Anyone else catch it live? The ball hits the upright, bounces through and hits the back bar and then bounces forward out of the FG and they rule it no good - end of game, Ravens win. The Ravens clear the field as they talk about it and look at it again. They overturn it, OT. Browns win. They got the call right, but another example of horrible officiating. It was not a reviewable play, they look at it anyway, change the call, and then say "After further discussion..."

Too funny.

quote:

Anyone else catch it live? The ball hits the upright, bounces through and hits thew back bat and then bounces forward out of the FG and they rule it no good - end of game, Ravens win. The Ravens clear the field as they talk about it and look at it again. They overturn it, OT. Browns win. They got the call right, but another example of horrible officiating. It was not a reviewable play, they look at it anyway, change the call, and then say "After further discussion..."

Just one thing wrong with you logic. They did *not* review it. They did not "look at it".

They got together, talked about what the officials saw and then made the correct call.

Excellent officiating.

One post game show stated the officiating crew could not and did not review the play. They did discuss it and got it right.

I question how one official missed the call. You've got one single thing to concentrate on and that's the ball. You're probably 10-15 feet away as it approaches the crossbar. Focus pal! If it hits the curved supprt beam both refs should easily see it.

quote:

Originally posted by southOfTheLine:
Just one thing wrong with you logic. They did *not* review it. They did not "look at it".

They got together, talked about what the officials saw and then made the correct call.

Excellent officiating.

I watched it. They looked under the hood. They are not supposed/allowed to do that and did.

Well, you're right about not reviewing it. No wonder Bellick was mad. The post game show with Marino and Bill Cowher is where I saw them say the refs did not look under the hood. Oops!

quote:

Originally posted by southOfTheLine:
Just one thing wrong with you logic. They did *not* review it. They did not "look at it".

They got together, talked about what the officials saw and then made the correct call.

Excellent officiating.

Yeah, they did because the ref said, "we're going to look at it." and went under the hood. He shouldn't have done that. THEN they talked about it.

The two refs under the FG post should have called it good initially because it was good. Had they done their job, it wouldn't have been an issue.

I agree with Chuck, bad officiating.

The booth guy told them they could not review it. They did not review it. They tried to, but could not.

I don't understand why they couldn't review it?

quote:

Originally posted by CS Pack:
I don't understand why they couldn't review it?

If they have some rule preventing a review in that situation than that's just plain stewpid. Great play. You could kick that field goal a million times and never get the same result.

Have the Cowboys ever had a field goal like that?

quote:

Originally posted by Blair Kiel:
Have the Cowboys ever had a field goal like that?

I seem to remember a game, around 1990 or so, where the Cowboy kicker flatout missed the field goal, or extra point, and the refs said it was good. I only saw the replay ONCE. Surely the NFL put the call in never to show that replay.

quote:

Yeah, they did because the ref said, "we're going to look at it." and went under the hood. He shouldn't have done that. THEN they talked about it.

The two refs under the FG post should have called it good initially because it was good. Had they done their job, it wouldn't have been an issue.

I agree with Chuck, bad officiating.

I'm sure you do. One of the officials underneath the posts did think it was good; the other did not. The ref initially called it no god because one of the two officials underneath the posts said "no good", which usually is enough to make a determination.

They never took another look at it on replay. They discussed and made the correct call, without reviewing it. How that's supposed to be bad officiating is beyond me.

Maybe it's bad officiating in the same way that Brett displayed some bad quarterbacking today.

If he didn't watch a replay, why did he put on the head phones and put his head under the hood?

quote:

Originally posted by Chuck Cecil:
If he didn't watch a replay, why did he put on the head phones and put his head under the hood?

Sideline Porn

i saw the replay of the play in question and wonder why that was such a tough call to make. it looks as if the idiots saw what happened but didn't know what to rule. it should have been a 30 second discussion.

when you are literally 10 feet away from the play and can't figure it out, you have no business being in that profession.

granted they finally got it right but in general the folks in stripes are just plain clueless.

That's an easy call to make with the benefit of replay, but from on the field is real time it obviously wasn't that clear.

The good news is that they got it right and there will undoubtedly be a rule change to allow for replay in this situation.

I caught it in real-time. I told my wife I thought it had bounced off the brace.

The zebras did the right thing and made the right call - eventually. The two morons under the posts who initially got it wrong should be canned.

Besides, how much sense does it make that a field goal can't be reviewed? I completely understand the reasoning behind not allowing opposing coaches to throw the challenge flag, but there's absolutely no reason for a questionable call to be unreviewable - especially one that might decide the game.

I smell a rule change coming ...

And screw Billick. I loathe that over-rated egomaniacal fraud.