Dumb challenge. Denver escapes a big disaster.

[WhiteBus]

2:30 left in the game, 3rd and 6 on the 14. Brady to Amendola. Passed ruled incomplete after Amendola juggles and ball comes free. Fourth down right? No Denver challenges the incomplete pass. WHAT???

Denver stops them on the play and they want it overturned?? They challenge the play in hopes of getting the ball on the fumble. The only problem was that on the replay it clearly shows that Amendola's knee was down before the ball comes free.
The Denver Broncos could have given NE a first down inside the 5 if the play was overturned. WTF were the thinking?

 

[rockyrutgers]

Thought he might have fumbled the ball. A Denver linebacker or defensive back had picked the ball up

 

[WhiteBus]

Thought he might have fumbled the ball. A Denver linebacker or defensive back had picked the ball up

Yes but Amendola's knee was down first before the fumble. So Denver's challenge of an incomplete pass would have given NE the ball!
That would have been an epic failure of a stupid challenge.

 

[vkj91]

yea, it was obvious it wasn't a fumble. Was thinking the best outcome for Denver is exactly what they have now which is 4th down.

 

[rockyrutgers]

I thought it was a completed pass, bit then remembered that was like Beckham catch that got overturned

 

[RUinOhio]

that's what I thought live...got distracted by the kids and had to rewind to see why it was 4th down...

I thought it was a completed pass, bit then remembered that was like Beckham catch that got overturned

 

[Yeah Baby]

The knee wasn't clearly down White Bus. I thought the same thing at first but from one angle it shows it was about to touch and from the other it shows him being whipped around so it may or may not have touched. PLUS, he was bobbling the ball around the time it looked like the knee was hitting so I think no way can they rule that a complete pass IMO.

Also, I think when a challenge is made they don't overturn for the other team or some other possibility. I think the challenge is specific. I'm not sure but there has to be a rule in place for that.For example, when Freeney recovered the backward pass early in the game you can see the referee calling the pass incomplete. He probably blew the whistle too. That challenge led to 6 pts that perhaps New England should not get if they are allowed to look at everything. I think the challenge was clearly on on the spot of the ball and not the ref blowing the whistle so New England gets the ball. Even though the RU guy recovered I thought that was a bad reversal.

 

[robcac26]

This reminds me of that Auburn and Alabama game a couple years ago when the game was going to go to overtime but Saban challenged a play saying that his player went out of bounds with time left on the clock so that they should be able to kick a field goal. He won the challenge, they got to line up for the field goal, the kick was short, and an Auburn player returned it all the way down the field for the winning touchdown.

 

[RUinOhio]

pretty sure on a challenge they review everything on the play.. in the case of Freeney, the whistle blew so the ball can't be advanced but clearly a recovery so the recovering team is awarded the ball at the spot of the recovery...

 

[Yeah Baby]

pretty sure on a challenge they review everything on the play.. in the case of Freeney, the whistle blew so the ball can't be advanced but clearly a recovery so the recovering team is awarded the ball at the spot of the recovery...

I get what you are saying but if the whistle blew and the RB did not try to recover I feel that leaves room for interpretation. The RB pulled up and did not try to recover the ball and you can see the Ref waving incomplete right next to him. I still think that was a tough call but happy for Freeney.

 

[WhiteBus]

The knee wasn't clearly down White Bus. I thought the same thing at first but from one angle it shows it was about to touch and from the other it shows him being whipped around so it may or may not have touched. PLUS, he was bobbling the ball around the time it looked like the knee was hitting so I think no way can they rule that a complete pass IMO.

Also, I think when a challenge is made they don't overturn for the other team or some other possibility. I think the challenge is specific. I'm not sure but there has to be a rule in place for that.For example, when Freeney recovered the backward pass early in the game you can see the referee calling the pass incomplete. He probably blew the whistle too. That challenge led to 6 pts that perhaps New England should not get if they are allowed to look at everything. I think the challenge was clearly on on the spot of the ball and not the ref blowing the whistle so New England gets the ball. Even though the RU guy recovered I thought that was a bad reversal.

His knee is 100% down, then he is rolled over and the ball comes out. with most of his body off the ground as the ball starts to come out. So if the call of incomplete catch is overturned the ball is NE's.

There is no replay rule for saving a coach for making a dumb challenge. The replay refs can't say yes it was a catch and ignore the fact that he was already down and mysteriously give the ball to Denver.

 

[RUBigFrank]

In watching the replay - I thought it was legitimately a catch and his knee was down.

 

[Randal7]

Challange? Really? The spelling on this forum is just horrendous. And I'm not one to call this out, but that level of misspelling does truly make a person look like an idiot.

 

[Yeah Baby]

His knee is 100% down, then he is rolled over and the ball comes out. with most of his body off the ground as the ball starts to come out. So if the call of incomplete catch is overturned the ball is NE's.

There is no replay rule for saving a coach for making a dumb challenge. The replay refs can't say yes it was a catch and ignore the fact that he was already down and mysteriously give the ball to Denver.

Disagree. I never saw the knee touch on the replays and I did see the ball moving. Good call by the refs to keep it incomplete 100%. Probably not a great idea to challenge but it did not cost them the game. I have NEVER seen a play challenged and then the refs say "hey you know what, that was a completeion." Never.

 

[jerzey devil]

The knee wasn't clearly down White Bus. I thought the same thing at first but from one angle it shows it was about to touch and from the other it shows him being whipped around so it may or may not have touched. PLUS, he was bobbling the ball around the time it looked like the knee was hitting so I think no way can they rule that a complete pass IMO.

Also, I think when a challenge is made they don't overturn for the other team or some other possibility. I think the challenge is specific. I'm not sure but there has to be a rule in place for that.For example, when Freeney recovered the backward pass early in the game you can see the referee calling the pass incomplete. He probably blew the whistle too. That challenge led to 6 pts that perhaps New England should not get if they are allowed to look at everything. I think the challenge was clearly on on the spot of the ball and not the ref blowing the whistle so New England gets the ball. Even though the RU guy recovered I thought that was a bad reversal.

The rule is if that there is an immediate clear recovery (which there was) even if the whistle is blown, the ball is awarded to the recovering team...

 

[WhiteBus]

Disagree. I never saw the knee touch on the replays and I did see the ball moving. Good call by the refs to keep it incomplete 100%. Probably not a great idea to challenge but it did not cost them the game. I have NEVER seen a play challenged and then the refs say "hey you know what, that was a completeion." Never.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/20160...ameinfo|contentId:0ap3000000627711&tab=videos

Play begins at the 5:38 mark of the video. Not only is his right knee down his entire lower leg is on the ground before he is rolled over and the ball comes out.

 

[RUinOhio]

if the RB didn't try for the ball because he saw the ref's reaction, then yeah it's a bad reversal....

I get what you are saying but if the whistle blew and the RB did not try to recover I feel that leaves room for interpretation. The RB pulled up and did not try to recover the ball and you can see the Ref waving incomplete right next to him. I still think that was a tough call but happy for Freeney.

 

[WhiteBus]

The rule is if that there is an immediate clear recovery (which there was) even if the whistle is blown, the ball is awarded to the recovering team...

He was already down. There would have been no recovery. Ball is dead if ruled a catch. NE would have got a first down near the 5.

 

[RUinOhio]

doubt it was intentional he spelled it correctly during the actual post, but rediculous is a far worse misspelling imo....lol

Challange? Really? The spelling on this forum is just horrendous. And I'm not one to call this out, but that level of misspelling does truly make a person look like an idiot.

 

[WhiteBus]

Challange? Really? The spelling on this forum is just horrendous. And I'm not one to call this out, but that level of misspelling does truly make a person look like an idiot.

Apparently you are!

 

[jerzey devil]

Disagree. I never saw the knee touch on the replays and I did see the ball moving. Good call by the refs to keep it incomplete 100%. Probably not a great idea to challenge but it did not cost them the game. I have NEVER seen a play challenged and then the refs say "hey you know what, that was a completeion." Never.

Don't know what replays you were looking at as his knee clearly hit the ground...But that's not the point of what white bus is saying...I thought it was a horrible challenge also as there was a lot better chance of it being ruled a completion and down by contact rather than completion and fumble....Never mind the fact that it clearly was incomplete after watching replays...That's just a play where you kep that challenge flag in your pocket and play 4th down!!

 

[jerzey devil]

He was already down. There would have been no recovery. Ball is dead if ruled a catch. NE would have got a first down near the 5.

was talking about the lateral there that Freeny recovered, not the Challenge play in the 4th qtr

 

[Yeah Baby]

Don't know what replays you were looking at as his knee clearly hit the ground...But that's not the point of what white bus is saying...I thought it was a horrible challenge also as there was a lot better chance of it being ruled a completion and down by contact rather than completion and fumble....Never mind the fact that it clearly was incomplete after watching replays...That's just a play where you kep that challenge flag in your pocket and play 4th down!!

Unless one of you can give me an example of this ever happening I cannot agree this was a dumb challenge (though I would not have made it). He was bobbling the ball on the one the angle where his knee looks like it touched down. From another angle it looks like it did not touch down which means it is inconclusive.

But again, that is not the point. Please give me evidence where a coach challenged and they found something completely different that worked against the coach who challenged. I just do not think that has ever happened nor would it ever happen. And even if was possible this could happen, this was inconclusive at best. They got the call right 100%. Incomplete and no fumble.

 

[Yeah Baby]

The rule is if that there is an immediate clear recovery (which there was) even if the whistle is blown, the ball is awarded to the recovering team...

Well there is a rule that needs to be considered. If the whistle blows ball should be dead. That was the rule for many years but replay is definitely changing the game. So if Hillman recovers the fumble and Freeney hits him he gets 15 yards for not playing the whistle but if Hillman does play the whistle he gets a turnover. Bad rule if that is in fact the rule.

 

[WhiteBus]

Unless one of you can give me an example of this ever happening I cannot agree this was a dumb challenge (though I would not have made it). He was bobbling the ball on the one the angle where his knee looks like it touched down. From another angle it looks like it did not touch down which means it is inconclusive.

But again, that is not the point. Please give me evidence where a coach challenged and they found something completely different that worked against the coach who challenged. I just do not think that has ever happened nor would it ever happen. And even if was possible this could happen, this was inconclusive at best. They got the call right 100%. Incomplete and no fumble.

I can't give you an example of a coach making such a dumb challenge. Has any other head coach asked for a challenge when his defense made a stop with an incompletion and than asked for it to be ruled a catch?
There have been many challenges where a coach asked for a review, especially on a ball spot, win the challenge but still not gain the yardage needed for a first down. I've seen that more than a few times.

Because the refs on the field ruled on incomplete pass it is then up to replay booth to determine not only if it was a catch but where the player was down. In some cases how much time on the clock. If that had been ruled a catch the replay booth would also have determined that Amendola was down by contact at about the 6. After that point the play is dead. The fact that the ball game out after down by contact is meaningless.

 

[jerzey devil]

Unless one of you can give me an example of this ever happening I cannot agree this was a dumb challenge (though I would not have made it). He was bobbling the ball on the one the angle where his knee looks like it touched down. From another angle it looks like it did not touch down which means it is inconclusive.

But again, that is not the point. Please give me evidence where a coach challenged and they found something completely different that worked against the coach who challenged. I just do not think that has ever happened nor would it ever happen. And even if was possible this could happen, this was inconclusive at best. They got the call right 100%. Incomplete and no fumble.

Were talking about hypotheticals here, not about what actually happened...Of all the things that could've happened with the replay challenge, the least likely outcome would've been a "catch and fumble" making it Denver ball...The most likely outcome with a "call reversal" would have been "catch with down by contact"

So of the 3 possible outcomes of the play..Most likely is what did happen "incomplete pass" 2nd most likely would have been "completion down by contact"...and the least likely "completion, fumble recovery Denver" So, still don't think that's a bad challenge?

 

[jerzey devil]

Well there is a rule that needs to be considered. If the whistle blows ball should be dead. That was the rule for many years but replay is definitely changing the game. So if Hillman recovers the fumble and Freeney hits him he gets 15 yards for not playing the whistle but if Hillman does play the whistle he gets a turnover. Bad rule if that is in fact the rule.

what part of "immediate, clear recovery" are you not understanding? I just rewatched the replay...I paused it as soon as I heard the whistle being blown...Freeny had moved to the ball, and was bent down with the ball coming into his hands, Hillman made no attempt whatsoever to recover the ball..By rule you have an immediate clear recovery...

 

[Yeah Baby]

It never would have been called complete and first down. I just don't think the refs would ever have the balls to make a call like that. 0% chance. If that ever happened I would be shocked. Who would EVER challenge a close call in the future? No way that gets changed to a completion on the Denver challenge.

Without the benefit of a replay it looked like a decent idea to challenge. When I saw the replay I thought there was very little chance he would win his challenge. So it was not a good challenge since he lost a timeout.

 

[Yeah Baby]

what part of "immediate, clear recovery" are you not understanding? I just rewatched the replay...I paused it as soon as I heard the whistle being blown...Freeny had moved to the ball, and was bent down with the ball coming into his hands, Hillman made no attempt whatsoever to recover the ball..By rule you have an immediate clear recovery...

So you're a dick but that's okay I will play along. My opinion is Hillman did not make an attempt to recover because the whistle blew. Chill.

I am not home watching the replays so my memory is not going to be anywhere near what you are watching. I only watched the game live and saw those replays.

 

[WhiteBus]

It never would have been called complete and first down. I just don't think the refs would ever have the balls to make a call like that. 0% chance. If that ever happened I would be shocked. Who would EVER challenge a close call in the future? No way that gets changed to a completion on the Denver challenge.

Without the benefit of a replay it looked like a decent idea to challenge. When I saw the replay I thought there was very little chance he would win his challenge. So it was not a good challenge since he lost a timeout.

So now you're going the conspiracy theory that replay refs need to protect head coaches who make dumb challenges?
The reply refs called it an incomplete pass because it wasn't a catch, plain and simple.

However, the potential for a disastrous result for Denver was there for making such a dumb challenge. That's my point.

There were at least 2 replays of the catch before and plenty of time for his staff to review it. Someone on his staff gave him terrible advice. The Patriots were about to line up for 4th down.

 

[Yeah Baby]

So now you're going the conspiracy theory that replay refs need to protect head coaches who make dumb challenges?
The reply refs called it an incomplete pass because it wasn't a catch, plain and simple.

However, the potential for a disastrous result for Denver was there for making such a dumb challenge. That's my point.

There were at least 2 replays of the catch before and plenty of time for his staff to review it. Someone on his staff gave him terrible advice. The Patriots were about to line up for 4th down.

I get what you are saying and I happen to disagree 100%. It's not like they get 10 minutes to review replays like we do. Coaches take a chance and the refs say they are right or wrong on their specific challenge. What about number 76 holding on the play? Should they review that too? Let's be reasonable.

 

[WhiteBus]

I get what you are saying and I happen to disagree 100%. It's not like they get 10 minutes to review replays like we do. Coaches take a chance and the refs say they are right or wrong on their specific challenge. What about number 76 holding on the play? Should they review that too? Let's be reasonable.

Holding isn't reviewable for one and the person who makes the challenge has to say what he is challenging. The Broncos were challenging the ruling of an incomplete catch. Had the Broncos had been right they would have given the Patriots a first down on the 6 yard line. I don't know what is missing that you can't understand.

There was no fumble on the play because the receiver was down by contact. So if it were ruled a catch the only result would have been 1st down NE.

 

[Yeah Baby]

Denver challenged that he fumbled the ball. I do hear what you are saying when you word it that way but give me just one example where that has ever happened or would ever happen. This is my last post unless you can show me a video of an example in which case I will say you were right my fellow RU fan. I am not afraid to say you were right, I just don't think that is the case. I need video proof or a real article, No wiki.

 

[WhiteBus]

Denver challenged that he fumbled the ball. I do hear what you are saying when you word it that way but give me just one example where that has ever happened or would ever happen. This is my last post unless you can show me a video of an example in which case I will say you were right my fellow RU fan. I am not afraid to say you were right, I just don't think that is the case. I need video proof or a real article, No wiki.

No this is where you are 100% wrong. Go to the link and listen to the announcers. Denver challenged that it was was an incomplete pass.

 

[Caliknight]

Has that ever happened? One team challenges the call, and the call is reversed to actually benefit the other team in a non neutral way, such as this? Not sure I am explaining myself very well.

Watching the replay, I thought it was a catch and non fumble. I noticed that the didn't replay that one very much, lol...

 

[BuckRU]

I was thinking the same thing. I thought for sure that it was going to result in a first down for New England.

 

[jerzey devil]

So you're a dick but that's okay I will play along. My opinion is Hillman did not make an attempt to recover because the whistle blew. Chill.

I am not home watching the replays so my memory is not going to be anywhere near what you are watching. I only watched the game live and saw those replays.

So now you want to resort to calling me names? very classy dude... What is it with people on message boards that have to resort to calling people names and getting all pissy when things don't go their way...Whatever, I'm done with this discussion...

 

[Yeah Baby]

Has that ever happened? One team challenges the call, and the call is reversed to actually benefit the other team in a non neutral way, such as this? Not sure I am explaining myself very well.

Watching the replay, I thought it was a catch and non fumble. I noticed that the didn't replay that one very much, lol...

That's what I'm asking too? I cannot see that ever happening. That is why it's not a bad challenge. If it could be called a completion then they would not have challenged.

 

[Yeah Baby]

So now you want to resort to calling me names? very classy dude... What is it with people on message boards that have to resort to calling people names and getting all pissy when things don't go their way...Whatever, I'm done with this discussion...

Sorry you are not a Dick. You just made a Dicky comment above. I forgave you so you should be able to move past this too. It has nothing to do with right or wrong. You were talking down to me which is Dicky. I forgive you.

 

[WhiteBus]

Has that ever happened? One team challenges the call, and the call is reversed to actually benefit the other team in a non neutral way, such as this? Not sure I am explaining myself very well.

Watching the replay, I thought it was a catch and non fumble. I noticed that the didn't replay that one very much, lol...

Not on a replay but there was a game ending kick attem

That's what I'm asking too? I cannot see that ever happening. That is why it's not a bad challenge. If it could be called a completion then they would not have challenged.

Dude it a terrible challenge. THATS the point.
For it to be a fumble it has to be a completion! Do you understand the rules at all?