Official Review for the fumble

[mws44]

There are different rules between a ball carrier maintaining possession and a receiver making a catch. I don't agree with the rules 100%, but I believe, as did my unbiased friend watching the game with me, that it was the correct call. It didn't make much of a difference in the outcome anyway. But Hochuli's explanation that the ball was pinned against the guy's chest when his knee hit the ground was accurate. You must differentiate between that kind of possession, where in essence the Saints player is a ball carrier that has already established possession, than a receiver attempting to make a catch and establish possession.

You are right. The rules should be defined between the two, but if you listen to the clip, he says that the words "ball was moving" should be removed from replays for both fumbles and catches. I've seen many catches overturned because the ball moves a tiny little bit in the receivers hand as he is pulling it in, and half the time it's just him shifting it into his body. If a receiver catches a ball, gets hit, falls to the ground, bounces off the turf and THEN gets separated from the ball, it's not a catch because he has to maintain possession throughout. When is possession gained or lost? The refs now have to make a judgement call as to when the ball has separated enough from the carrier's hand and or body for a loss of possession.

 

I'm not even arguing this because of last Sunday at this point. I want to know how these things are going to be called on the field, because I like to look at the footage and decide for myself what happened. That has been made impossible by this explanation because there is no definitive rule for possession as far as I can tell.

 

(BTW, a 10 point deficit at half time is much different than17, not that I think the D ever would have stopped that offense in the second half anyway.)

[Treehugger]

fine. despite the fact that the giant defense was made to look similar in ability to the local Pop Warner team, and despite the fact that the offense was clearly off and unable to keep pace, and despite the fact that they allowed 48 points, 34 in one half...etc...the dog will concede your point: every giant loss in the history of the NFL is directly the result of poor officiating and injuries. without those two factors, as most evidenced by this past week, the giants would have yet to lose a game in their storied franchise. the dog does think it is a shame that no other NFL team has had to overcome poor officiating and some injuries before...what a pity...

You know you're losing an argument when you have to exaggerate to make your point.

[fringe]

You know you're losing an argument when you have to exaggerate to make your point.

even if he had a point, it's lost in all the cynicism.

[Nas]

Who cares? This only means the scored would have been 41-17...

 

That's not necessarily true... take away that bullshit PI call against Webster and that's a 14 point turn-around with this fumble.. and it's a different ballgame.

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

I still think it's a crock of shit

 

 

I could not watch the entirety of that bullshit....basically as the guy is going down look closely the tip of the ball is outside of his thumb. The thumb is what separates us from the apes...without his thumb on the ball there is no way he can have control. This is sophistry at its highest....they know full well that they just described 90% of recorded fumbles in organized football. Hock-A-Cock has had a hard on for the Giants since before the 2000 SB. Any play that is not bang bang...he is not going to rule in the Giants favor. The Giants organization collectively sighs whenever he calls one of their games as they prepare to hear novel interpretations of rules that have never been heard before.

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

That is a bullshit explanation. It will be interesting to see if this explanation effects catches, normally if the player does not maintain control of the ball it is incomplete, this guy basically just said that is no longer the case.

 

 

That is what I wrote during the game... . What a bullshit explanation and call by the refs. But as Hock-A-Cock was the one to call him down...do we really think he would reverse himself?

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

I've maintained throughout that I don't think we would have won, Brees was just too good at exposing our depleted secondary, but the Refs prevented this game from being a contest. It would have been a much closer affair, and a much better game. The Saints are very good (I was particularly impressed by their pass coverage), but not as good as that score indicates.

 

And I'll discuss issues from any and all Giants games on this Giants message board at my leisure. If you don't like it feel free to fuck off.

 

 

 

Sometimes its hard to tell if this is a GIANTS message board...or one for a rival team.

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

I sort of felt the same way as you about the call...except NEVER have I ever seen a replay interpreted that way. Its always been called where if the ball is moving as the player is going to the ground, its considered to be the start point of the loose ball. And if the goal is to keep gray areas out of officiating, the play has to be called that way. Hochuli's call, in and of itself I don't have much issue with - it was very close - but the explanation is bullshit, and if it sets precedent, it just made every ref's job a little harder.

 

 

Exactly...if there is movement before the knees hit, it is the beginning of a fumble. This hump has definitely made it easier for the Refs to be screwed over on similar close calls. He has definitely made their job a lot harder.

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

You know you're losing an argument when you have to exaggerate to make your point.

And one wonders....since we are such homer biased fans....why does so august a personage deign to basically waste his time amongst us? Tis truly a question of the ages....

[ksm7]

You know you're losing an argument when you have to exaggerate to make your point.

 

there's no argument to lose...you choose to blame giat loses on officiating. the dog chooses to recognize that they lost to a superior team at this point...if you want to continue to blame things that all teams deal with, then by all means, make yourself feel better. exaggeration in debate is akin to using more force when swinging a hammer against a brick wall...

[ksm7]

And one wonders....since we are such homer biased fans....why does so august a personage deign to basically waste his time amongst us? Tis truly a question of the ages....

 

because when the dog enjoys conspiracy theories as much as the next guy...so tbcvp, please share with the dog one of your yarns about the officials teaming with the NFL to plot against the giants...the dog will start the tale in your true fashion:

 

one day, while you were sleeping with your 9th girl of the day, you found out that she was ed hoculi's ex girlfriend. so excited by this, and not realizing that it was a figmentt of your imagination, you________________________.

[Storm]

Who cares? This only means the scored would have been 41-17...

 

What? That could have been at least a 7 point swing or more assuming we drove down for a field goal or something, like was the plan. We also would have gotten the ball at the half down less with the momentum.

[Storm]

There are different rules between a ball carrier maintaining possession and a receiver making a catch. I don't agree with the rules 100%, but I believe, as did my unbiased friend watching the game with me, that it was the correct call. It didn't make much of a difference in the outcome anyway. But Hochuli's explanation that the ball was pinned against the guy's chest when his knee hit the ground was accurate. You must differentiate between that kind of possession, where in essence the Saints player is a ball carrier that has already established possession, than a receiver attempting to make a catch and establish possession.

 

The only difference was going to be that the Giants would go into the locker room down 27-17, with the Giants yet to demonstrate they can protect Eli or stop the Saints offense from marching up and down the field on them.

 

I totally disagree with the second part of your post. The first part, you explain much better than Hocculi though.

 

First of all, I think the right call was to dress your wounds, run out the clock and go into the half down 27-17. I still think you run the draw to try to pick up some yards and get out of your own territory before you even dream of 5 step drops and holding onto the ball for 7 seconds....down 10 or not, this was a poor decision.

 

You have to realize that WE JUST MADE A GOAL LINE STAND!!! That's momentum right there, you don't kill it, you try to work with it and extend it into the next half. I don't think anyone, let alone the Saints, thought the Giants could drive the ball 60 yards or so to set up a field goal in 50 seconds, especially the way they were playing. It was a horrible, horrible coaching decision, and honestly, despite what you say, it could have changed the outcome of the game.

 

We get the ball coming out of the half, with the momentum, and drive down and even, say, kick a field goal, it's a 7 point game. Instead of a 17 point game. I'm not saying we might have won, but our chances would have been much better.

 

But honestly, I don't even care about whether or not the dude actually fumbled it (he did, based on every other time I've seen the ball start to move around and the officials called it a fumble, though your explanation at least works)...it was simply stupid to even attempt to drive the length of the field in the situation. Coughlin does that shit all the time too, they'll be 30 seconds left in the half and Eli is notorious for forcing throws at the end of the half (or, in this case, being completely oblivious to the fact the blitz came from the side opposite of the directed protection).

 

The 7 points at the end of the half when we did so well to cut the lead to 10 was the dagger. A 10 point lead isn't insurmountable. A 17 point lead often is.

[Storm]

Actually Tree, we would have gotten the ball on the 20 yard line with only 18 seconds left in the half. Check ESPN play by play. Eli wouldn't have had time to get us down the field, and I'm pretty certain at that point they would've downed it.

 

It was a close call, and by no means was it clear that the ball carrier for the Saints did not display possession at the point his knee hit the ground. The most I could say about it is that it was inconclusive evidence, insufficient to overturn the call on the field. If the situation was reversed and the referee ruled that a Giants player had fumbled in that exact manner, we'd all be going ape shit over that not being a fumble.

 

Which is why you throw that debacle on Coughlin and Gilbride, without question. Manning gets some blame too. We got the ball after the stand with about 50 seconds left on the clock.

[Storm]

Yeah the call wouldnt of made to much of a difference, we still would of lost. In my mind I still think the call was correct and it wasn't a fumble.

 

You guys act like our offense was doing nothing when in fact, we were gaining yards and getting shit done, not to the tune of 34 first half points obviously...but you are all acting like we couldn't have come back from 10 down. Sure we played awful, but we SHOULD have went into the half down 10, to get the ball at the start of the 3rd. With 50 seconds left in the half and zero timeouts (at least I don't think we had any)...the idea is to run the clock to the half. That's coaching 101.

 

Go into the half 27-17, receive the ball, score any points and it's a one score game (add momentum to the equation). If any of you think that this wasn't the turning point of the game or that we somehow still had no chance of winning had this not occurred, you're wrong.

[Storm]

fine. despite the fact that the giant defense was made to look similar in ability to the local Pop Warner team, and despite the fact that the offense was clearly off and unable to keep pace, and despite the fact that they allowed 48 points, 34 in one half...etc...the dog will concede your point: every giant loss in the history of the NFL is directly the result of poor officiating and injuries. without those two factors, as most evidenced by this past week, the giants would have yet to lose a game in their storied franchise. the dog does think it is a shame that no other NFL team has had to overcome poor officiating and some injuries before...what a pity...

 

dude, I get your whole, "holier than thou" position in regards to arguing football, but you aren't right about the offense. Our offense put up 27 points. That's enough points to beat every single team in the NFC East on any Sunday. Our offense was 'off' because the defense couldn't get off the field and the offense had no chance to develop any kind of a rhythm because they saw the field maybe twice a quarter. And no one is putting the loss squarely on the officials, but that seems to be the conclusion you're drawing. All I've read so far from posters was that 2 officiating calls in particular were very shaky. The phantom hold (now a clip) and the little leg tangle between Webster and the Saints receiver. Neither call was correct. One took away a touchdown from us, and another put them in a buttery position to score another one. Not only can you not argue against these facts, but it's making you seem, like I said, 'holier than thou'.

 

Whether or not officiating is ticky tacky in regards to other teams is, quite frankly, irrelevant. What you're saying by that is since other teams sometimes get screwed by poor officiating, that the poor officiating on Sunday during our game had nothing to do with the loss. Of course it didn't make us lose, but you're arguing that it didn't matter one way or the other when in fact, you take away those poor calls and Coughlin, Manning, and Gilbride's SNAFU you have a much, much closer game.

[Storm]

You know you're losing an argument when you have to exaggerate to make your point.

 

Tree, he lost the argument when he first posted. Irrelevant details, illogical arguments, hyperbole, ego, and third person narrative....the five things hotdog brings to this board.

[Storm]

there's no argument to lose...you choose to blame giat loses on officiating. the dog chooses to recognize that they lost to a superior team at this point...if you want to continue to blame things that all teams deal with, then by all means, make yourself feel better. exaggeration in debate is akin to using more force when swinging a hammer against a brick wall...

 

 

Dude, you're the biggest fucking idiot on the planet next to JackStroud. Not once did Tree "blame giat loses on officiating". He said you take away the two bogus calls and we are in a much better position to try to win the game. You take away a bogus call against, say, the Steelers, that took away a touchdown from them and they would have been in a much better position to win the game. Yes, all teams deal with bogus calls, but you're the dope saying that the bogus calls don't affect the outcome of the game, ever. There's been times that rules were instituted mid-game that affected the outcome of the game (the Tuck rule, for instance).

 

Besides, if anything, Tree brings up the point that outcomes of NFL football games(especially) are far too often left in the hands of officials. Maybe not in this case, but who knows, we go into the half down by 10, the Giants decide to wake up, come out at the half fired up and with the momentum, and decide to play football. Instead, Coughlin blew it and tried to drive 60 yards in 50 seconds...but what deflated the sails even worse was the fact that there was a forced fumble after wards and the rules were suddenly changed mid-challenge.

[fringe]

 

Sometimes its hard to tell if this is a GIANTS message board...or one for a rival team.

really? i think the allegiance is pretty obvious.

[TaylorBanksCarsonVanPelt]

really? i think the allegiance is pretty obvious.

I was not referring to any of the Giants fans' comments pro or con......

[ksm7]

dude, I get your whole, "holier than thou" position in regards to arguing football, but you aren't right about the offense. Our offense put up 27 points. That's enough points to beat every single team in the NFC East on any Sunday. Our offense was 'off' because the defense couldn't get off the field and the offense had no chance to develop any kind of a rhythm because they saw the field maybe twice a quarter. And no one is putting the loss squarely on the officials, but that seems to be the conclusion you're drawing. All I've read so far from posters was that 2 officiating calls in particular were very shaky. The phantom hold (now a clip) and the little leg tangle between Webster and the Saints receiver. Neither call was correct. One took away a touchdown from us, and another put them in a buttery position to score another one. Not only can you not argue against these facts, but it's making you seem, like I said, 'holier than thou'.

 

Whether or not officiating is ticky tacky in regards to other teams is, quite frankly, irrelevant. What you're saying by that is since other teams sometimes get screwed by poor officiating, that the poor officiating on Sunday during our game had nothing to do with the loss. Of course it didn't make us lose, but you're arguing that it didn't matter one way or the other when in fact, you take away those poor calls and Coughlin, Manning, and Gilbride's SNAFU you have a much, much closer game.

 

quite frankly the dog doesn't have time to read chapters 7 and 8 of your novel posted below...the giants lost to a superior team at this stage of the season. they were shredded on defense, and aside from a useless fourth quarter fg when they were trailing 41-17, and a useless DAVID CARR td pass with one minute left, that whopping 27 points that beats most nfc teams doesn't sound so sweet...in the end, it doesn't matter. it is just a loss. but it was an ugly putrid loss that had nothing to do with poor officiating...now, when the dog is struggling to fall asleep tonight, then the dog will be thanking you for the posted novel to read...if a request can be made, please include some more "lock" bets and a brief summary of your last clubby soccer romp with some of the other sweeties...much obliged!

[Storm]

quite frankly the dog doesn't have time to read chapters 7 and 8 of your novel posted below...the giants lost to a superior team at this stage of the season. they were shredded on defense, and aside from a useless fourth quarter fg when they were trailing 41-17, and a useless DAVID CARR td pass with one minute left, that whopping 27 points that beats most nfc teams doesn't sound so sweet...in the end, it doesn't matter. it is just a loss. but it was an ugly putrid loss that had nothing to do with poor officiating...now, when the dog is struggling to fall asleep tonight, then the dog will be thanking you for the posted novel to read...if a request can be made, please include some more "lock" bets and a brief summary of your last clubby soccer romp with some of the other sweeties...much obliged!

 

Yah, because, down 17-27 at the half, with the fumble called back, and minus the phantom hold that called back the TD run, that's 24-27, Carr isn't even in the game and Manning is driving to win the game, instead, you fucking dolt. You aren't taking into consideration any intangibles that going into the half not down 17-34 would bring. To be a football fan, you have to consider ALL variables and aspects of the game. If it were up to you, the effect refs have on the game would not even be mentioned, but it's because you're a retard, not because "every team has to deal with them".

 

It's not my fault you can't read (not to mention the whole "look who's talking" on long posts) dipshit. And yah, a Giants fan, every week, will predict a Cowboys loss. Go find a wife and get out of your parents basement, the Ned.

[ksm7]

Yah, because, down 17-27 at the half, with the fumble called back, and minus the phantom hold that called back the TD run, that's 24-27, Carr isn't even in the game and Manning is driving to win the game, instead, you fucking dolt. You aren't taking into consideration any intangibles that going into the half not down 17-34 would bring. To be a football fan, you have to consider ALL variables and aspects of the game. If it were up to you, the effect refs have on the game would not even be mentioned, but it's because you're a retard, not because "every team has to deal with them".

 

It's not my fault you can't read (not to mention the whole "look who's talking" on long posts) dipshit. And yah, a Giants fan, every week, will predict a Cowboys loss. Go find a wife and get out of your parents basement, the Ned.

 

um, what is this all about? the dog can't remember...you know, it being two weeks old now...let it go. the giants lost to a superior saints team. they followed it up with a loss to a team that most likely they are better than. not so good right now. you however, keep dragging this thread up...the dog will look for it week 16. you are almost as inspiring as the court jester...almost...

[Storm]

um, what is this all about? the dog can't remember...you know, it being two weeks old now...let it go. the giants lost to a superior saints team. they followed it up with a loss to a team that most likely they are better than. not so good right now. you however, keep dragging this thread up...the dog will look for it week 16. you are almost as inspiring as the court jester...almost...

 

Blame that one on you, bub. You're the one who didn't reply to people shitting on your incorrect assessment of football. And when you did, it was simply to state that you either can't read or don't have the attention span it takes to read 2 paragraphs.

[ksm7]

Blame that one on you, bub. You're the one who didn't reply to people shitting on your incorrect assessment of football. And when you did, it was simply to state that you either can't read or don't have the attention span it takes to read 2 paragraphs.

 

disagree with the dog's assessment all you want. when something is done, it is done. the dog let it go, you want to drag it on. the dog has always maintained that blaming poor officiating for a loss (obvioulsy if there is a blatent bad call that takes the winning score off the board, well then, so be it) is ridiculous, as poor officiating/missed calls impact every game and every team. the saints game was not a loss due to poor officiating. you want to take the other side to a 48-27 point loss as it was all about officiating, go to it. the dog will choose to ignore it b/c it was weeks ago, and since that time, a second loss that is more alarming took place...