gbmickey:

Muddy what the hell kind of answer is that? You can't even compare the two. Under a pile no one can see. This was clear as he began to roll over with the ball.

MuddyMask:

gbmickey:

Muddy what the hell kind of answer is that? You can't even compare the two. Under a pile no one can see. This was clear as he began to roll over with the ball.

Trying to fill Reg's shoes as resident homer. (Not near as good at it as Reg was.)

Classic evasive response I see. I will admit you ARE on par with Lamblow. :)

gbmickey:

Creepy he clearly had possession and was on it before Jolly even got there

Saw the same as you but have different opinion.  He landed on it first and stared to wrap up, then Jolly hit him.  If Jolly had just flopped on him it would have been Dallas ball, but Jolly (whether by accident or on purpose) dove in sideways and reached in.  When they rolled over both had hands on the ball.  If Jones had clear possesion when he was rolled it would have been Dallas ball, since neither had complete control it popped up and we all know the rest.

That is why the rule isn't revieweable.  Just because it looks like the first one on it had control, may not actually be true.  Had it been reviewable I believe the call would have stood, as there is no evidence that Jones had control of it when jolly hit him, just that he was laying on it (not wrapped up).

If the ref had ruled he was down, I could have accepted that and if reviewed the same reasoning would have been used to let Dallas keep it.  No clear evidence to overturn the call. 

We both saw the same play, we both have an opinion and I don't believe either will change the others mind.  How it worked out we both agree was good for GB.  The outcome of the game would not have changed much IMO, as I think GB would have won 10-7 or possibly 13-7, as a punt from there could have given GB great field position and a chance to get within FG range.

gbmickey:

MuddyMask:

gbmickey:

Muddy what the hell kind of answer is that? You can't even compare the two. Under a pile no one can see. This was clear as he began to roll over with the ball.

Trying to fill Reg's shoes as resident homer. (Not near as good at it as Reg was.)

Classic evasive response I see. I will admit you ARE on par with Lamblow. :)

1. You fumble the ball you live with the consequences. THEY started the mess.
2. A fumble isn't yours until a ref pries it out of your hands and points in your direction.
3. I'm no Reg.
   

Creepy:

gbmickey:

Creepy he clearly had possession and was on it before Jolly even got there

Saw the same as you but have different opinion.  He landed on it first and stared to wrap up, then Jolly hit him.  If Jolly had just flopped on him it would have been Dallas ball, but Jolly (whether by accident or on purpose) dove in sideways and reached in.  When they rolled over both had hands on the ball.  If Jones had clear possesion when he was rolled it would have been Dallas ball, since neither had complete control it popped up and we all know the rest.

That is why the rule isn't revieweable.  Just because it looks like the first one on it had control, may not actually be true.  Had it been reviewable I believe the call would have stood, as there is no evidence that Jones had control of it when jolly hit him, just that he was laying on it (not wrapped up).

If the ref had ruled he was down, I could have accepted that and if reviewed the same reasoning would have been used to let Dallas keep it.  No clear evidence to overturn the call. 

We both saw the same play, we both have an opinion and I don't believe either will change the others mind.  How it worked out we both agree was good for GB.  The outcome of the game would not have changed much IMO, as I think GB would have won 10-7 or possibly 13-7, as a punt from there could have given GB great field position and a chance to get within FG range.

I saw it exactly the same way, Creepy. This situation could be compared to when a receiver catches a pass and is immediately hit and the ball comes out. Once upon a time, that was considered a fumble but now it's just an incomplete pass. The rule was changed to say the receiver had to make a football move to consider the pass complete. In other words, they introduced the concept of how long the receiver had to be in possession of the ball before it was considered a fumble vs incomplete.

This fumble recovery is similar in that looking at this play in slow motion, yes it appeared Jones may have been in possession of the ball for a split second but is that long enough to rule the play over? The NFL obviously recognized this by stating recovery of fumbles was not a reviewable play. In other words, it's totally a judgement call by the ref as it happens (and IMO, the refs got it right). Had the ref blown it dead, though, I suspect a lot more people would be saying the Packers got "jobbed" than are saying Dallas got "jobbed".  You know, the people on this forum that actually root for the Packers.

MuddyMask:

gbmickey:

MuddyMask:

gbmickey:

Muddy what the hell kind of answer is that? You can't even compare the two. Under a pile no one can see. This was clear as he began to roll over with the ball.

Trying to fill Reg's shoes as resident homer. (Not near as good at it as Reg was.)

Classic evasive response I see. I will admit you ARE on par with Lamblow. :)

You want forthright opinion? Okay:

1. You fumble the ball you live with the consequences. THEY started the mess.
2. A fumble isn't yours until a ref pries it out of your hands and points in your direction.
3. I'm no Reg.
   

Reg ain't a homer, he's trying to move the team to a retirement community in Florida.

puddyellow:

prime311:

 Rule 15, Section 9 of the rule book states that "for initiating a challenge when all of a team’s timeouts have been exhausted or when all of its available challenges have been used: Loss of 15 yards."

I have yet to see an NFL link to this rule.  Their abbreviated online rule book lists no such infraction.  They list all 15 yard penalties and it doesn't exist.  While they have some pretty obscure infractions listed like "piling on" and "leaping."  The only possible correlation to any 15 yard penalty in this digest would be "unsportsmanlike."

By all means, I'd like to see a link to some PDF rule book, but I haven't come across one yet.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/penaltysummaries

Hopefully the head of NFL officiating can convince you, homer.

"It should have been a flag immediately," Pereira said of an instance when Packers coach Mike McCarthy threw his red flag after exhausting his challenges. "We compounded this by actually announcing that they were challenging and then going over to the monitor, at which point the replay assistant said, 'Green Bay has already used both their challenges. They won one and lost one which means they don't get a third.'"

Pereira tried to spare Triplette by saying, "we," instead of "Triplette," but the bottom line is that the referee screwed up.

"We should have thrown the flag right then for unsportsmanlike conduct -- it's a 15-yard penalty," Pereira said. "We were wrong in not doing that."
 

I've already had a link from a gracious poster.

You're late to the party.

Have you answered yet that (1) The Cowboys still got a first down and bungled the opportunity with an interception on first and goal?  and (2) that the "catch" in question was actually incomplete?

Have you answered those, homer?