October 6th, 2015 at 12:18 AM ^
I kinda see your point. Fumbling out of the EZ still results in a change of possession without anyone touching it.
Safeties are applied to the offense. Especially when the D doesn't have possession outside the EZ.
October 6th, 2015 at 12:21 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:49 AM ^
Even if he recovered it and ran it out of the back/side of the EZ, or got tackled in it, it would not have been a safety. You have to establish possession outside of the EZ. Just like the punt return Jones (?) f'ed up.
October 6th, 2015 at 1:36 AM ^
Did you not even bother reading the comment you are replying to ?
October 6th, 2015 at 1:37 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:12 AM ^
Back judge didn't feel it was overt.
So that whole open-palmed batting motion at the ball was just a natural motion.
October 6th, 2015 at 12:18 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:33 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:23 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:28 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:42 AM ^
What is the point of replay if you can't review something critical like that? You have mandatory review on turnovers, but you can't review THAT? Seriously? Who wrote that assinine rule?
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13819689/dean-blandino-refs-incorrect… BTW the blind moron claiming that the ball just went out of bounds by accident is Greg Wilson. How he ever got a job in the NFL to begin with is beyond me, given that I'd take Forest Gump in a battle of wits over him.
October 6th, 2015 at 12:52 AM ^
It's like reviewing if the RB went out of bounds and you spot a holding call. You can't go to the film to find a penalty. Ref should have thrown the flag initially but after he didn't it wasn't reviewable.
October 6th, 2015 at 1:03 AM ^
Because the penalty in question directly affects who possesses the ball. Because of the penalty, nobody recovered the fumble. So the act of the penalty was the determining factor in who got the ball. You shouldn't be able to commit a penalty that directly determines who gets the ball that is unreviewable when every change of possession is automatically reviewable.
October 6th, 2015 at 2:10 AM ^
On the other hand, the NFL should not employ officials like Greg Wilson who cannot see what was obvious to grandmothers across America.
https://twitter.com/SportsCenter/status/651245368542425088/photo/1?ref_…
Unless, of course, Greg Wilson was uber-quick-thinking and seized upon an opportunity to give a much needed boost to the very well-known Seahawks and their sagging playoff chances.
October 6th, 2015 at 3:03 AM ^
neither of those penalties are directly related to a turnover.
This penalty is DIRECTLY related to the determination of who recovered a fumble. AKA the VERY ACT OF THE PENALTY CAUSED A TURNOVER. And BY RULE, all turnovers MUST be reviewable. This is a paradox. If the act of the penalty alters the very definition of who basically receives the turnover, you HAVE to put it on the reviewable list, right?
Now I know you coud argue that Pass Interferece could "cause" a turnover, but that is more indirect. This penalty DIRECTLY caused the turnover. His illegal batting of the ball out of the endzone is what gave the ball to Seattle. Therefore you HAVE to allow it to be reviewed, or the entire "we review all turnovers" becomes a joke.
October 6th, 2015 at 12:57 AM ^
Here is blind moron Greg Wilson getting in position to completely blow the game. Don't say he didn't get a good look at it:
October 6th, 2015 at 3:06 AM ^
I am of the opinion that he obviously saw the play clearly and just was completely clueless about the rule. I think he is now lying to CYA because he thinks the NFL will punish him less for a ridiculously poor judgement call than for not knowing the actual rules.
But all of that is just personal speculation. The dude could just be blind and incompetent.
October 6th, 2015 at 12:06 PM ^
and their cachet into the playoffs.
October 6th, 2015 at 6:06 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2015 at 7:46 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 12:10 PM ^
that has touched the ground intentionally in any direction.
In the 100 yds between the goal lines, it is legal to bat a fumbled ball backward.
October 6th, 2015 at 8:03 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2015 at 4:17 PM ^
Shouldn't the Lions have let them score there to get the ball back? It is a miniscule chance of winning, but it is the only chance they had at all... not that it mattered, just curious.
October 6th, 2015 at 8:19 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 10:04 AM ^
@davesbarton Any car that has held Ricky, Bubbles & Julian is priceless, David!
— webuyanycar.com (@webuyanycar) October 6, 2015