I think it's bull****. While the fans were in the wrong, there's no way they should've reversed that call. A rule's a rule, and replays clearly show that the ref didn't acknowledge the booth until after the next play was completed.
The fans sure had a right to be upset. The reversal was crap. But they went overboard. Throwing stuff wasn't the proper way to handle it (though as fans, I guess there's nothing anybody can do when the refs are incompetent).
Horrible officiating... no way you can reverse a call two plays down the line. It was plain as can be that the ref went for the buzzer after both the spike and after he ruled it incomplete. I can't say that I support the fans throwing bottles onto the field, but I'm glad they did something besides walk out of the stadium with their heads down. Now if only fans at Laker games would do that...
I guess we shouldn't expect the fans to obey the rules if the refs won't obey the rules. What gets me, though, is the refusal now to admit the mistake. This whole "I got the buzzer before the snap" thing is crap and disputed by the evidence. It's just like during that muffed coin toss a few years ago when the ref tried to excuse his massive screw-up by coming up with a phantom explanation. The thing I thought was weird was that the Cleveland Channel 3 newscast wasn't questioning the call at all. I watched their report online, and there wasn't any mention of that element of the dispute. Their report made it sound like the fans just didn't like the reversal of the catch, not that they were near-rioting because of the ref's flagrant ignoring of the rules of the game.
I saw the end of that game, and I can't believe that the refs reversed that call. It's as Cat said...it was clear to everyone that the ref didn't go for his buzzer until after Couch spiked the ball...one play after the one in question . Yes, Quincy Morgan did not hold on, but guess what? It was too late and you can't review a play if you have already run a play after the one in question. The bottom line is that the officials (both on the field and in the replay booth) were caught by surprise by how fast the Browns were able to get to the line of scrimmage. They will never admit that. I don't think that it was a good thing to see the fans throw stuff like that because even though they were irate (and had a good reason to be), it is not worth seeing someone get hurt by that. I was amazed at how almost-defiant acting the Owner, Al Lerner, and Eddie DeBartolo's twin brother, Carmen Policy was about the whole thing in the press conference.
What actually is significant: the time that the message is sent FROM the upstairs official OR the moment that the onfield official actually RESPONDS to it. The upstairs official has clearly stated that he commenced the communication before the ball was snapped on the unjustly earned first down. Need we say more? It's not possible for the two events (the signal and the reception of the signal) to happen simultaneously; they must occur sequentially. In almost every NFL game you see a ball snapped and a play executed that was destined not to count, typically because of the playclock running out or some kind of illegal motion perhaps. People don't go ape-**** over that. Only in Cleveland. I guess if you can't win honestly; you go for dishonorably. And then when you don't get your way, you throw a tantrum.
You know what I find amusing? If the call had gone the other way, then the other team would have been robbed. He didn't catch that pass. The right call did end up getting made. Yeah, the procedure sucked, but I'd rather it have gone this way.
You know whats really sad? I wish the Rockets had these kind of fans. They may give their team a bad name, but at least the give a f@ck about their team. Our fans would just applaud only because the game was over quicker.
rm95: Yes, rules are for a reason. Like, they're supposed to be called. The refs did **** up twice. But the team that should have won, did.
haven's on the money with this one. Would you rather have the officials gone by the "rules" and allowed a bogus catch, thereby stripping the Jags of deserving win? Personally I would much rather see the players decide the game than let the officials screw up and not make an effort to correct a bad call due to some technicality. What this really draws attention to is the fact that the "inside 2 minutes only the booth gets to decide" challenge rule should be done away with. Let the coaches have another challenge (a total of 3) and let them decide for the entire game.
Read McClain in the Chronicle today. The rules are the rules and they were obeyed. The signal was sent PRIOR to the snap of the ball so "No Play." That is the imperative action. Not everything that looks bad is bad you know! There are plays just like this in every game-- only not so critical. Nevertheless revisions need to be made in the Instant Replay System. Having the Instant Replay Official at the mercies of the TV Producers who "don't want to miss the next play" is insane. The signal relays take time. Browns fans could have screamed their heads off without hurling dangerous projectiles and we could have admired them. Now they look like chumps.
Problem is that there is dispute as to whether the signal was sent prior to the snap of the ball. It's a little too convenient an excuse now, especially considering that the game tape appears to show a different story. (McClain is wrong to assert that these are the same pagers that we all have, by the way. And this delay, which doesn't affect other game technology, has never been mentioned before, leading one to believe that it's just more of the CYA going on at the NFL). In the end, we have the word of one man who has a vested interest in the situation and whose word may well be contradicted by the video evidence in hand.
<b>mr.paige</b>: There was no problem. Only the replay official and the Referee know when the signal was sent in relation to the snapping of the ball. Who is disputing the timing of the signal? It was nothing more than a falsely started play. Almost every game has a couple of those. Players and coaches will say ANYTHING that favors their effort. The only objective ones here are the officials. How could anybody else make a claim on knowing when the signal was sent? It is an imperceivable vibrating pager on the waist of the Referee. What is the vested interest of the Replay Official? He is making a tough call against the home team. His easy call is to say that the page was not sent in time. The video relays no information whatsoever about the pager. How can this reality be denied? Are you a Browns fan?!?
What? Riiiiight. They have no reason to want to cover their collective asses on a play that they obviously (again, watch the tape) screwed up on. Sure the right team won (meaning it was an incomplete pass, not in the rules of the game though), but then how can you argue against going back 3 or 4 plays to make sure you got the right call? What about instant replay now for penalties? Screw it, I'm for every play being reviewed to make sure everything was within the rules. I want to make sure that on that last 20 yard run, there was no holding. I want to make sure that on that last broken up pass, there wasn't any pass interference. As long as it makes sure the right team wins honorably, then I'm all for it. The fact of the matter is this. The refs called the pass complete. The Browns got a play off. The ref did not acknowledge his pager until after he called the pass incomplete. We wouldn't allow Jacksonville to throw the red flag (outside of two minutes left) after the play if there was some confusion on their sideline as to whether or not the play should be challenged, the refs shouldn't be any different.
<B>The ref did not acknowledge his pager until after he called the pass incomplete. </B> The question here is "what is the rule". Is it when the ref acknowledges the challenge, or when the challenge is called? If it's the latter, then there's no "conclusive evidence" either way. <B>We wouldn't allow Jacksonville to throw the red flag (outside of two minutes left) after the play if there was some confusion on their sideline as to whether or not the play should be challenged,</B> No, but what would happen if Jax threw a red flag in time (obviously, not in a final-2-minutes scenario), but it was not acknowledged by the official until after a spiked-ball play? What would happen in that scenario?
He can do that. The only way to prevent it is to always put your hands over your ears and type with your elbows when you visit the BBS. Tough one. The rules say that the ruling on the field stands, unless overruled by replay according to a set procedure. That procedure was not followed; therefore, Morgan's non-catch should have stood, since it was erroneously ruled on the field to be a catch. The real story is, if Quincy Morgan didn't suck donkey balls, the point would be moot-- because he would have caught and hung on to the ball and Cleveland would have gone on to win the game. Thus, probably setting up victory riots...
