PDA

View Full Version : Refs blew the call


DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 09:22 AM
About Ryan Moats' fumble. Forget about not calling a quick play at the 2-minute warning. There wasn't a single person in that stadium that thought that was a fumble until the TV timeout at the 2-minute warning and everyone got to look at it again. (They should totally change that rule, by the way. A TV timeout should NOT give teams a chance to review a call and throw a red flag. What BS that is. But I digress.) This thread is about the call from a RULES perspective only, not about the game.

There's no doubt that Moats fumbled the ball before he hit the ground. However, the defense player that tackled him was out of bounds when Moats lost control. Therefore, the players should be ruled out of bounds when the ball was fumbled. Texans retain possession.

On replay with sound, the whistle was blown BEFORE the ball was recovered. Play is dead, Texans retain possession.

IF you say that he fumbled before anyone went out of bounds, then there's the question of the Colts player that WAS out of bounds and came back in to pick up the loose ball. I don't know whether or not an OOB player can come back in to recover a loose ball. Even the refs had to talk that over. Let's assume they ARE allowed to. The explanation by the referee was ridiculous. He claimed that the player did NOT re-establish himself in the field of play, and therefore ILLEGALLY touched the ball while it was sitting on the goal line. If you illegally touch a ball, it should automatically be ruled DEAD. Texans retain possession.

Finally, if you allow the fact that the tackling player was NOT out of bounds and that the recovering player did NOT illegally touch the ball, then that means Moats DID fumble and the recovering player LEGALLY picked up the fumble. THEN HE STEPPED OUT OF BOUNDS AT THE SIX INCH LINE!!!! Colts should get possession at the six-inch line.

I was just blown AWAY at the final outcome of the replay review. Not only did they wrongly award the Colts the ball, but THEY GAVE THEM A TOUCHBACK!!

Completely blown call, even with a long replay review. I can't wait to see what officiating VP Mike Pereira has to say about this one on NFL Total Access this week.

BrandonLwowski
11-09-2009, 09:25 AM
About Ryan Moats' fumble. Forget about not calling a quick play at the 2-minute warning. There wasn't a single person in that stadium that thought that was a fumble until the TV timeout at the 2-minute warning and everyone got to look at it again. (They should totally change that rule, by the way. A TV timeout should NOT give teams a chance to review a call and throw a red flag. What BS that is. But I digress.) This thread is about the call from a RULES perspective only, not about the game.

There's no doubt that Moats fumbled the ball before he hit the ground. However, the defense player that tackled him was out of bounds when Moats lost control. Therefore, the players should be ruled out of bounds when the ball was fumbled. Texans retain possession.

IF you say that he fumbled before anyone went out of bounds, then there's the question of the Colts player that WAS out of bounds and came back in to pick up the loose ball. I don't know whether or not an OOB player can come back in to recover a loose ball. Even the refs had to talk that over. Let's assume they ARE allowed to. The explanation by the referee was ridiculous. He claimed that the player did NOT re-establish himself in the field of play, and therefore ILLEGALLY touched the ball while it was sitting on the goal line. If you illegally touch a ball, it should automatically be ruled DEAD. Texans retain possession.

Finally, if you allow the fact that the tackling player was NOT out of bounds and that the recovering player did NOT illegally touch the ball, then that means Moats DID fumble and the recovering player LEGALLY picked up the fumble. THEN HE STEPPED OUT OF BOUNDS AT THE SIX INCH LINE!!!! Colts should get possession at the six-inch line.

I was just blown AWAY at the final outcome of the replay review. Not only did they wrongly award the Colts the ball, but THEY GAVE THEM A TOUCHBACK!!

Completely blown call, even with a long replay review. I can't wait to see what officiating VP Mike Pereira has to say about this one on NFL Total Access this week.




The call was right...the refs made the right call...the only thing that i put into question is i thought if u fumble, but ruled down and the ball is blown dead before anyone picks it up it is not a challangeable play?

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 09:29 AM
The call was right...the refs made the right call...the only thing that i put into question is i thought if u fumble, but ruled down and the ball is blown dead before anyone picks it up it is not a challangeable play?

I had forgotten that point, but added it in my edit. No way did the refs get that call right. Per his explanation, the ball was touched illegally. That's a dead ball. If it was touched legally, then he picked it up and ran it six inches, then out of bounds. That call was NOT correct.

GlassHalfFull
11-09-2009, 09:29 AM
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66740

Already discussed.

Pantherstang84
11-09-2009, 09:30 AM
About Ryan Moats' fumble. Forget about not calling a quick play at the 2-minute warning. There wasn't a single person in that stadium that thought that was a fumble until the TV timeout at the 2-minute warning and everyone got to look at it again. (They should totally change that rule, by the way. A TV timeout should NOT give teams a chance to review a call and throw a red flag. What BS that is. But I digress.) This thread is about the call from a RULES perspective only, not about the game.

There's no doubt that Moats fumbled the ball before he hit the ground. However, the defense player that tackled him was out of bounds when Moats lost control. Therefore, the players should be ruled out of bounds when the ball was fumbled. Texans retain possession.

On replay with sound, the whistle was blown BEFORE the ball was recovered. Play is dead, Texans retain possession.

IF you say that he fumbled before anyone went out of bounds, then there's the question of the Colts player that WAS out of bounds and came back in to pick up the loose ball. I don't know whether or not an OOB player can come back in to recover a loose ball. Even the refs had to talk that over. Let's assume they ARE allowed to. The explanation by the referee was ridiculous. He claimed that the player did NOT re-establish himself in the field of play, and therefore ILLEGALLY touched the ball while it was sitting on the goal line. If you illegally touch a ball, it should automatically be ruled DEAD. Texans retain possession.

Finally, if you allow the fact that the tackling player was NOT out of bounds and that the recovering player did NOT illegally touch the ball, then that means Moats DID fumble and the recovering player LEGALLY picked up the fumble. THEN HE STEPPED OUT OF BOUNDS AT THE SIX INCH LINE!!!! Colts should get possession at the six-inch line.

I was just blown AWAY at the final outcome of the replay review. Not only did they wrongly award the Colts the ball, but THEY GAVE THEM A TOUCHBACK!!

Completely blown call, even with a long replay review. I can't wait to see what officiating VP Mike Pereira has to say about this one on NFL Total Access this week.

It won't be on there. Don't even look for it.

dinkatoid
11-09-2009, 09:31 AM
I thought the Chargers/Broncos game in week 2 of last season established that if the whistle was blown, the play was dead. Cutler lost the ball and it was ruled (incorrectly) as an incomplete pass instead of a fumble, but the whistle blew the play dead and the recovery by the Chargers was not legal cause the play was over. I believe that you are correct, and they ruled that the challege would do no good because the play had been whistled dead.

Therefor, if the whistle was blown before the Colts picked up the ball, the ruling on the field would have to stand. HOWEVER, I do believe this was looked at in the offseason so they could make a change to it, I just do not remember if any change was made and if it was, what change was made.

hollywood_texan
11-09-2009, 09:33 AM
I thought the Chargers/Broncos game in week 2 of last season established that if the whistle was blown, the play was dead. Cutler lost the ball and it was ruled (incorrectly) as an incomplete pass instead of a fumble, but the whistle blew the play dead and the recovery by the Chargers was not legal cause the play was over. I believe that you are correct, and they ruled that the challege would do no good because the play had been whistled dead.

Therefor, if the whistle was blown before the Colts picked up the ball, the ruling on the field would have to stand. HOWEVER, I do believe this was looked at in the offseason so they could make a change to it, I just do not remember if any change was made and if it was, what change was made.

They changed the rule.

BrandonLwowski
11-09-2009, 09:36 AM
what did they change the rule to?

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 10:05 AM
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66740

Already discussed.

that thread turned into the ref calls in general, and ONLY the fact that he was out of bounds. I was expanding it. Plus that thread didn't show up for some reason when I first posted.

Hervoyel
11-09-2009, 10:10 AM
Nothing changes yesterdays outcome. I wish everyone would just drop it. It's just undignified to keep complaining about this. I don't see a bunch of threads appear when a blown call benefits us (and I wouldn't expect to) so come on guys, take your medicine.

gtexan02
11-09-2009, 10:12 AM
It wasn't a tv timeout, it was the 2 minute warning

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 10:25 AM
Nothing changes yesterdays outcome. I wish everyone would just drop it. It's just undignified to keep complaining about this. I don't see a bunch of threads appear when a blown call benefits us (and I wouldn't expect to) so come on guys, take your medicine.

This thread isn't to complain about the call's impact on the game. We recovered from it and took the lead, so I'm over it. It's about questioning what the game rules are and how this call came about. Facts here, not opinion.

Jewel
11-09-2009, 11:02 AM
The refs got the call right, blame Moats for fumbling the ball not the refs.

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 11:05 AM
Just to clarify, the call was right. The fumble was legit. The player out of bounds jumped back in and re-established his position in bounds...that is something the ref didn't explain right. However, when he touched it the ball had already touched the goalline, thus making it a touchback...whether you agree he wa sin illegally, legally, etc.

Porky
11-09-2009, 11:34 AM
Just to clarify, the call was right. The fumble was legit. The player out of bounds jumped back in and re-established his position in bounds...that is something the ref didn't explain right. However, when he touched it the ball had already touched the goalline, thus making it a touchback...whether you agree he wa sin illegally, legally, etc.

What about Bethea touching the ball while he was laying out of bounds. The ball should have been dead at that point with possession retained by the offense. So, no it was not a correct call. The refs totally blew it and a couple of others that extended Colt drives.

Having said that, if Schaub and the O actually bothered to show up for the first 1/3 of the game, we win going away. This isn't about making excuses but getting the facts straight and clearly that had a major impact on the game.

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 11:44 AM
Just to clarify, the call was right. The fumble was legit. The player out of bounds jumped back in and re-established his position in bounds...that is something the ref didn't explain right. However, when he touched it the ball had already touched the goalline, thus making it a touchback...whether you agree he wa sin illegally, legally, etc.

NO. If he legally touched the ball, then he ran it out of the end zone and out of bounds at the 6-inch line. The call was that he ILLEGALLY touched the ball while it was in the end zone, making it a touchback. What the ref is saying is that the illegal touch is the same thing as the defense knocking the ball out of bounds in the end zone. That, by rule, WOULD be a change of possession and a touchback. To me, that's still a bad rule as well. If a defensive player bats a ball out of bounds anywhere else on the field, it's not a change of possession. You have to establish possession in the field of play for there to be a turnover.

If the touch was illegal, it should have immediately been a dead ball. That is NOT the same thing as batting the ball out of bounds.

Blown call any way you look at it.

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 12:09 PM
What about Bethea touching the ball while he was laying out of bounds. The ball should have been dead at that point with possession retained by the offense. So, no it was not a correct call. The refs totally blew it and a couple of others that extended Colt drives.
Having said that, if Schaub and the O actually bothered to show up for the first 1/3 of the game, we win going away. This isn't about making excuses but getting the facts straight and clearly that had a major impact on the game.

The ball, by replay, was already coming out before they got to the sideline and there is no way to tell if they were out when it flung into the field of play. It rolled off the body. There is no one on 610, 1560..anywhere that is disputing that it was the right call. LZ went through it this morning and by the rules it was a legit call. With Moats on top of the other player he was effectively still in play. This pic in this article shows it coming out as the start going out and explains it. I mean even Texans players aren't disputing it.

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/5412/how-colts-smart-challenge-changed-a-game

http://i37.tinypic.com/ic0c37.jpg

NO. If he legally touched the ball, then he ran it out of the end zone and out of bounds at the 6-inch line. The call was that he ILLEGALLY touched the ball while it was in the end zone, making it a touchback. What the ref is saying is that the illegal touch is the same thing as the defense knocking the ball out of bounds in the end zone. That, by rule, WOULD be a change of possession and a touchback. To me, that's still a bad rule as well. If a defensive player bats a ball out of bounds anywhere else on the field, it's not a change of possession. You have to establish possession in the field of play for there to be a turnover.

If the touch was illegal, it should have immediately been a dead ball. That is NOT the same thing as batting the ball out of bounds.

Blown call any way you look at it.

No, it was Colts ball no matter how you look at it.

utahmark
11-09-2009, 12:14 PM
The ball, by replay, was already coming out before they got to the sideline and there is no way to tell if they were out when it flung into the field of play. It rolled off the body. There is no one on 610, 1560..anywhere that is disputing that it was the right call. LZ went through it this morning and by the rules it was a legit call. With Moats on top of the other player he was effectively still in play. This pic in this article shows it coming out as the start going out and explains it. I mean even Texans players aren't disputing it.

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/5412/how-colts-smart-challenge-changed-a-game

http://i37.tinypic.com/ic0c37.jpg

look at the picture. the ball is coming out. it touches a player who is out of bounds. that means its a dead ball. it's really pretty simple. bethea is out of bounds and touching a loose ball. play is dead.

dalemurphy
11-09-2009, 12:15 PM
The ball, by replay, was already coming out before they got to the sideline and there is no way to tell if they were out when it flung into the field of play. It rolled off the body. There is no one on 610, 1560..anywhere that is disputing that it was the right call. LZ went through it this morning and by the rules it was a legit call. With Moats on top of the other player he was effectively still in play. This pic in this article shows it coming out as the start going out and explains it. I mean even Texans players aren't disputing it.

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/5412/how-colts-smart-challenge-changed-a-game

http://i37.tinypic.com/ic0c37.jpg

They should've given the Colts the ball inside the one. That was a highly questionable call to call it a touchback and it looked like the referee was really enjoying himself. Both of the player's feet landed at basically the same time. Regardless, the team overcame that call as well. Pollard's interception led to a FG before half.

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 12:23 PM
look at the picture. the ball is coming out. it touches a player who is out of bounds. that means its a dead ball. it's really pretty simple. bethea is out of bounds and touching a loose ball. play is dead.

He isn't out of bounds in the pic...he is lying right before the line and you can't see his legs. I'm wondering how every fan complaining about the call KNOWS it was a wrong call yet the Texans players and people who talk/parse this for a living can't see anything wrong with it. These are bang/bang plays that even with replay are hard to go through. I can see a small debate on where it should be marked but even that has been explained. I thought the fumble was legit. Going with what I've said in the past..you don't have to blame others if you don't put yourself in the position to have others look at it. Just hold onto the ball.

Pantherstang84
11-09-2009, 12:25 PM
What I want to see on Official Review is for Pierra to explain the Conner Barwin neutral zone infraction after the drive killing incomplete pass. I want to see him spin that one.

utahmark
11-09-2009, 01:00 PM
He isn't out of bounds in the pic...he is lying right before the line and you can't see his legs. I'm wondering how every fan complaining about the call KNOWS it was a wrong call yet the Texans players and people who talk/parse this for a living can't see anything wrong with it. These are bang/bang plays that even with replay are hard to go through. I can see a small debate on where it should be marked but even that has been explained. I thought the fumble was legit. Going with what I've said in the past..you don't have to blame others if you don't put yourself in the position to have others look at it. Just hold onto the ball.

really?

Fixed link
http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i174/SchoonPK/Blowncalloutofbounds.jpg

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 01:41 PM
really?

Yeah, look at the two pics. The one obviously his butt and legs in the air...you can even see a gap. You are showing the same pic from the other angle and saying his legs are touching out. Please stop. Desperation is a stinky cologne. Most people with knowledge of it, thought it was a reasonable call. Again, it is bang/bang and you are making this out to be some NFL cover up.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/6710617.html

Rare play indeed
“The ball did come out; nobody argued about that,” Kubiak said. “We felt like the players were out of bounds and touching the ball. They said the runner was on top of the player that was tackling him. He was on top of the player, so, technically, he was not out of bounds.”

I'm just tired of the blame game. It's bush league. hold onto the ball and there is no debate

infantrycak
11-09-2009, 02:12 PM
He isn't out of bounds in the pic...he is lying right before the line and you can't see his legs.

That's BS. Look at the distance between the yard marker stripes and the sideline. His entire body is not crammed into 2 inches. Virtually half his body is out of bounds.

utahmark
11-09-2009, 02:32 PM
Yeah, look at the two pics. The one obviously his butt and legs in the air...you can even see a gap. You are showing the same pic from the other angle and saying his legs are touching out. Please stop. Desperation is a stinky cologne. Most people with knowledge of it, thought it was a reasonable call. Again, it is bang/bang and you are making this out to be some NFL cover up.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/6710617.html



I'm just tired of the blame game. It's bush league. hold onto the ball and there is no debate

all i did was show you a picture. I'm really not sure where this cover crap your talking about came from. i'm not blaming the game on this call. i'm just saying it was a bad call. and if it was so bang/bang and there is clearly evidence in the picture to at least put some doubt in everyone's mind(reasonable people would actually call those pictures more than just doubt) how do you overturn the original call?

overreact much?

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 02:33 PM
That's BS. Look at the distance between the yard marker stripes and the sideline. His entire body is not crammed into 2 inches. Virtually half his body is out of bounds.

Disagree. To me it looks like his shoulder is in bounds and he is lying sideways(rolling toward the sideline).. and his legs, which were in the air, are just about to land out. That is how I saw it on the replay on TV and what I see when I look at the pic. JMO.

all i did was show you a picture. I'm really not sure where this cover crap your talking about came from. i'm not blaming the game on this call. i'm just saying it was a bad call. and if it was so bang/bang and there is clearly evidence in the picture to at least put some doubt in everyone's mind(reasonable people would actually call those pictures more than just doubt) how do you overturn the original call?

overreact much?

Really? I'm not the one trying to Zapruder film the incident. I just posted a pic. All I did was give an opinion regarding the play without chanting the refs screwed us. Which is what some people have resorted to doing everytime there is a close loss...this is the 3rd game I've seen it. We can analyze the stills all day but they took what they had on the field and made a call. The Texans themselves aren't making excuses about. As I said, if he hangs onto the ball, there are no debates. Sorry if you aren't one of the ones hanging onto this play, but many are.

Big Lou
11-09-2009, 02:47 PM
He isn't out of bounds in the pic...he is lying right before the line and you can't see his legs. I'm wondering how every fan complaining about the call KNOWS it was a wrong call yet the Texans players and people who talk/parse this for a living can't see anything wrong with it. These are bang/bang plays that even with replay are hard to go through. I can see a small debate on where it should be marked but even that has been explained. I thought the fumble was legit. Going with what I've said in the past..you don't have to blame others if you don't put yourself in the position to have others look at it. Just hold onto the ball.

No one on the team questioned it because if you question the almighty refs they fine your ass thousands of dollars. The NFL is Dictatorship, and free speech will get you executed. "You can't question the refs because it takes away from the integraty of the game."


The whistle blew before the recovery. Period the end.

I don't think there was a conspiracy, and the Texans make a lot of mistakes that were penalties. However it sure seemed like every time the Colts a stalled drive they got a call. I could review the game and find 20 more penalties by both teams, the difference bieng they need to be called equally!

Also there are only two undefeated teams left and it sure makes for good ratings to have undefeated teams, it just creates buzz, and more revenue for Goodell the NFL Mafia Boss.

The simple fix to this is to go out and dominate the other team and kick the crap out of them, and keep the game out of the refs hands. We lost by three, this team is good, they just need to perform to their potential and improve as a whole like the defense has.

disaacks3
11-09-2009, 02:48 PM
Disagree. To me it looks like his shoulder is in bounds and he is lying sideways.. and his legs, which were in the air, are just about to land out. As I said, this stuff is bang-bang and crying about it is useless. The point you're missing is that we're talking about the DEFENDER here. A portion of Bethea's Gluteus Maximus (or BUTT, if you prefer) is clearly on the ground OUT of bounds. If the ball is no longer in possession of Moats at this point, then the ball is dead right there (Texans ball at the 1.8 yd line).

I don't think there's some sort of VAST conspiracy, but also remember that the refs are supposed to have conclusive evidence to OVERturn a call. The call on the field was Texans ball at the 2. If it's 'marginal', then you leave the on-field call alone.

The call was questionable on levels even AFTER that point too, and I'd be happy to debate those as well, but this definitely isn't an open / shut case.

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 02:54 PM
The point you're missing is that we're talking about the DEFENDER here. A portion of Bethea's Gluteus Maximus (or BUTT, if you prefer) is clearly on the ground OUT of bounds. If the ball is no longer in possession of Moats at this point, then the ball is dead right there (Texans ball at the 1.8 yd line).

I don't think there's some sort of VAST conspiracy, but also remember that the refs are supposed to have conclusive evidence to OVERturn a call. The call on the field was Texans ball at the 2. If it's 'marginal', then you leave the on-field call alone.

The call was questionable on levels even AFTER that point too, and I'd be happy to debate those as well, but this definitely isn't an open / shut case.

And my point is that replay people and refs don't have still photos to analyze every position. From seeing it live and then 50 times on my DVR and through replay I don't think his butt is down right there. As I said I think it is coming down as he and Moats roll out of bounds. The one shot is above the play. The other one is from right on it. You can see the gap under the butt and the legs out of the pic. It was one continuous motion of the landing and rolling. I thought it was a fumble yesterday and I do today.

You may not think it is vast conspiracy but accoring to some here there have been multiple games where the refs went out of their way to screw the Texans because of their lot in life or their pecking order. I've seen the phrases "out to get them." It is silly and pathetic to think that way. I've seen multiple threads on refs and this isn't the first game for it.

What many miss is.. if you don't play sloppy... and you don't fumble... and you don't make mental mistakes then other people can't control the outcome by doing their job too. I don't mind that we disagree on what happened here. I mind that some think that the Texans should be 8-1 because of bad luck, bad refs or the boogie man of bad luck. As I put in my thread...a Parcells quote.."you are what your record says you are." At some point these little debates won't happen because they will be happening to other teams.

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 03:30 PM
And my point is that replay people and refs don't have still photos to analyze every position. From seeing it live and then 50 times on my DVR and through replay I don't think his butt is down right there. As I said I think it is coming down as he and Moats roll out of bounds. The one shot is above the play. The other one is from right on it. You can see the gap under the butt and the legs out of the pic. It was one continuous motion of the landing and rolling. I thought it was a fumble yesterday and I do today.

Even if one were to concede that Bethea was not out of bounds, how do you justify the touchback? If it were an illegal touch by the recovering player, it should be a dead ball, not "out of bounds from the end zone". A dead ball, last team with possession retains possession. If it was a LEGAL touch, he picked it up and advanced it to the 6-inch line. Still not a touchback. Someone PLEASE explain that one to me.

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 03:50 PM
Even if one were to concede that Bethea was not out of bounds, how do you justify the touchback? If it were an illegal touch by the recovering player, it should be a dead ball, not "out of bounds from the end zone". A dead ball, last team with possession retains possession. If it was a LEGAL touch, he picked it up and advanced it to the 6-inch line. Still not a touchback. Someone PLEASE explain that one to me.

All I have heard multiple times was that the refs explained it wrong. From the replay it looked like he jumped back in, reestablished himself and grabbed it. I thought he would be out at the 1 also. But from what I heard and have read the ruling came from the ball touching the goallline..like breaking the plane for a TD...and that once that happened it was an automatic touchback. They made it seem like it happened whether the guy restablished himself or not. I heard another explanation that because he hadn't reestablished himself it helped his cause because it means he touched it while out of bounds, which was the goalline, thus a touchback.....

And for those who didn't know what I was trying to say above about the still photo...watch this replay from this angle....it is a falling backward roll where Bethea's legs are in the air and landing...in fact they swing around. Too bad you don't see the ball here

http://www.indysportsnation.com/sports/pro/isn-colts-caldwell-timely-call-091109,0,7040172.story

Air Canada
11-09-2009, 03:56 PM
He isn't out of bounds in the pic...he is lying right before the line and you can't see his legs. I'm wondering how every fan complaining about the call KNOWS it was a wrong call yet the Texans players and people who talk/parse this for a living can't see anything wrong with it. These are bang/bang plays that even with replay are hard to go through. I can see a small debate on where it should be marked but even that has been explained. I thought the fumble was legit. Going with what I've said in the past..you don't have to blame others if you don't put yourself in the position to have others look at it. Just hold onto the ball.

No, BETHEA was OUT OF BOUNDS while he touched the ball... I already went into this yesterday in my thread
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66740

with the photos and if you can go back and watch the play over it can be seen that when the ball came loose his @#$ was out of bounds! We know for a fact the ball touched him as well. The refs screwed us there like I said, but can we hope for some payback in H-town. :bat:

axman40
11-09-2009, 03:56 PM
Nothing changes yesterdays outcome. I wish everyone would just drop it. It's just undignified to keep complaining about this. I don't see a bunch of threads appear when a blown call benefits us (and I wouldn't expect to) so come on guys, take your medicine.
Oh crap we are off the meds!
:)

HoustonFrog
11-09-2009, 04:02 PM
No, BETHEA was OUT OF BOUNDS while he touched the ball... I already went into this yesterday in my thread
http://www.texanstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66740

with the photos and if you can go back and watch the play over it can be seen that when the ball came loose his @#$ was out of bounds! We know for a fact the ball touched him as well. The refs screwed us there like I said, but can we hope for some payback in H-town. :bat:

This is exactly the same angles we are talking here and as some said on there it is up for interpretation. Watch the video I posted above and it looks like he is still in bounds. His forearm hits and his body swings around like his tail is just off the ground. I won't go into it again. People are going to agree to disagree. I'm just looking at the pics from the standpoint with how they jive with the video. I realize many won't see it my way. Cool with me.

Air Canada
11-09-2009, 04:26 PM
This is exactly the same angles we are talking here and as some said on there it is up for interpretation. Watch the video I posted above and it looks like he is still in bounds. His forearm hits and his body swings around like his tail is just off the ground. I won't go into it again. People are going to agree to disagree. I'm just looking at the pics from the standpoint with how they jive with the video. I realize many won't see it my way. Cool with me.

Yes, I do disagree...Remember that the play was CHALLENGED and then reversed. For that to happen there has to be "indisputable evidence" as they love to say...If it is up to interpretation at all and not clear, then the play should not be changed. So regardless the refs blew the call....

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 04:31 PM
All I have heard multiple times was that the refs explained it wrong. From the replay it looked like he jumped back in, reestablished himself and grabbed it. I thought he would be out at the 1 also. But from what I heard and have read the ruling came from the ball touching the goallline..like breaking the plane for a TD...and that once that happened it was an automatic touchback. They made it seem like it happened whether the guy restablished himself or not. I heard another explanation that because he hadn't reestablished himself it helped his cause because it means he touched it while out of bounds, which was the goalline, thus a touchback.

If there's a turnover in the end zone (e.g., an interception or a fumble recovery in the end zone), then the recovering player can advance the ball. That's EXACTLY what it looked like happened. He re-established himself in the field of play, recovered the fumble, and advanced the ball. Colts ball inside the 1.

What was explained is that he did NOT re-establish himself in bounds, and therefore ILLEGALLY touched the ball while technically still OUT of bounds. that should be a dead ball.

Bottom line, if you forget the question of whether Bethea was in or out of bounds (that alone should have given us possession, as it was inconclusive at best and should not overturn the call), then the ball was either dead (illegally touched, no change of possession), or recovered and advanced. But no WAY should the Colts have had the ball at the 20.

Howev

DerekLee1
11-09-2009, 04:33 PM
bah. accidental double post. sorry.

Porky
11-09-2009, 04:33 PM
It is hard to tell in the video Frog posted, but I suspect a slower motion would tell the same tale as the still. The still photo is proof as far as I am concerned but proof in a motion video is harder. Still, at the least it's not clear at all whether Bethea is out while touching the ball. I think virtually everyone not being hard headed for the sake of arguing would agree that at the least it's in dispute. Therefore, if one cannot tell then the play stands as called on the field. If they say it was industipable, I would posit that they are a corrupt officiating crew which I highly doubt - Incompetent and easily influenced by the home crowd maybe. But, corrupt? I doubt it although I would have said the same thing about the NBA ref sitting in jail too.

DocBar
11-09-2009, 05:04 PM
I absolutely hate it when refs can influence the outcome of the game by bad calls. Having said that, I would rather the Texans not be in a position where this can happen. I think it was a dead ball and the Texans should've retained possession. What makes me mad are the 13 penalties for over 100 yds. Some were iffy, most weren't.

spurstexanstros
11-09-2009, 05:56 PM
i was screaming to Schaub hike the damn ball both before two minute and after two minute warning...two chances to do render play moot...I was screaming it at the top of my lungs.

thunderkyss
11-09-2009, 06:15 PM
I found another thread...... sorry.

So I'll change this to a We don't know how to win thread.

This team is good enough, we've got enough talent to be a play-off team.

We were good enough to beat the Colts last year.. we were definitely good enough to beat them yesterday.

It's not the team... & I'm not ready to fire anybody right now.

But the coaches on this team need to do a better job of getting our boys ready to play on Sunday.

This slow start offense.... it's because they are not ready, or they made some bad assumptions about what the other team is going to do.... NYJ game is a glaring example of that, & every other slow start we've had is similar to a lesser degree.

The penalties..... man.... this was our worst game all season long as far as penalties go. They were too amped... too hyped... they needed calming down. They needed someone to center their focus...

They needed a coach.

I've said before, that I like Kubiak as a coach, but he has as much learning to do as our young players.

It's about time the light bulb goes off in his head. Once it does.... watch the Chuck out.

utahmark
11-10-2009, 10:26 AM
The ball, by replay, was already coming out before they got to the sideline and there is no way to tell if they were out when it flung into the field of play. It rolled off the body. There is no one on 610, 1560..anywhere that is disputing that it was the right call. LZ went through it this morning and by the rules it was a legit call. With Moats on top of the other player he was effectively still in play. This pic in this article shows it coming out as the start going out and explains it. I mean even Texans players aren't disputing it.
http://espn.go.com/blog/afcsouth/post/_/id/5412/how-colts-smart-challenge-changed-a-game

http://i37.tinypic.com/ic0c37.jpg



No, it was Colts ball no matter how you look at it.

apparantly they are disputing it.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/6712243.html

TexCanada
11-10-2009, 12:40 PM
apparantly they are disputing it.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/6712243.html

Maybe they will re-over-turn (good word huh?) the call and we can resume the game from that point. I've got my fingers crossed!

Joe Texan
11-10-2009, 03:03 PM
Horse Collar

Wolf
11-10-2009, 06:08 PM
no matter what, a fumble is a fumble.. but I didn't notice it but the ref did blow the whistle before the pick up... here is the video on youtube

not that it matters

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoitRyfqmUA