Crabtree's fumble

[253hawk]

Sidenote - for all of the complaining about Seattle's DB's holding/grabbing, SF's WR's get a way with a lot of blatant pushing off, Crabtree in particular.

Yeah just a little.

 

[Marvin49]

Sidenote - for all of the complaining about Seattle's DB's holding/grabbing, SF's WR's get a way with a lot of blatant pushing off, Crabtree in particular.

Yeah just a little.

LOL.

Well...in fairness, that was a run play, not a pass....but yeah....that was a hold.

 

[look@dafilm]

when 3 guys hold you up for 10 seconds trying to strip the football from you, I think you're forward progress has been stopped

 

[253hawk]

10 seconds? That's some serious hyperbole. Never understood why WR's are called down after being stood up for 1 second when it takes a good 3+ for RB's.

 

[BASF]

During the Rams/Cardinals game, the Arizona ballcarrier fumbled the ball at the 6 inch line and the Rams recovered in the endzone and ran it out to the 50. However the officials signaled touchdown (incorrectly) which immediately kills the play in the same was as blowing the play dead.

I actually missed the followup to that play where they discussed the penalty that was called on the LB that blocked for return as Carson Palmer was trying to chase down the play. The penalty was I believe was unnecessary roughness for seeking out the QB after the play was over. However as soon as they got the call right that it was in fact a fumble and awarded the Rams the ball, did they pick up the flag? I can't seem to find anything to answer that in the Play by Play's from the game.

The penalty was assessed from the 20yard line. Rams kept the ball. Rams started on their 10 yard line after the penalty.

Thanks Polaris. That is such crap to still enforce the penalty since they were complete wrong about the return.

 

[JustTheTip]

when 3 guys hold you up for 10 seconds trying to strip the football from you, I think you're forward progress has been stopped

He was still moving forward during that time. So the player is supposed to get all of the benefits of forward progress with out any potential drawback? I think the forward progress rule needs to be examined and revised. I also hate seeing players be driven back 5 yards, popping free and running past the 5 yards they were at before. If they are tackled before breaking free though, they still get their forward progress. So they can fumble or get tackled during that time with no negative impact but still have the potential to break a big play? Sounds like a bunch of bs to me. If being driven backwards means you are down, then it should mean you are down.

 

[Scottemojo]

when 3 guys hold you up for 10 seconds trying to strip the football from you, I think you're forward progress has been stopped

I would do as your username suggests, and tell me at what point Crabtree stops moving forward. Credit to him, with three guys on him he never stops making forward progress. Until he fumbles.

 

[HoRneR]

when 3 guys hold you up for 10 seconds trying to strip the football from you, I think you're forward progress has been stopped

I would do as your username suggests, and tell me at what point Crabtree stops moving forward. Credit to him, with three guys on him he never stops making forward progress. Until he fumbles.

Yea this play really reminded me of the Bradshaw play in the Giants and 49ers NFCC game from 2 years ago where Bradshaw was still moving forward and fumbled and we recovered and the refs said it was dead when it obviously wasn't.

 

[Scottemojo]

when 3 guys hold you up for 10 seconds trying to strip the football from you, I think you're forward progress has been stopped

I would do as your username suggests, and tell me at what point Crabtree stops moving forward. Credit to him, with three guys on him he never stops making forward progress. Until he fumbles.

Yea this play really reminded me of the Bradshaw play in the Giants and 49ers NFCC game from 2 years ago where Bradshaw was still moving forward and fumbled and we recovered and the refs said it was dead when it obviously wasn't.

It was pretty much just like that.

 

[kidhawk]

Wasn't there a whistle blown before the "fumble" indicating the play was over?

In cases of down by contact whistles, fumbles (If clearly recovered) can still be reviewed when the whistle was calling the play dead by judging the player down by contact before the ball was loose. That appeared to be the case in this instance. The official blew his whistle, pointed to his own rear and then to the turf showing that he was saying the players butt touched the turf and he was down before the fumble. In this case, the Seattle player had picked the ball up cleanly and quickly after the fumble so there was a clear recovery. It wasn't until Pete tried to challenge it that the officials changed the ruling from "Down by contact" to down due to forward progress. If the original official had ruled him down due to forward progress then there would be no issue, but he didn't