Clay Matthews sack and forced fumble that got overturned

[pack4to84]

Video I uploaded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__VySVrB6cI

Some of you didn't get to see this so I uploaded it. The replay wasn't available on NFL.com.

This was called a sack and force fumble on the field. The play got challenged. Then was overturned by replay. Big Ben arm got pend against the his shoulder pad then the ball fell to the ground.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2d135o8.jpg

http://i49.tinypic.com/2j3f815.jpg larger picture

[Brandon494]

Clearly a fumble, i hate the tuck rule.

[mission]

Didn't look anything like a pass in any way.

Hell, I say it shouldn't even matter IF the arm is going forward. If the ball falls straight down to the ground, it wasn't much of a pass. Rule it a fumble.

Shit's out of hand.

[HarveyWallbangers]

It was a fumble, but it didn't really matter at all in the game. The Steelers punted, we got a big play from Driver (I believe), and in about two minutes we were where we would have been had they not overturned the play. I think that's the drive that Crosby missed the FG.

[pack4to84]

his arm stops then get pend against shoulder pads ball falls to the ground.

[pack4to84]

It was a fumble, but it didn't really matter at all in the game. The Steelers punted, we got a big play from Driver (I believe), and in about two minutes we were where we would have been had they not overturned the play. I think that's the drive that Crosby missed the FG.so if we where at the Steelers 30 when Driver play would have been a TD instead of 40 yards

[HarveyWallbangers]

so if we where at the Steelers 30 when Driver play would have been a TD instead of 40 yards

What?

[pack4to84]

so if we where at the Steelers 30 when Driver play would have been a TD instead of 40 yards

What?you said it didn't matter. But if the Packers had the ball at the Steelers 30. When Driver got his big catch it would have went for a TD instead of just 40 yards and a miss field goal.

[Maxie the Taxi]

No one can convince me this wasn't a big play. It could have swung momentum to us.

Instead, the Steelers got a boost. We've lived on turnovers this year.

[RashanGary]

It was so close. However the ref called it in the game, it should have stayed. I really didn't think that thing would be reversed so I voted no. If it was coming forward, it was impossible to tell even with the frame by frame looks we got.

[pbmax]

It was so close. However the ref called it in the game, it should have stayed. I really didn't think that thing would be reversed so I voted no. If it was coming forward, it was impossible to tell even with the frame by frame looks we got.
I mentioned this in another thread, but since you asked:

Ben's arm (possibly just his elbow) was moving forward, the ball was not. Like a whip, there is a delay between his arm moving and the ball going forward. The rule reads that the arm that must be going forward. Usually, when its this close (arm moves, ball doesn't) the ref will uphold the call on the field. It was a surprise it got overturned, but there will not be a letter of apology from the league on this one.

[red]

his upper body was moving into throw motion making it look like the arm was going forward. but if you look at his arm in relation to his body, it doesn't move

that was a horrible call, i don't see how the ref see indisputable evidence to overrule the call

the telling thing is that big ben was shocked on the sideline when the call was overturned

[ThunderDan]

With the way Ben reacted, not yelling at the ref that he was throwing, I thought he stopped his motion and was trying to reload to another WR.

[The_Dude]

Not sure where the indisputable evidence is that is was a pass? That is so close to being either a pass or a fumble that you (at least I thought this is how the rules worked) keep the call on the field.

[HarveyWallbangers]

you said it didn't matter. But if the Packers had the ball at the Steelers 30. When Driver got his big catch it would have went for a TD instead of just 40 yards and a miss field goal.

What? I'm not sure I need to point this out, but if we got the ball at the 26 yard line, we likely don't get the play to Driver. In the end, the call mattered little. Two minutes later, we had the ball 1st and 10 from the same spot on the field that we would have had it. Big deal. Bad calls are made. You'd have to be a homer to say this one affected the game much.

[wist43]

The "tuck rule" is idiotic... and of course that should have been a fumble; however, by the way the rule is written, it had to be overturned - hence, I voted yes.

[sharpe1027]

you said it didn't matter. But if the Packers had the ball at the Steelers 30. When Driver got his big catch it would have went for a TD instead of just 40 yards and a miss field goal.

What? I'm not sure I need to point this out, but if we got the ball at the 26 yard line, we likely don't get the play to Driver. In the end, the call mattered little. Two minutes later, we had the ball 1st and 10 from the same spot on the field that we would have had it. Big deal. Bad calls are made. You'd have to be a homer to say this one affected the game much.

I tend to agree that it could have made a difference. I don't care if they eventually got to the same point, they still had much further to go. Maybe they don't get the exact same play, but maybe they still exploit a similar weakness.

You'd have to be clairvoyant to be so sure that it wouldn't have mattered at all. :lol:

[The Leaper]

I don't think they should be allowed to review those plays...if the play looks like a pass to the naked eye, it's a pass...if the play doesn't look like a pass, it isn't.

Trying to take it down to a frame-by-frame analysis is stupid IMO.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I tend to agree that it could have made a difference. I don't care if they eventually got to the same point, they still had much further to go. Maybe they don't get the exact same play, but maybe they still exploit a similar weakness.

You'd have to be clairvoyant to be so sure that it wouldn't have mattered at all. :lol:

The way it turned out, the play mattered little. It was a bad call, but I'm not going to bitch about every bad call. They happen in every game. I'll save my bitching for plays like Jerry Rice's fumble. That call directly cost the Packers that playoff game.

[Freak Out]

We lost the damn game. Nothing is going to change that.

[Guiness]

I think it should've stayed as called on the field.

Replay is supposed to overturn the call if there is 'indisputable evidence' not 'if the ref had seen it in super slo-mo, how would he have called it.

The way I read the replay rule, you're supposed to view the film biased towards the call on the field, and change it if it's obvious it was a BLOWN call, not if 'well, it looks more like....'

[bobblehead]

I don't think they should be allowed to review those plays...if the play looks like a pass to the naked eye, it's a pass...if the play doesn't look like a pass, it isn't.

Trying to take it down to a frame-by-frame analysis is stupid IMO.

especially when you can't challenge a 40 yard PI penalty.

[channtheman]

Didn't look anything like a pass in any way.

Hell, I say it shouldn't even matter IF the arm is going forward. If the ball falls straight down to the ground, it wasn't much of a pass. Rule it a fumble.

Shit's out of hand.

My dad and I were talking and we came to the conclusion that the ball should have to pass the line of scrimmage to be ruled incomplete. QB arm going forward but it hits 1 yard short of the line of scrimmage? Fumble. Certainly would clear up a lot of bull shit.

[MadScientist]

Didn't look anything like a pass in any way.

Hell, I say it shouldn't even matter IF the arm is going forward. If the ball falls straight down to the ground, it wasn't much of a pass. Rule it a fumble.

Shit's out of hand.

My dad and I were talking and we came to the conclusion that the ball should have to pass the line of scrimmage to be ruled incomplete. QB arm going forward but it hits 1 yard short of the line of scrimmage? Fumble. Certainly would clear up a lot of bull shit.
Given the way they apply the rules, it should have been reversed. The initial call of fumble also makes sense, so you don't have the 'blown whistle' issues when it really is a fumble.

I like the idea that the ball has to travel significantly forward, although the LOS might be a bit too far. Perhaps the ball must go 2 yards forwards when hit to not be a fumble. What really really gets me is when they call incomplete because of the arm going forward when the ball lands behind the QB. That should always be a fumble / backwards lateral.