OFFICIAL PACKERS VS SAINTS GAME DAY THREAD

[HarveyWallbangers]

Yes, a blown whistle no longer nullifies any potential replay. The defense has to have a clear recovery. I don't know if they told McCarthy that there was no clear recovery or that it didn't matter because he had no more challenges. It looked pretty clear to me that the Packers recovered though. Either way, blown call. I'm just glad it didn't cost us another game.

[mraynrand]

No, they can now overturn down by contact if the other team clearly has possesion. The problem is the scrum at the end of the play negates the clear possesion part of the overturn.

That's what I was talking about. Why no clear possession? But let me make sure I understand: If the Packers had 'clear possession' then they would have been forced to review the play, because it is a turnover play, which must be review. So by not giving clear possession to GB, they don't have to review the play, and they don't have to admit they got the initial call wrong.

[ThunderDan]

That's what I was talking about. Why no clear possession? But let me make sure I understand: If the Packers had 'clear possession' then they would have been forced to review the play, because it is a turnover play, which must be review. So by not giving clear possession to GB, they don't have to review the play, and they don't have to admit they got the initial call wrong.

I think the sequence of events is:
1. Refs rule down by contact, so play is dead no turnover no automatic review

The End

Unless..... you have a challenge left.

Then
1a. Check if ball is fumbled before down
2a. See if a defensive player clearly has possesion of the ball

[pbmax]

That sounds like a conspiracy theory. I hate this sequence: Well, we blew the call, but we can't correct it because the manner in which we blew it protects us from being shown to be wrong!

I prefer to call it a Hoculi.

[mraynrand]

I think the sequence of events is:
1. Refs rule down by contact, so play is dead no turnover no automatic review

The End

Unless..... you have a challenge left.

No, they can now overturn down by contact if the other team clearly has possesion.

So they can only overturn with a challenge, but the challenge is only allowed if there was a clear call of changed possession. I'd like to restate my conspiracy theory charge, officer.

[mraynrand]

I prefer to call it a Hoculi.

bless you

[ThunderDan]

No, they can now overturn down by contact if the other team clearly has possesion.

So they can only overturn with a challenge, but the challenge is only allowed if there was a clear call of changed possession. I'd like to restate my conspiracy theory charge, officer.

You can challenge any time you want in a game. The challenge, if it shows a fumble, then had to be able to determine clear possession. If there is no clear possession than the ball goes back to the team that fumbled.

[pbmax]

No, they can now overturn down by contact if the other team clearly has possesion. The problem is the scrum at the end of the play negates the clear possesion part of the overturn.

On a similar note, how the hell did we lose the second challenge on the Grahm drop?

Yes, a blown whistle no longer nullifies any potential replay. The defense has to have a clear recovery. I don't know if they told McCarthy that there was no clear recovery or that it didn't matter because he had no more challenges. It looked pretty clear to me that the Packers recovered though. Either way, blown call. I'm just glad it didn't cost us another game.

No, they can now overturn down by contact if the other team clearly has possesion.

But does down by contact with clear recovery qualify for automatic review or must the team have spend a challenge.

[ThunderDan]

But does down by contact with clear recovery qualify for automatic review or must the team have spend a challenge.

After today I think the answer is clearly the later, which I think is technically correct because if the play is down before the fumble there was no turnover to review.

[mraynrand]

You can challenge any time you want in a game. The challenge, if it shows a fumble, then had to be able to determine clear possession. If there is no clear possession than the ball goes back to the team that fumbled.

I didn't mean to say 'allowed' only that in this instance - or anything like it - the lack of clear possession call - even if correct - essentially covers for the blown fumble call. In other words, the call of no clear possession essentially gets the refs off the hook, because it puts the burden on the team to challenge, and if the refs can't make a clear possession call, it's unlikely replay will show anything different. I've had enough.

[ThunderDan]

I didn't mean to say 'allowed' only that in this instance - or anything like it - the lack of clear possession call - even if correct - essentially covers for the blown fumble call. In other words, the call of no clear possession essentially gets the refs off the hook, because it puts the burden on the team to challenge, and if the refs can't make a clear possession call, it's unlikely replay will show anything different. I've had enough.

Yes, I completely agree!

[Pugger]

Had MM not foolishly challenged that play early in game when it was obvious to me we were gonna lose it we would have been able to challenge that last fumble by the Saints. Who is the goofball up there advising MM anyway??