether or not the call was right is another point. Look back to the Seattle Cincy game when the official ruled a fumble was an incomplete pass in which Seattle would have lost about 15 yards but the official ruled the play wrong and then ruled that the play was unchallangeable. If I am Baltimore I protest that game. Not because of the actual play but because the officiating crew operated outside of the NFL guidelines.

What NFL guidelines did they operate outside of? The replay official said they couldn't show them the film for review due to NFL rules, and that any final determination had to be made by the on-field officials. So the head official called those officials together to "huddle" and review. It was determined the ball went through the uprights (broke the plane) and did indeed hit the back bar.

So in the long run they got the call right.

So what NFL rule or guideline did they violate that would give the Raven's justification to protest?


If a FG is ruled as a non challangeable play then once you rule it was no good you can not take that ruleing back.

The rule does not say it is non challengeable. It says it is not reviewable, meaning, the replay officials cannot be utilized to review the play. It must be an on-field determination.


But my thinking is once the official went over to the replay booth he was in the wrong. He can't just go over there whenever he feels it necessary.

Sure he can. But if his request is in violation of NFL guidelines then it's up to that replay official to remind him of that, and refuse to show him a replay. And that is exactly what happened in this instance. The field official went over, made the request, and the replay official said "Sorry. Can't do it. You're on your own."

But it's not a violation of NFL guidelines to go over to the booth. A violation would have been committed if they had allowed him to see the film (replay).


I am also at a loss for when the official ruling was that the FG was no good. If the play was not reviewable then how did the ruleing change?

From what I heard in the post-game (the announcers had talked off-camera with the head official) - when they discovered they couldn't review the play (see the film), and that a determination had to be made by the on-field officials, he called those officials together. The two officials under the goal post confirmed that it had broke the plane, hit the back bar, and then bounced back into the field of play. What influenced the one official, who made the call, was that it had bounced back into the field of play.

But once that head official saw that they both confirmed it had broken that plane and hit the back bar, he then reversed the call.


I'd agree if the ref actually saw the replay and reversed the call after "consulting" with the other officials. It doesn't appear that he did that, though. He did make a mistake in attempting to look at the call since it isn't something that can be reviewed. It appears that the replay official didn't show the referee the replay so he had no idea of knowing whether the FG was good or not. He consulted the other officials without seeing a replay and they reversed the call.

And that is exactly what happened. The head official asked for a review and the replay official told him he can't show him the film because NFL rules says it's not permitted, and that the fianl determination must be made by the on-field officials.

But nowhere in NFL rules, to the best of my knowledge, does it say those officials cannot reverse a call.