Referee Carl Cheffer's Response To Overturned Raider TD

Cheffers: We had a situation where the receiver caught the pass in the air and as he is coming down to the ground, he is actually going to the ground. That's a defined term in our rule book, a player, a receiver who is going to the ground. The rule book says, if a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, with or without contact by opponent – so that can be on his own; In this case, he got hit by an opponent – he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete. That wasn't the case. What we ruled, what we saw in replay, was that he was going to the ground, as he came down the ball came loose, he lost control of the ball, the ball skidded along the ground, he eventually completely lost control of the ball. So, by rule, by what we saw in review, it's an incomplete pbutt.

Source: Inside Bay Area.com

 

I missed that play, I want to see it now.

 

it was a tough call, but the right call in accordance to the rule. The rule states when going to the ground the receiver has to maintain possession through the entire catch. I think the rule kind of screwed the Raiders here, but it is the rule, and for the most part a good one...I just didn't like it in this case

 

ESPN kept stopping the replay as he hit the ground and I thought it was a bad call but by the rule (which is ticky tac) the refs were right because a second after he hit the ground the ball came loose.
Tough call but Looked like the right one and once again the Raiders suffer from a technicality and judgement call in a rule.

 

They'll change the rule next year and call it the Tuck Rule #2

 

no they wont...lol...they haven't even changed the tuck rule

 

You people didn't know this rule?

 

i knew the rule...lol mike and mike kept telling everyone who didn't know the rule that posession in the endzone was just 2 feet down...lol

 

Commentators are well smart!

 

i think the rule's stupid. he caught the ball for petes sake. who cares if it "moved"? a cath is a catch. madden always felt this way about fumbles. he misses the days when a fumble was a fumble and there was no scrutinizig every little thing on the replay

 

at the very end the ball came completely out that was the big issue

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqs_8thjvsc]YouTube - San Diego Chargers-Oakland Raiders 24-20 NFL Week 1[/ame]

They show the play @ 1:45 looks like a TD but the other camera angle @ 2:25 shows it come out of his hand just as he starts to get up.

No catch.

 

Idk i guess they got it right it did come out

 

IT WAS A BULLCRAP CALL !

 

awful awful awful call.....just pathetic

 

Stupid rule? Maybe. By the rule standards was it a correct call? Yes it was, bullcrap or not it was the right call..

 

I honestly think that was a bullcrap call...

 

it wasnt the right call, that maintain possession all the way through is stress when you get both feet down and land out of bounds....when you get both feet down and land in the middle of the endzone its real touchy....

the ball moved at the very end but it was still pressed up against his body and the end of the ball....this is where replay gets abused to make touchy calls like this, there no way that was concrete evidence enough to force and overturn....in college or high school we call that a great catch.

i rememebr 2 years ago shockey caught the ball in the endzone, got his feet down, got freaking destoyed, dropped the ball and they called it a touchdown

 

The loss of possession was @ 2:27 the ball was out of his hand and touching the ground.

 

Goto 1:21 in the video.

Gates catches and loses the ball, but nope, its ruled a catch.

Amazing.