PDA

View Full Version : To Challenge or not To challenge


OneForTheToe
09-23-2007, 05:36 PM
Probably the only bit of controversy that will be seen in the Burgh this week. Should Tomlin have challenged the incomplete pass to the Niner's TE in the second half? One thing is for sure, the Ref's seem to have blown the play.

To me the question comes down to the rules of replay in the NFL. When the ref goes into the replay booth is he restricted by the specific issue at challenge, or can he make a determination based on another issue as long as it is still a reviewable issue? Does anyone know? If the Ref is restricted by the issue challenged, then maybe Tomlin should have challenged. However, if they are not restricted then it would have been useless for Tomlin to challenge the play because the Ref would have already considered all issues regarding that particular play.

Pheww ... did that make any sence?:dang::wave:

Livinginthe past
09-23-2007, 05:51 PM
Probably the only bit of controversy that will be seen in the Burgh this week. Should Tomlin have challenged the incomplete pass to the Niner's TE in the second half? One thing is for sure, the Ref's seem to have blown the play.

To me the question comes down to the rules of replay in the NFL. When the ref goes into the replay booth is he restricted by the specific issue at challenge, or can he make a determination based on another issue as long as it is still a reviewable issue? Does anyone know? If the Ref is restricted by the issue challenged, then maybe Tomlin should have challenged. However, if they are not restricted then it would have been useless for Tomlin to challenge the play because the Ref would have already considered all issues regarding that particular play.

Pheww ... did that make any sence?:dang::wave:

I did happen to see that play.

First up, I think the ball did hit the ground - otherwise I can't see how the ball gained so much 'spring' from the inside of the arm.

As far as challenges go - im pretty sure you only challenge a certain element of the play.

So yes, I think Tomlin could have challenged the fact that the ball hit the ground, though I think it would have been close to impossible to say with any certainty that it didn't - which is what is required to over turn the call.

I happen to think the receiver was actually down - but that rule is open to interpretation it could go either way depending on the ref's mood.

As it happened a 50 yd FG is a (literal) long shot at Heinz - I thought Tomlin made the right call...or non-call.

Haiku_Dirtt
09-23-2007, 06:21 PM
I did happen to see that play.

First up, I think the ball did hit the ground - otherwise I can't see how the ball gained so much 'spring' from the inside of the arm.

As far as challenges go - im pretty sure you only challenge a certain element of the play.

So yes, I think Tomlin could have challenged the fact that the ball hit the ground, though I think it would have been close to impossible to say with any certainty that it didn't - which is what is required to over turn the call.

I happen to think the receiver was actually down - but that rule is open to interpretation it could go either way depending on the ref's mood.

As it happened a 50 yd FG is a (literal) long shot at Heinz - I thought Tomlin made the right call...or non-call.


It was 49 yards -not 50. Your right about the "long shot at Heinz." I may be wrong but no Steeler has kicked one 50 or longer at Heinz. That kick by Reed today would have been good from 60 yards out.

It's the little things and the big things that are going right this season. I'm trying to think what is different this season :scratchchin:

tony hipchest
09-23-2007, 06:24 PM
I did happen to see that play.

First up, I think the ball did hit the ground - otherwise I can't see how the ball gained so much 'spring' from the inside of the arm.

As far as challenges go - im pretty sure you only challenge a certain element of the play.

So yes, I think Tomlin could have challenged the fact that the ball hit the ground, though I think it would have been close to impossible to say with any certainty that it didn't - which is what is required to over turn the call.

I happen to think the receiver was actually down - but that rule is open to interpretation it could go either way depending on the ref's mood.

As it happened a 50 yd FG is a (literal) long shot at Heinz - I thought Tomlin made the right call...or non-call.i guarantee that there will be plenty said about this next week by those who are desperately trying to find a chink in tomlins coaching armor.

the call was f--- up from the beginning. a catch is a catch is a catch. the ball was caught, the ground cannot cause a fumble, and by all means it shouldve been ruled a reception (this is my biggest pet peve in football).

the steelers actually lucked out with a shitty ruling.

for all those who are gonna question tomlins coaching decision: why would he throw a flag and review a play that the refs had just reviewed? they looked at the play, they made their decision. is a second challenge really gonna change what they saw and ruled on?

good job by tomlin not throwing an irrational challenge flag. that is why he is coach and the fans are fans. if any media questions his decision, they are retarded.

fwiw, those are the plays tomlin thrives on to see how his team responds to adversity. the defense responded just like last week when tomlin was questionned for not throwing a flag on a long kick off return.

again, any inevitible article questionning tomlins lack of challenges should be immediately discredtited.

choose youre battles wisely and pick the ones you know you can win.

Haiku_Dirtt
09-23-2007, 06:58 PM
[QUOTE=tony hipchest;298637 why would he throw a flag and review a play that the refs had just reviewed? they looked at the play, they made their decision. is a second challenge really gonna change what they saw and ruled on?[/QUOTE]

That actually happened in a Pac-10 game USC vs. I think Oregon. Carroll threw the flag and won the ruling only to have Belotti throw the flag to have the call re-reversed :dang:.

If someone is looking for a Tomlin mistake so far should use Windex on the mirror before they next look into it.

Dude has a layer of teflon thicker than perhaps even Reagan IMHO.

moedap
09-23-2007, 06:59 PM
I agree with what Tony said!

fansince'76
09-23-2007, 07:01 PM
Bottom line: we won by 21. :coffee:

Steeler in Carolina
09-23-2007, 07:38 PM
I also think the play was a catch and runner was down, however it worked well for me because I have Nedney on my fantasy team.

Tim
09-23-2007, 07:51 PM
The ground can't cause a fumble, that much is true, but it's also true that you have to establish that you have possession for it to be ruled a catch.

The instant he had the ball he got crushed and upended, when he came down the ball came out. I'm not sure how he could have had possession of the ball.

tony hipchest
09-23-2007, 08:17 PM
The ground can't cause a fumble, that much is true, but it's also true that you have to establish that you have possession for it to be ruled a catch.

The instant he had the ball he got crushed and upended, when he came down the ball came out. I'm not sure how he could have had possession of the ball.
he had 2 feet down before he was flipped.... = a catch (possession).

today was another fine example of the refs not being perfect.

MACH1
09-23-2007, 08:40 PM
he had 2 feet down before he was flipped.... = a catch (possession).

today was another fine example of the refs not being perfect.

But did he make a football move? :wink02:

I honestly think it was a catch and down by contact. It was a good non-call by Tomlin. IMO

Sith Lord
09-23-2007, 08:51 PM
Mike Tomlin didn't challenge last weeks return when the returners' foot stepped out of bounds. Lost the shutout, no biggie.

Mike Tomlin didnt challenge the incomplete when the ball clearly never hit the ground and popped up into Ryan Clark's hands for the pick. Steelers won big, no biggie.

When will his poor decision making on (key) challenges cost the steelers a regular season game? A playoff game? It's only a matter of time.

Discuss.

MACH1
09-23-2007, 08:58 PM
It was a catch and down by contact. IMO After all he did have two feet down and possession then the ground can't cause a fumble.

Tomlin made a good non call on that one.

jjpro11
09-23-2007, 08:59 PM
the guys in the booth should have been screaming in his ear to challenge... thats what they're payed for.

SteelersMongol
09-23-2007, 09:05 PM
I thought Coach should've challenged the ruling made on that fumble caused by Polamalu's hit. :huh:

SteelCurtain
09-23-2007, 09:12 PM
first off i'd like to say that was THE WORST call after a challenge i have ever seen...the man clearly caught the ball and was down by contact. that is what it should have been. how they came to the conclusion it wasn't a catch is beyond me. if it wasn't caught by him then it should have been an interception, because you can clearly see that the ball never touched the ground. what was the logic behind the ref saying "he barely got the second foot down," because if it is down...it is down. it doesn't matter if it is barely down or not.... after that ruling tomlin should have challenged that the ball touched the ground, therefore making it an interception

stillers4me
09-23-2007, 09:14 PM
The way I saw it, the league owes us at least two apologies tomorrow. It's now known as the Polamalu Rule.

Dynasty
09-23-2007, 09:41 PM
Well on that return last week, there was not a whole lot they could do about it. When they realized that he had stepped out of bounds, the bills had already snapped it.

polamalufan43
09-23-2007, 09:42 PM
The way I saw it, the league owes us at least two apologies tomorrow. It's now known as the Polamalu Rule.

It was down, and it was caught. There's only two things it could have been, a complete pass or an interception.

I invoke the right of the Polamalu Rule, :old:

Well on that return last week, there was not a whole lot they could do about it. When they realized that he had stepped out of bounds, the bills had already snapped it.

True, although I doubt someone up there did not know about it...

~PF43:tt02:

lilyoder6
09-23-2007, 09:47 PM
maybe thats y he didn't challenge th eplays since we are alrdy gonna win the game y waste time to overturn a call.. but i think tomlin is a very smart person and will challenge when needed.

Haiku_Dirtt
09-23-2007, 10:18 PM
It was a catch and down by contact. IMO After all he did have two feet down and possession then the ground can't cause a fumble.

Tomlin made a good non call on that one.

My opinion too. The ground can't cause a fumble after what was clearly contact. Period. I'm somewhat surprised by a debate about it.

Considering I thought the odds were more likely in favor of a 6-10 record rather than a 10-6 record...How perfect are things going right now?

97-26 in scoring and +3 in turnovers/takeaways in your first three games in the NFL. Why Tomlin is getting any criticism after that is plain nuts.

Sharkissle29
09-23-2007, 10:49 PM
it looks like at an angle that the nose of the ball hit the ground which popped it up...im guessing thats what the referees saw.

tony hipchest
09-23-2007, 11:05 PM
Discuss.i knew it was just a matter of time before people started bitching and whining about this.

heres a clue:

just because you challenge a play doesnt mean the refs will automatically overturn it, ESPECIALLY if its a play they just spent 5 minutes reviewing.

it was a catch that was incorrectly called incomplete and tomlin was smart enough to leave "well enough" alone.

get over it people.

Preacher
09-23-2007, 11:06 PM
REFEREE GERALD AUSTIN
Why was the call made the way it was made?
Gerald Austin: He didn?t complete the pass as a catch. You have to get two feet clearly down and make another football move. If in the process of making the catch, he gets hit and goes to the ground, then he has to hold on. When he hit the ground and the ball hit the ground, it popped out.
Did he have one foot on the ground?
Gerald Austin: He had one foot and a toe on the other one.
That?s not considered two feet?
Gerald Austin: You have to be clearly down, and if he goes to the ground, he has to maintain control of the ball. He went to the ground and didn?t do anything other than that because as soon as that second toe hit, he gets hit and boom down he goes and hits on the elbow, the ball hits and pops up. That is the rule of the process of the game, two feet clearly down and if he goes to the ground he has to hold it.


So the call makes sense... and with that, Tomlin's choice not to challenge it makes sense as well.

Petesburgh66
09-23-2007, 11:12 PM
Regardless of the feet, Davis didn't make a football move. Unless you consider Troy destroying him as being apart of a football move. :tt02:

tony hipchest
09-23-2007, 11:16 PM
You have to get two feet clearly down and make another football move. the most bogus "rule" in football EVER!

i aknowledge that the rules today favor the offense but way too many great catches are wiped out thanks to a referees discretion. anybody remember troy polamalus interception against the colts in the playoffs 2 years ago?

with this being said, tomlin made the right call not to challenge. pick your battles and choose them wisely.

its simple. the refs werent gonna overturn what they had just spent 5 minutes under the hood to overturn.

Preacher
09-23-2007, 11:18 PM
I put the refs answer in another thread. Maybe it should have gone here... but his answer made a lot of sense.

It isn't just having to feet down that makes it a catch, it is two feet down, and a football move. Two feet down is ONLY when going out of bounds. He was not able to make a football move. He got hit and flipped over. At that point, the question is, did he keep possession when he hit the ground, or did he lose possession and thus the ball was incomplete.

We all know the answer to that one... and that is why it was called an incomplete pass.

Haiku_Dirtt
09-23-2007, 11:21 PM
Wait. So now an elbow is an extension or rather conduit for the ball to the ground?

I'm clearly confused now so I need to see the play again. Did the ball hit the ground or not? I get the two feet rule which is fair.

fansince'76
09-23-2007, 11:24 PM
When will his poor decision making on (key) challenges cost the steelers a regular season game? A playoff game? It's only a matter of time.

Tell you what - while you fret away about something that hasn't happened, I'll savor another 20+ point win and the first 3-0 start for the team in 15 years. OK? :coffee:

Haiku_Dirtt
09-23-2007, 11:24 PM
Unless you consider Troy destroying him as being apart of a football move. :tt02:

:jawdrop: Teams work so hard to avoid him that when he gets his he ain't holdin' back.

Petesburgh66
09-23-2007, 11:26 PM
I agree, it's a dumb rule as well. I am not in favour of anything in which involves the refs discretion. The whole idea of making a football move is subjective to each ref interpretation to begin with. But it is what it is for now.

MACH1
09-23-2007, 11:28 PM
Hmmm....What about all the tip-toe catches on the sidelines. Do they not count on the assumption that a toe is not a whole foot ?

stlrtruck
09-23-2007, 11:35 PM
Regardles of how the calls should have been made, the fact of the matter is that the ref's made some bad calls. We as Steelers fans have seen that same process work against us.

I'm glad Tomlin didn't challenge those plays. I'm sure that he'll make the right call on a challenge when he needs to do so. Sometimes all it takes is an overturned call or a call-stands type play to give the other team a little swing and then we're battling things out again.

Tomlin gives a calm feeling about his presence on the sidelines. I get the feeling he knows about the challenges and that he should have or could have challenged but that he wants to send a different message to his players. Something to the affect of, "This is football and you need to play it on the field, not in the replay booth! - NOW GO GET ME THE FOOTBALL!"

I'm liking it - A LOT!

tony hipchest
09-23-2007, 11:49 PM
It isn't just having to feet down that makes it a catch, it is two feet down, and a football move. Two feet down is ONLY when going out of bounds. He was not able to make a football move. He got hit and flipped over. At that point, the question is, did he keep possession when he hit the ground, or did he lose possession and thus the ball was incomplete.

We all know the answer to that one... and that is why it was called an incomplete pass.
i'll say it again. a catch is a catch is a catch.

to have 3 different rules for a catch being caught in the field of play, along the sidelines, and in the endzone is simply retarded.

a catch is a catch is a catch.

a "football move"???????

and here i thought catching the freaking ball "was a "football move" all along. i guess i was wrong.

12+88=6
09-24-2007, 12:00 AM
Hmmm....What about all the tip-toe catches on the sidelines. Do they not count on the assumption that a toe is not a whole foot ?


if a wr catches a pass at the sideline and just taps his toes he's inbounds.

but if he's falling down and hits the ground out of bounds and the ball pops out it's an incomplete pass even though he was in when he caught it. he has to maintain control when he hits the ground.

so the same thing goes for in the middle of the field. i just didn't see where the ball hit the ground at all on that play. maybe the ref had another angle.

SteelerManiacXLII
09-24-2007, 12:27 AM
Game over... Steelers win... Case closed!
:blah::tt02::tt02::tt02::cheers:

Preacher
09-24-2007, 12:58 AM
if a wr catches a pass at the sideline and just taps his toes he's inbounds.

but if he's falling down and hits the ground out of bounds and the ball pops out it's an incomplete pass even though he was in when he caught it. he has to maintain control when he hits the ground.

so the same thing goes for in the middle of the field. i just didn't see where the ball hit the ground at all on that play. maybe the ref had another angle.

I agree...

and...

Game over... Steelers win... Case closed!



I absolutely agree

Preacher
09-24-2007, 12:59 AM
i'll say it again. a catch is a catch is a catch.

to have 3 different rules for a catch being caught in the field of play, along the sidelines, and in the endzone is simply retarded.

a catch is a catch is a catch.

a "football move"???????

and here i thought catching the freaking ball "was a "football move" all along. i guess i was wrong.

Tony... Yeah... Don't you feel like the game is being ran by a bunch of lawyers now?

Sith Lord
09-24-2007, 03:19 AM
Tell you what - while you fret away about something that hasn't happened, I'll savor another 20+ point win and the first 3-0 start for the team in 15 years. OK? :coffee:

not fretting....just posting. If we dont post we dont have a message board. I'm just saying so far this is a weakness. Its inevitable. Tomlin brings his "A" game monday-sat. Now he has to bring it on Sunday. Listen, I like him and know he's a rookie coach. I hope I'm wrong.

You "GO" Mike Tomlin!!!

SteelFist
09-24-2007, 11:04 AM
not fretting....just posting. If we dont post we dont have a message board. I'm just saying so far this is a weakness. Its inevitable. Tomlin brings his "A" game monday-sat. Now he has to bring it on Sunday. Listen, I like him and know he's a rookie coach. I hope I'm wrong.

You "GO" Mike Tomlin!!!


"At an End, your rule is......And not short enough it was." LOL

:duel:

Jman
09-24-2007, 11:16 AM
This was not a bad call by the refs. Davis caught the ball. A catch is a catch is a catch. He did [i]not[/] get two feet down when he got popped. He went up, ball came down and hit the ground. Incomplete pass. It's a good call. The result? A catch is a catch, but this was not a catch.

I'm not here to argue either, just putting my two cents in.