Hah McVay.

[Torc]

Real question here.

Was there a whistle prior to Charb touching it?

I honestly couldn’t tell (crowd noise).

I pulled up the replay on NFL+ so it's straight from the broadcast. There is a quick sound that MIGHT be a whistle, but might also be someone yelling, but definitely not the typical multiple refs' whistles.

 

[glenwo2]

McVay is a McPussy.....cat.

 

[ivotuk]

Real question here.

Was there a whistle prior to Charb touching it?

I honestly couldn’t tell (crowd noise).

From what I heard on TV, no, there wasn't a whistle.

 

[flv2]

That rule was put in because there were too many whistles before a player was ruled to have fumbled the ball leaving those fumbles unable to be reviewed. To be clear the rule only allows for possession of the ball so basically the recovery spot...

Yes, but when there's a fumble it will normally result in a pile of players fighting for the ball. Officials blow their whistles to end the play. However, this rule also means players should ignore the whistle and continue fighting for the loose ball. There's not any obvious good way around it. Even saying there have to be multiple whistles involving at least 2 officials wouldn't solve every situation.

 

[ivotuk]

When there's a pile, players always ignore whistles.

 

[DTiempo81]

Yes, but when there's a fumble it will normally result in a pile of players fighting for the ball. Officials blow their whistles to end the play. However, this rule also means players should ignore the whistle and continue fighting for the loose ball. There's not any obvious good way around it. Even saying there have to be multiple whistles involving at least 2 officials wouldn't solve every situation.

So mean what happens every time there is a loose ball?

 

[kidhawk]

Yes, but when there's a fumble it will normally result in a pile of players fighting for the ball. Officials blow their whistles to end the play. However, this rule also means players should ignore the whistle and continue fighting for the loose ball. There's not any obvious good way around it. Even saying there have to be multiple whistles involving at least 2 officials wouldn't solve every situation.

First of all there was no fumble. This was a lateral that was never possessed therefore the ball was always live until it was picked up. Even when there is a fumble though it doesn’t always end in a pile of players. If it did there would never be fumble advancements and defenses advance fumbles regularly.

 

[flv2]

So mean what happens every time there is a loose ball?

Yes. This is pretty much what happens every time there is a loose ball, and players do ignore the whistle. If there were multiple whistles from at least 2 different officials, (and this pretty much also happens every time), then players at the edge of the pile should know not to continue.

I'm not in favour of continuing plays after the whistle or after the player/ball has touched out-of-bounds. This is a sport that creates a lot of 'what if...'.

As i've said multiple times i'm fine with the outcome of the player, which was officiated correctly. Also, (as I believe you pointed out), a backwards pass is NOT a fumble even though it is still a live ball ball. I knew that it was a live ball but I had forgotten that it wasn't - by rule - a fumble. If it had been classed as a fumble then - by rule - the 2-point try would have failed.

As to a wider point I was looking as to what the NFL could do with the rules if they wanted to prevent a repeat of this scoring play. Re-classifying a backwards pass as a fumble would actually create more problems than it would solve, (which is presumably why footballing authorities haven't done so). The only way to do would be to classify passes that are tipped by opponents and fall incomplete in advance of the point of the throw as incomplete forward passes.

 

[flv2]

First of all there was no fumble. This was a lateral that was never possessed therefore the ball was always live until it was picked up. Even when there is a fumble though it doesn’t always end in a pile of players. If it did there would never be fumble advancements and defenses advance fumbles regularly.

I was already writing a 'far too long' post addressing some of this. Offensive fumble advancement happens regularly under current rules. It just can't happen on certain plays, (4th down + 2-points), and at certain times, (late in the half).

 

[flv2]

Strangely i've never heard of anyone jumping up and shouting: 'non-possessed football!' when the ball is 'live'.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Surprised he has time to coach when clearly spends all day checking himself out in the mirror.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

From what I heard on TV, no, there wasn't a whistle.

And it doesn't even matter. It has been made clear, whistle or NO whistle, this was the correct call. No matter what McButtnugget or POOka think.

 

[kidhawk]

I was already writing a 'far too long' post addressing some of this. Offensive fumble advancement happens regularly under current rules. It just can't happen on certain plays, (4th down + 2-points), and at certain times, (late in the half).

Still isn’t a fumble no matter what you hear people shout. This play was a lateral pass thus a live ball. The rule works as it is designed and isn’t going anywhere over a one in a million type play.

 

[flv2]

Still isn’t a fumble no matter what you hear people shout. This play was a lateral pass thus a live ball. The rule works as it is designed and isn’t going anywhere over a one in a million type play.

The play was officiated correctly which tied the game at 30-30. I'm ok with the current rule and I would also be ok with the rule being changed. Such 'one in a million' type plays have resulted in previous rule changes. The 'Tuck rule' and the 'Holy Roller' come to mind. Generally fans don't like games being decided by such plays.

 

[Torc]

The play was officiated correctly which tied the game at 30-30. I'm ok with the current rule and I would also be ok with the rule being changed. Such 'one in a million' type plays have resulted in previous rule changes. The 'Tuck rule' and the 'Holy Roller' come to mind. Generally fans don't like games being decided by such plays.

You're right, there would probably be less controversy if everyone on the field had assumed it was a live ball, had a scrum, and one team ended up with it. Assuming a Seahawk had ended up with it, there would have been the obligatory automatic review that would have determined a backwards pass. I bet Rams players jump on loose balls from now on, just like Steelers players probably don't let balls sit in the end zone during kickoffs.

I don't like McVay's statement that the rule will change and that there's no way anyone disagrees with his displeasure with the rule. His statement that the play should end as soon as the defense "rejects" the extra point attempt is silly. On a PAT, everyone knows that if the kick is blocked (rejected) that the defense can pick it up and score. It's a live ball. It's no different on a two point conversion - it's live until the ball is downed.

 

[glenwo2]

Surprised he has time to coach when clearly spends all day checking himself out in the mirror.

 

[mikeak]

The play was officiated correctly which tied the game at 30-30. I'm ok with the current rule and I would also be ok with the rule being changed. Such 'one in a million' type plays have resulted in previous rule changes. The 'Tuck rule' and the 'Holy Roller' come to mind. Generally fans don't like games being decided by such plays.

Also after a horrible missed call on a PI committed by a team (which sent them to the superbowl) we got reviewable PI for one season

Was not a good change so it reverted

Can't recall the team that benefitted so much from that PI.....

 

[DTiempo81]

The play was officiated correctly which tied the game at 30-30. I'm ok with the current rule and I would also be ok with the rule being changed. Such 'one in a million' type plays have resulted in previous rule changes. The 'Tuck rule' and the 'Holy Roller' come to mind. Generally fans don't like games being decided by such plays.

I think creating/changing rules for extremely rare one in a million type plays is generally frowned upon by fans actually. I don't think the holy roller fits this description, because we see this rule applied quite often. The tuck rule is a better example, and one which ultimately is mocked by fans as one of the many Brady rules. When's the last time you saw the tuck rule applied? Once or twice a season at most?

Either way, the only fans that I see that don't like the rules to applied correctly in this situation are Rams fans and possibly some Vikings fans that are still butthurt about Darnold. There is no great solution to this specific play outside of calling a live ball dead in certain instances which opens up a huge can of worms.

 

[JPatera76]

The simultaneous catch rule wasn’t changed

 

[themunn]

I’ll be honest, I think it’s ridiculous that a referee can blow the whistle and things after that can still count. Makes no sense to me.

I'll be honest - the whistle shouldn't be blown until a player has the ball in their possession to avoid any and all controversy as to when the whistle is blown - the refs shouldn't be whistling a live play dead