THE BIGGEST ****ING INJUSTICE IN THE WHOLE ****ING WORLD

<B>While you can't blame the Patriots, you can honestly say that they were NOT the better team, so whenever there is an argument in the future about who won the game in playing better football as per the rules, the answer should be Raiders, imo.</B>

No, it says they MIGHT not have been the better team. Patriots still might have won that game. Bottom line, though, Oakland still allowed them to drive the field for a tying field goal, and then again drive the entire field for a game winning field goal.

 

BTW, here's the ref's explanation:

<I>After a number of minutes and plenty of head scratching, the play was ruled an incomplete pass. The ruling of referee Walt Coleman: while Brady was trying to tuck the ball, his arm was moving forward, thus the play was ruled an incomplete pass. This was based on Rule 3, Section 21, Article 2, Note 2 of the NFL rule book: "...any intentional forward movement of [the passer's] arm starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body."

Explained Coleman to a pool reporter, "When I got over to the replay monitor and looked it was obvious that his arm was coming forward, he was trying to tuck the ball and they just knocked it out of his hand. His hand was coming forward, which makes it an incomplete pass."

</I>

 

That's so annoying though. I for one, have been *infuriated* with the level of proof that the NFL seems to require for reversal on instant replay at times this year. Sometimes, it looks about 80% certain that the play should be reversed. But it's "inconclusive..." evidently meaning, "there's a shadow of a doubt" so no reversal is made.

I can't see any chance that there wasn't doubt on this play. I actually *thought* that he was already set again. But even if you disagree, you can't say it was conclusive. I just find it mind-boggling that *anybody* could look at that replay and say there was conclusive evidence to reverse the original call.

My actual guess: the refs had no frickin' clue what to call. Hence, they gave the Patriots back the ball on the grounds that Oakland was going to win no matter what if they got the ball. The Pats were out of timeouts. Oakland gets it, game over. IF the pats got the ball, Oakland's defense still had a chance.

That explanation even makes a little sense to me... but not enough.

 

I guess this is why it pays off to have homefield advantage, there's no way in hell the ref reverses this in anywhere other than New England...

Just like the Bills-Titans Music City Miracle would have been reversed in Buffalo...

 

<B>That's so annoying though. I for one, have been *infuriated* with the level of proof that the NFL seems to require for reversal on instant replay at times this year. Sometimes, it looks about 80% certain that the play should be reversed. But it's "inconclusive..." evidently meaning, "there's a shadow of a doubt" so no reversal is made.</B>

I agree. I didn't see the play, so I can't say anything about it in particular. However, refs do seem to ignore the conclusive-evidence rule quite a bit. It seems they go with the "it looks like..." call more often. If they made that the standard, I wouldn't mind, but there does need to be a definite standard.

 

In my opinion, the call was right (according to the rule) but the rule is bad.

 

and the other 1/3 must be blind or Pat fans.

I am not a fan of either of those teams, but that has to be one of the most horrendous calls in the history of sports.

 

I agree, according to the rule the call was correct but the rule needs to be deleted or changed.

 

I concur with bobrek and Lil Pun. That rule is absolutely ridiculous. By that rule, the QB should be constantly pump faking the ball so that if he ever gets hit, he can just let go and avoid any sack.

But in watching the review, the ref made the right call. I am also quite impressed that the ref knew the rule that well off the top of his head as to make the right call. Brady was still tucking when he was hit, and the ball popped out.

It is a stupid rule, but not really the refs fault for enforcing it.

(I do agree with BGM, however, that they never would have reversed that call if this was not in New England)

 

It just underscores how much the NFL sucks now that the two teams in the AFC championship game weren't even in the playoffs last year.

Look for the Texans in the playoffs next year.

 

I feel for the Raider fans. Even though the call on the field was correct due to the rules of forward arm motion, it is a stupid rule. It`s sad to have the game decided by a third party. Good Luck next year raider fans,except when you play Miami

 

There is NO WAY the call should have been reversed. The forward motion was stopped and Brady had the ball with 2 hands. Now unless by "tucked" they mean having a football in the pit of the stomach with two hands around it like no QB actually carries it, it looked to be a fumble. The fact the call on the field was a fumble and they overruled it made the call 10 times worse. As other said, all QBs should now just do a quick pump fake after the snap and carry the ball like they normally do and they will never officially "fumble".

That said, NE substantially outgained the Raiders, the Raiders had a 3rd and 1 to clench the game and took the ball out of Garner's hands and got stopped 1 foot short, and the Raiders couldn't stop the Pats on their last 2 drives despite a blizzard and the aid of wind on the 2nd one.

However, as somewhat of a Raiders fan, I will point out the whole thing wouldn't have meant much in the end. The Raiders would have gotten pulverized by the evil Steelers on both sides of the ball. The Steelers D would have limited the Raiders O just like the Raven's did, except unlike the Raven's of last year Pittsburgh will score plenty because of the Raiders sorry front 7.
However, the Pats have a well enough balanced team to play with the evil ones if the Pats bring their A game.

While it sucks for the Raiders as a whole it is justice for Jerry Rice. A few years ago Rice fumbled away the 49ers season against the Packers but the ref plainly, blindly, and incorrectly ruled he was down and the 49ers one on a last second play of that drive kept alive.

 

I sure dont think the Steelers creaming the Raiders was a foregone conclusion. Oakland has not lost a game the whole season by more than a TD. They have been in EVERY game. I bet they would have been close in the Steelers game and one bounce one way or another might have won them the game. Obviously, there is no way to know but they sure should have had the chance instead of the Pats. There is just no excuse for that Bulls*** call. Forward pass my ass.
I do think the Patriots will get what they deserve in Pittsburgh. Much as I dislike the Steelers, I will be glad to see the Patriots shown the door.

Now if they can just sign Gruden.................

 

Did anyone watch ESPN late Saturday night/early Sunday?

They analyzed "the call" and showed it frame-by-frame with the rulebook open.

Sorry Raider fans, but the refs made the correct call.

All the rulebook says is that the QBs arm must be in a forward motion for it to be an incomplete pass. And Brady's arm, even though he was clearly pumping the ball, was in a forward motion. Therefore, according to NFL rules, the zebras made the correct call. It still sucks, especially if you are a Raider fan, but it is not an injustice...unlike Mike Renfro's "Non-touchdown" in the Oilers-Steelers 1979 AFC Championship game.

 

RM Tex, I beg to disagree. Brady stopped the ball with his off hand before Woodson knocked it out. I think the key thing the refs and league are saying is until the ball is re"tucked away", it is still considered forward motion even if the arm has stopped moving forward (which Brady's had).

As some of has said, if you take this rule to the extreme all QBs should pump fake after the snap because then they will never be called for fumbling unless they put the ball in the pit of their stomach (which no QB does anyway). In fact you would be better off never tucking the ball away after a fake period because as long as you carry it like a loaf of bread it would never be called a fumble if you lost it.

NE has the better chance against Pittsburgh because the Raiders front 7 are league average at best . That is not a good formula to stop Pittsburgh's offense, and aside for the Rams on carpet, no offense is going to light up the Steelers for over 24 or so to make up the difference.

 

Who still believes it's an incomplete pass?

 

But the rule states even if he has it tucked like that it is still in forward motion. Like I said before, it is a VERY BAD rule (that needs to be changed) but the call on the field was correct.

 

I'm still trying to figure out why this is a bad thing? Do you prefer MLB where only 8 teams have a legitimate shot each year, or the NBA where the nearly the same teams make the playoffs every year?