Horrible TD call cost Seahawks the game

[XxXdragonXxX]

Which line is the line?

Yeah they had a horribly painted sideline. A soft white for about 2 inches and then a sharp white after that. Not sure where their sideline was supposed to be.

 

[hawknation2018]

Which line is the line?

Good point! It’s supposed to be the line extending from the pylon. But that line looks very faint in the end zone, for some reason. It looks like three inches of spotty paint from where the line is supposed to be. The left foot was clearly extended into that out of bounds area.

 

[minormillikin]

It was a touchdown. Stop whining about refs. Seahawks were lucky the game was as close as it was.

 

[hawknation2018]

It was a touchdown. Stop whining about refs. Seahawks were lucky the game was as close as it was.

Based on what? You think the receiver got either foot in bounds?

 

[Bigpumpkin]

It was a touchdown. Stop whining about refs. Seahawks were lucky the game was as close as it was.

Based on what? You think the receiver got either foot in bounds?

A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

 

[Hawkpower]

Every year we see the Seahawks get screwed repeatedly by horrendous calls and then when they are properly pointed out here, we get the cascade of "well thats not why they lost" posts or "they still had their chances" posts.

So sick of it.

That they could have or should have won anyway is pointless. That they played like dog poo at times is irrelevant. They shouldn't have to beat the Broncos AND overcome 14 gifted points on top of it. The failed fumble call and the erroneous TD call, if properly officiated, swings the game in a different direction, and that is justifiably maddening to fans just looking for competently officiated games.

Not too much to ask.

 

[Vesuve]

Neither foot was in bounds after securing the catch. Left foot is planted on the line. Right foot lifts off the ground after ball is secured.

Totally agree.

Can't believe they would call that TD after the review.

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

This game had so many so close moments:

It didn’t bother me that Marshall was called for OPI on his first TD.

It didn’t bother that Janikowski missed two consecutive FGs.

It didn’t bother me that Pete fumbled his challenge on trying to challenge a fumble.

It didn’t bother me that the Oline gave up a zillion sacks

Or the D got owned by a pair of rookie RBs.

All of that is pretty much football or Pete being Pete.

However, that Thomas TD was such BS call. And it completely changed the game no matter how much time was left.

I just don’t think it was fair as closest ref ruled it incomplete almost immediately.

Then an ensuing conference overturned that call and for what?

If there wasn’t enough evidence on the replay to overturn the call on video. How the hell can you overturn the call through a human conference especially when the closest judge in live time ruled it incomplete. The Production team didn’t really give the tv audience much to work with. Can’t remember but I felt they only showed one angle on the close-up and in the age of high definition that angle was grainy/blurry for whatever reasons.

Not to mention the facts Thomas had one foot in when he caught the ball, then only brought that other foot down, the controversial foot down after he secured possession. So to me even if that 2nd foot was actually in bounds, at no true point in the catch did Thomas get both feet down at the same time after completing the catch.

But I don’t even really care about the football play, the referee politics afterwards is what irks me, the closest official ruled it incomplete, if it was that close then just allow the Broncos to challenge it like they would have and go from there. Don’t understand the point of that conference and honestly I think the motivation was pretty simple, 27-24, covers the spread.

 

[Smellyman]

What's worse is that this was a catch, but the Marshall sideline catch was ruled incomplete due to "no football move".

No that is what idiot Schlereth said. It wasn't a catch because you have to control it to the ground. That hasn't been a catch for the last few seasons.

 

[AgentDib]

I just don’t think it was fair as closest ref ruled it incomplete almost immediately. Then an ensuing conference overturned that call and for what?

I'm completely with you on this one. I was at the game and didn't have a perfect look at it, but the official at the spot immediately signaled it incomplete and none of the other officials were particularly close to the play. It appeared that in conference they decided on a touchdown so that it would be reviewed, but if so that's an awful decision when the burden of the proof on replay is against overturning a call on the field.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

It was a bad call but Seattle had there chances. They just didn't get it done tonight .

 

[OkieHawk]

What's worse is that this was a catch, but the Marshall sideline catch was ruled incomplete due to "no football move".

No that is what idiot Schlereth said. It wasn't a catch because you have to control it to the ground. That hasn't been a catch for the last few seasons.

It was controlled to the ground though, he lost it after he hit the ground.

 

[JimmyG]

Even if, let's say, the refs got the call wrong (which I disagree with), this play occurred on 1st and goal from the 4-yard line. Do you really trust our defense to make a stand here? They moved the ball very well against us yesterday (6.5 yards per carry, 25 first downs, etc).

 

[JRobinson]

It was a bad call but Seattle had there chances. They just didn't get it done tonight .

Didn’t see the play, sounds like y’all got shafted on that though if the initial official signaled incomplete.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Bill Parcells used to say if one play or call costs us a game, then we didn't deserve to win.

This was certainly the case yesterday. Yes the closer ref shouldn't have been overruled by the other ref who had a worse angle and called it a TD, which made it impossible to overturn.

But;

- missed FG
- 2-12 on 3rd down
- Horrible last two drive execution, especially Russell
- No defensive Line pressure whatsoever


Etc Etc. Bottom line, this was a winnable road game, in a stadium where very few teams have won road openers. If I'm handing out blame, I blame Russell for not taking that game over in the 4th quarter, and especially the last two drives.

 

[XxXdragonXxX]

It was a bad call but Seattle had there chances. They just didn't get it done tonight .

Didn’t see the play, sounds like y’all got shafted on that though if the initial official signaled incomplete.

Basically the officials after conferencing decided that they should call it a TD because then it gets auto reviewed. Unfortunately the replay view was garbage so you couldnt tell on review, therefore the "call on the field" (which was already changed once) couldnt be overturned.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

And the non fumble call, 4 plays later, TD. But yeah, the refs have nothing to do with the outcome of games. Not why they lost, BUT then again, two horrific calls that changed the entire game. Yet again.

 

[12thbrah]

Homer call but thats going to happen on the road. The Hawks still had their chances even in the end. All they needed to do was to get into field goal range. That got messed up by Russell's costly fumble

 

[Tusc2000]

You should expect the defense to give up 27.

Especially when the offense is playing like it did.

What I didn't expect was seeing this offense score less than 30. That won't cut it.

We would have scored 31 if the ref had called illegal contact on pacman instead of offensive interference on Marshall.

Totally agree. The push-off was so minimal it was ridiculous. There is far greater PI and defensive holding going on during almost every pass route. It is rarely called. That one on Marshall was just nonsense, and it did cost us the game.

 

[Popeyejones]

My first impression is that he was out, but that's before I saw the replay today and that the white of the sideline was off -- it's a bit fainter, but it goes to the inside-side of the pylon rather than starting at the outside-side of the pylon.

Basically that means that his foot can be an extra four inches or so into the white and he'd still be in bounds.

I'm guessing this is what caused the disagreement about him being out or not between the refs?

In any case, in a very close scoring play for which the refs really can't tell the difference I'd prefer them to call it a touchdown and go into automatic review every single time. That means that if it stays inconclusive it remains a TD, but that's better than the alternative, in which it doesn't automatically get reviewed.

Still though, after watching that replay and seeing the discrepancy in the sideline colors I think that's *probably* a TD and ended up being correctly called. Still though, the angle isn't great and I wouldn't say that definitively. Having four inches of white still in bounds just messes with my eyes a little bit, and gives me a headache.