Crabtree's fumble

[pocketprotector]

According to Mike Pereira's twitter account "Regarding your tweets, in the SF game, it shouldn't have been forward progress & Crabtree wasn't down"

Interesting that the ref indicated that Crabtree was down, and yet when the challenge came they said it was forward progress.

 

[nanomoz]

Ya, I'd successfully removed that from my consciousness. Now I'm more pissed.

 

[ivotuk]

Yea that was an odd call. "Player was down so not a fumble" "What? It was a fumble?" "Forward progress had stopped"

 

[IllWill49]

Wasn't there a whistle blown before the "fumble" indicating the play was over?

 

[Blitzer88]

Yeah, it was a bull call, we would of been in great field position. They showed a replay of the side judge and he singled that Crabtree's butt was down before the fumble, which it wasn't, but then after Pete tried to challenge it, the head ref switched it and said the the first ref singled that his forward progress had been stopped, which he never did.

 

[rlkats]

Ya I agree wrong call

 

[AbsolutNET]

Wasn't there a whistle blown before the "fumble" indicating the play was over?

The ref signaled that Crabtree was down by contact, and then they decided it was forward progress after Pete tried to challenge.

 

[nanomoz]

Yeah, it was a bull call, we would of been in great field position. They showed a replay of the side judge and he singled that Crabtree's butt was down before the fumble, which it wasn't, but then after Pete tried to challenge it, the head ref switched it and said the the first ref singled that his forward progress had been stopped, which he never did.

I guess we can't say the refs aren't able to adapt to suit their purpose. :stirthepot:

 

[seabowl]

Interesting how many calls Pereira thinks are wrong lately now that he is NOT on the NFL payroll. Hey Mikey where were your honest opinions after XL?

 

[loafoftatupu]

That was a big one, but the one that got me was the catch Crabtree was granted with his second foot out. It was plain as day and they got the ball snapped.

That one was a factor too and PC couldn't get a look at it. That and the bad call on the fumble certainly affected the game. No matter, the Hawks had a good chance of winning that game in any case.

 

[Pak40.]

Forward progress was stopped, he was being held up off the ground by the defensive player as always happens. That is why there is a forward progress rule, so the D cant just stand the guy up and try to strip the ball for 5 seconds.

 

[AbsolutNET]

Forward progress was stopped, he was being held up off the ground by the defensive player as always happens. That is why there is a forward progress rule, so the D cant just stand the guy up and try to strip the ball for 5 seconds.

Thanks for the explanation of what forward progress is. Too bad it doesn't apply here.

The official ruled him down by contact during the play, so it should have been reviewable.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Forward progress was stopped, he was being held up off the ground by the defensive player as always happens. That is why there is a forward progress rule, so the D cant just stand the guy up and try to strip the ball for 5 seconds.

No it wasn't. "Baghdad" Mike Pereira was right for the first time in his miserable life.

 

[pocketprotector]

He was still fighting forward and moving in that direction.

 

[Pak40.]

I would have to see it again. I remember he was pretty much on the way to the ground but the defensive player was holding him off the ground while another guy was trying to get the ball.

 

[AbsolutNET]

I would have to see it again. I remember he was pretty much on the way to the ground but the defensive player was holding him off the ground while another guy was trying to get the ball.

I'll try one more time.

The referee signaled that Crabtree was down by contact (because he touched the ground). But after Pete challenged it, he was told it was forward progress. Based on what the referee initially signaled, Pete should have been awarded the challenge and the ball via fumble and recovery. Because the official did not stop the play due to forward progress.

 

[NFSeahawks]

I thought it was interesting that they didn't review it and just kept playing, I for one thought it was a fumble.

 

[HawkWow]

It did appear to be a BS call, then make up call. But maybe it was another official that blew is dead? Cuz the chump they showed, clearly did not blow it dead or he wouldn't have made the ass to the ground sign. But we lost that game by letting Gore torch us at a crucial time...and right as it looked like they were going to let the teams decide the outcome. We were not the better team today, even though we should have / could have won.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

I would have to see it again. I remember he was pretty much on the way to the ground but the defensive player was holding him off the ground while another guy was trying to get the ball.

I'll try one more time.

The referee signaled that Crabtree was down by contact (because he touched the ground). But after Pete challenged it, he was told it was forward progress. Based on what the referee initially signaled, Pete should have been awarded the challenge and the ball via fumble and recovery. Because the official did not stop the play due to forward progress.

Exactly. Thanks for nothin, Bevell.

 

[nsport]

The referee signaled that Crabtree was down by contact (because he touched the ground). But after Pete challenged it, he was told it was forward progress. Based on what the referee initially signaled, Pete should have been awarded the challenge and the ball via fumble and recovery. Because the official did not stop the play due to forward progress.

I saw it the same way. They teach the guys to pick up that fumble even if they're not sure so it is a "clear recovery" so if the call is overturned, they get the turnover. It was total BS that the guy had it called on the field then it was changed. Put Seattle on the spot for using a replay try - don't just take it away. That call would have changed the entire outcome of the game!