Please look at this video. Tell me how the refs ruled that

[Seanhawk]

Yeah, they ruled that Hankey, or whatever his name is recovered it when he fell on it 10 yards before, but I'm pretty sure you have to have possession to actually recover it, and since the ball came out without anyone touching him, it's pretty obvious he didn't have possession. That ruling alone should have triggered a replay. Maybe they just didn't want to go through the hassle of trying to figure out possession in the pile.

This is exactly what they ruled.

And its beyond stupid.]

How can a guy have possession of the ball when there is a pile of guys 5 yards away from him of guys going after the ball he no longer possesses?

No logic whatsoever. Im going to try and let this go, but just thinking about it raises my blood pressure about 50 points

Rule is with under 2:00 remaining if ball is fumbled by offense and the O recovers then ball goes back to spot of fumble. In this case the refs would have to have ruled that a Ram came out with the ball from the pile. I saw absolutely no person or ruling from the ref that a Ram recovered the ball from the pile.

I am not one to believe in a fix by the NFL but do not understand how they ruled this was. IMO it's plain incompetence from part time refs with full time jobs in the NFL offseason.

The ref picking apart the pile, pulled the ball out and they pointed in the Rams direction for recovery. Then the ref SAID they recovered the fumble. I don't know what else you need as far as a ruling from the officials that a Ram recovered it.

 

[seabowl]

Yeah, they ruled that Hankey, or whatever his name is recovered it when he fell on it 10 yards before, but I'm pretty sure you have to have possession to actually recover it, and since the ball came out without anyone touching him, it's pretty obvious he didn't have possession. That ruling alone should have triggered a replay. Maybe they just didn't want to go through the hassle of trying to figure out possession in the pile.

This is exactly what they ruled.

And its beyond stupid.]

How can a guy have possession of the ball when there is a pile of guys 5 yards away from him of guys going after the ball he no longer possesses?

No logic whatsoever. Im going to try and let this go, but just thinking about it raises my blood pressure about 50 points

Rule is with under 2:00 remaining if ball is fumbled by offense and the O recovers then ball goes back to spot of fumble. In this case the refs would have to have ruled that a Ram came out with the ball from the pile. I saw absolutely no person or ruling from the ref that a Ram recovered the ball from the pile.

I am not one to believe in a fix by the NFL but do not understand how they ruled this was. IMO it's plain incompetence from part time refs with full time jobs in the NFL offseason.

The ref picking apart the pile, pulled the ball out and they pointed in the Rams direction for recovery. Then the ref SAID they recovered the fumble. I don't know what else you need as far as a ruling from the officials that a Ram recovered it.

I didn't see this but I was going crazy at that moment.

 

[Hawkpower]

Yeah, they ruled that Hankey, or whatever his name is recovered it when he fell on it 10 yards before, but I'm pretty sure you have to have possession to actually recover it, and since the ball came out without anyone touching him, it's pretty obvious he didn't have possession. That ruling alone should have triggered a replay. Maybe they just didn't want to go through the hassle of trying to figure out possession in the pile.

This is exactly what they ruled.

And its beyond stupid.]

How can a guy have possession of the ball when there is a pile of guys 5 yards away from him of guys going after the ball he no longer possesses?

No logic whatsoever. Im going to try and let this go, but just thinking about it raises my blood pressure about 50 points

That is exactly NOT what they ruled. Possession wasn't ruled until after the pile, not before it like you two are claiming.

Wrong.

They RULED it after the pile, but they claimed that initial possession was gained by Hankey when he jumped on the ball and that he was down.

They just waited for the scrum to end before making it official, but thats why they didnt even point RAMS ball or SEAHAWK ball, he just grabbed the ball, ran 5 yards back upfield where Hankey pounced on it, and signaled DOWN with possession

I dont think the refs saw the ball squirt away from Hankey. Hence the need for replay

 

[BigBill1945]

The saddest part is that this terrible call decided the game. I truly believe that if the refs would have made the right call we would have won. We were a simple field goal away. The NFL's meaningless apology is to follow. It is kind of like saying I drowned your loving dog but it is ok I am sorry.

 

[Sherman4Prez]

Yes, that was bad. But let's face it, the odds of us getting into FG range with no TO's was very, very, slim. Game ended on the fake punt to a large degree. That game... never mind.

 

[Hawkpower]

Yes, that was bad. But let's face it, the odds of us getting into FG range with no TO's was very, very, slim. Game ended on the fake punt to a large degree. That game... never mind.

There was 1:00 left. Plenty of time to get into field goal range.

 

[Seanhawk]

Yeah, they ruled that Hankey, or whatever his name is recovered it when he fell on it 10 yards before, but I'm pretty sure you have to have possession to actually recover it, and since the ball came out without anyone touching him, it's pretty obvious he didn't have possession. That ruling alone should have triggered a replay. Maybe they just didn't want to go through the hassle of trying to figure out possession in the pile.

This is exactly what they ruled.

And its beyond stupid.]

How can a guy have possession of the ball when there is a pile of guys 5 yards away from him of guys going after the ball he no longer possesses?

No logic whatsoever. Im going to try and let this go, but just thinking about it raises my blood pressure about 50 points

That is exactly NOT what they ruled. Possession wasn't ruled until after the pile, not before it like you two are claiming.

Wrong.

They RULED it after the pile, but they claimed that initial possession was gained by Hankey when he jumped on the ball and that he was down.

They just waited for the scrum to end before making it official, but thats why they didnt even point RAMS ball or SEAHAWK ball, he just grabbed the ball, ran 5 yards back upfield where Hankey pounced on it, and signaled DOWN with possession

I dont think the refs saw the ball squirt away from Hankey. Hence the need for replay

No, they ruled it after the scrum, pointed that it was the Rams ball after the scrum, announced that the Rams recovered the ball, and the reason they went backwards to spot the ball is because they took it back to the spot of the fumble. Under two minutes, if an offensive player fumbles forward and an offensive player gets on it, the ball gets spotted at the location of the fumble. They did not spot the ball where Harkey initially pounced on it.

I've seen people claiming that Harkey wasn't even in the pile and this is just not true. He is #46, and the official who pulled the ball out is standing directly over him right before he gets the ball. He is laying on the ground next to a kneeling #73 for the Rams and after the pile is pulled apart, #63 runs over and helps him up.

 

[SomersetHawk]

You just know that this would have been reviewed had it happened to the Broncos or Andynapolis Colts.

 

[Hawks46]

Seattle was getting these close ones last year.


The law of averages.

The call that aggravated me the most was where Carpenter got about as phantom of a holding call as I have seen, shortly followed on the next Ram possession, by repeated blatant holds on Irvin during the Ram's last scoring drive.


I quit watching the NBA, long ago, because my blood pressure couldn't handle how the calls were influencing the games so heavily. I'm starting to reach that saturation point with the NFL.

Pretty much the way I feel about it. Irvin deserves about 8-10 more holding calls this year. On offensive holding, I'm not saying the NFL is out to get us (lack of holding calls for our defense), but against our offense, at times has been disgusting. The personal foul against Carpenter was decried by a ton of analysts as a "WTF" call (that called back a Harvin TD), and there have been at least 5 bad calls/phantom calls that I've seen against us this year.

It certainly seems that the NFL doesn't want a repeat team at SB champ. That, and all the butthurt after we won it. The Niners have been to the NFCCG 3 times in a row, and this year they're one of the most penalized teams in the league after not having that reputation under Harbaugh. I wonder what's going to happen when our teams meet ?

 

[drrew]

Based on the reaction of the Seahawk players, it seems pretty clear that the Rams had the ball in the pile. I don't know how they got it away from Sherman and whomever was directly behind him, but they did.

 

[cajunhawk]

Yeah, they ruled that Hankey, or whatever his name is recovered it when he fell on it 10 yards before, but I'm pretty sure you have to have possession to actually recover it, and since the ball came out without anyone touching him, it's pretty obvious he didn't have possession. That ruling alone should have triggered a replay. Maybe they just didn't want to go through the hassle of trying to figure out possession in the pile.

This is exactly what they ruled.

And its beyond stupid.]

How can a guy have possession of the ball when there is a pile of guys 5 yards away from him of guys going after the ball he no longer possesses?

No logic whatsoever. Im going to try and let this go, but just thinking about it raises my blood pressure about 50 points

Rule is with under 2:00 remaining if ball is fumbled by offense and the O recovers then ball goes back to spot of fumble. In this case the refs would have to have ruled that a Ram came out with the ball from the pile. I saw absolutely no person or ruling from the ref that a Ram recovered the ball from the pile.

I am not one to believe in a fix by the NFL but do not understand how they ruled this was. IMO it's plain incompetence from part time refs with full time jobs in the NFL offseason.

The ref picking apart the pile, pulled the ball out and they pointed in the Rams direction for recovery. Then the ref SAID they recovered the fumble. I don't know what else you need as far as a ruling from the officials that a Ram recovered it.

Here is where your logic is flawed. Harkey was on the outside of the pile. There is video evidence of this. Sherman handed the ball to the refs...not Harkey. By all means show me video evidence to the contrary and you will prove yourself correct. But we we all know video evidence doesn't exist of Harkey being anywhere near the ball. The refs gave him the ball at the point he "recovered" it a few yards up the field...but it was still an offensive fumble recovery so they went back to the spot of the fumble. So the fact that they did not go back to the spot Harkey "recovered" it does not mean they got the play right. They actually ruled on possession BEFORE the scrum. I have seen this happen before with the refs. They know it's literally impossible to overturn a call based on a pile up scrum. So the call they make is concrete and they are well aware of this. Take a deep breath...and realize we got jobbed...hard.

Look...we deserved to lose that game with how our special teams played. But here is the rub...and follow along here I don't want to lose you...SO DID THE RAMS. You fumble with a minute left instead of just falling on the ground...you deserve to lose the game. The refs made sure that didn't happen. Hell the Rams only had 2 penalties. 2. That bunch of animals only has 2 penalties? The Rams can't even have a team meeting without getting 5 personal foul penalties called on them. The refs turned a blind eye as much as they could and looked for every opportunity to screw us over. I don't know what the agenda is. Small market teams don't do much good for the NFL when they dominate. I am sure they are tickled pink Dallas is 6-1.

 

[LawlessHawk]

I understand this thread is about a, at the very least, "questionable" call regarding the fumble at the end of the game... However, the Hawks didn't lose the game because of that. They lost the game because of completely bone headed special teams play. A punt that went to one side of the field and all the coverage that went to the other side of the field resulting in an easy return for a TD... and utter and complete ineptitude on a fake punt, by a nothing-to-lose, Jeff Fisher coached football team... Gee, he's never burnt the Hawks with Special Teams trickery before... right???

 

[drrew]

Here is where your logic is flawed. Harkey was on the outside of the pile. There is video evidence of this. Sherman handed the ball to the refs...not Harkey.

If you watch the video linked in the initial post, there is no video evidence of what you just stated. It cannot be seen who directly handed the official the ball, however, when the pile is cleared Sherman is flat on his back with his head facing the Hawks end zone, and it appears the official takes the ball from somewhere/someone near where Sherman's feet were.

If you watch Harkey pull himself into the pile, I think he ended up back with the ball.

 

[drrew]

Here is where your logic is flawed. Harkey was on the outside of the pile. There is video evidence of this. Sherman handed the ball to the refs...not Harkey.

If you watch the video linked in the initial post, there is no video evidence of what you just stated. It cannot be seen who directly handed the official the ball, however, when the pile is cleared Sherman is flat on his back with his head facing the Hawks end zone, and it appears the official takes the ball from somewhere/someone near where Sherman's feet were.

If you watch Harkey pull himself into the pile, I think he ended up back with the ball.

Watching further, at 45 seconds, Harkey rolls over and the official takes the ball from him.

I was as mad as anyone when it seemed like a screwjob, but in the end, it looks like the Hawks were outwrestled for the ball.

 

[cajunhawk]

Here is where your logic is flawed. Harkey was on the outside of the pile. There is video evidence of this. Sherman handed the ball to the refs...not Harkey.

If you watch the video linked in the initial post, there is no video evidence of what you just stated. It cannot be seen who directly handed the official the ball, however, when the pile is cleared Sherman is flat on his back with his head facing the Hawks end zone, and it appears the official takes the ball from somewhere/someone near where Sherman's feet were.

If you watch Harkey pull himself into the pile, I think he ended up back with the ball.

Looking at the 12 second mark you see three Seahawks in the pile and Harkey, #77, & #73 for the Rams are not in the pile. At this point in the play the refs should have given the Seahawks possession. When it zooms out at the 13-14 second mark there are 3 refs in optimal viewing and they let it to go the scrum...and that was a very bad call. They had it plain as day. They blew the call.

37 second mark, the white hat makes the possession call. The scrum is not yet over and every other ref is still engaged in the pile. How did he know? Why didn't they trust their eyes at the 13-14 second mark where the pile consisted of 3 Seahawks?

It does seem that Harkey did end up with the ball but was that after Seattle had already been told at the 37 second mark that the Rams had the ball? There still isn't clear evidence that Harkey and Sherman didn't have spontaneous possession (to quote the Fail Mary parlance). And even better....to quote Blandino...possession in the pile is not evidence of possession period. Because Harkey had the ball at the end of the scrum it means nothing. The refs on the field erred by not giving the Seahawks possession when the pile began at the 12 second mark. In fact...video evidence should show that fact. Pile starts...no Rams in pile. Unless they are playing Hot Potato...that has to be Seahawks ball. The onus remains on the refs on the field making a bonehead decision to let the Rams get into the pile and alter possession even though once can clearly see them coming into the pile after the fact. I do not understand how replay cannot make the connection from the video evidence that we all have seen. Loose ball...Rams player does not have possession...ball is pounced on by 3 Seahawks and zero Rams...3 Rams enter the pile seconds later...and are rewarded with possession because...your guess is as good as mine.

 

[cajunhawk]

Here is where your logic is flawed. Harkey was on the outside of the pile. There is video evidence of this. Sherman handed the ball to the refs...not Harkey.

If you watch the video linked in the initial post, there is no video evidence of what you just stated. It cannot be seen who directly handed the official the ball, however, when the pile is cleared Sherman is flat on his back with his head facing the Hawks end zone, and it appears the official takes the ball from somewhere/someone near where Sherman's feet were.

If you watch Harkey pull himself into the pile, I think he ended up back with the ball.

Watching further, at 45 seconds, Harkey rolls over and the official takes the ball from him.

I was as mad as anyone when it seemed like a screwjob, but in the end, it looks like the Hawks were outwrestled for the ball.

Actually he took it from where Harkey was...we cannot see a 100% concrete from Harkey to ref exchange. Also this is well after the possession was decided at the 37 second mark. It's possible a Seahawk let go once they gave the ball to the Rams. If they gave Harkey the recovery...it's a massive screw up. You can see him entering the pile well after it forms. Refs have to be taught that this is not the best way to rule on a pile. Especially when you have a clear vantage point of 3 Seahawks on the ball to begin the pile. This happened a few years back against the Bears. Hawks got the ball in the pile...but they ruled the Bears had it at the beginning of the pile. Sucks to be burned by both sides of the coin. Regardless of if it could be reviewed, or overturned...the Rams at the point of the fumble deserved to lose the game as much as we did. This argument is a valid one.

 

[RamBall]

Sherman never had possesion of the ball, being on his hands and knees over the ball does not equal possesion. If he had grabbed the ball with his hands that would be possesion.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Yeah, because you can prove that the Hawks didn't recover. :roll:

 

[Hawkpower]

Sherman never had possesion of the ball, being on his hands and knees over the ball does not equal possesion. If he had grabbed the ball with his hands that would be possesion.

So who did??

 

[SoulfishHawk]

They decided BEFORE even seeing who came up with it that the Rams had the ball. Shocker