Stupid Ref

Warmother · Post by **Warmother** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:48 pm

I wish that ball had hit Him cleanly in the groin.

surferskin · Post by **surferskin** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:52 pm

no doubt, that's got to be one of the stupidest things i've ever seen in a game...good thing it's preseason :roll:

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:35 pm

That was BS!!!!and he should be fined :lol:

Shoot.

Amberion · Post by **Amberion** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 9:13 pm

For those of us who cant see it - what happened??????

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 9:19 pm

The ref was standing on our 2 yard line on a punt and the ball was goin into the endzone but it hit the ref and stopped on the 2 yards line....

Dumb ref :thump:

Warmother · Post by **Warmother** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 9:21 pm

Carolina punted the ball the return man faked a catch at the 10 yd line and let the ball go over his head, the ref was not standing in the endzone and the ball bounced off him at the 1 yd line where it was downed.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:22 pm

The refs are rusty as hell. Dmac gets pushed in the back and refs stands there and spits like he is about to pitch a gotD baseball

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:51 am

Man, that play was in the end zone where I was at and I was just livid. Everyone in the stadium was furious. I bet he felt like an idiot, though. :lol:

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 2:27 am

I wish it would have hit him in his D*** face... :evil:

Im sorry, Chris feels a little grumpy tonight after a loss. Its pre-season, I know :oops:

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 10:43 am

Stan Freeman is the Idiots name. I don't ever remember hearing anything this crazy...they new he screwed up because they tried to give us the ball at the 20(before Car challenged) saying he had one foot in the end zone the fact is he didn't have his head in the game

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 6:33 pm

That was such a crock. And everyone in the stadium was booing so loud they had to put the "Quiet Offense at Work" screen up.

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 6:38 pm

If that ref could hear all of the names I was calling him from row 28, section 451....he would have been too humiliated to ever want to ref again!

gibbsfan · Post by **gibbsfan** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 7:49 pm

that ref needs to pull his lip over his head and swallow ,in the field of play :lol:

yeah right. i bout blew a gasket on that one.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 9:22 pm

Hey...
It appears that the officiating crew tried to make amends. What else could they do ? As was pointed out, it is the preseason. Mistakes will be made.
Anyway, it's not like our special teamers are opening any lanes, you know. My feeling is the ref should've made the grab and headed upfield.
He may have been the guy with the best chance to give us nice field position.

General Failure · Post by **General Failure** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 10:21 pm

On the plus side Southwest Airlines has a new commercial to air during the season.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 11:43 pm

Plus, a fifteen minute call could save you 15% or more on your car insurance !

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 12:55 pm

From section 316, the ref looked like he was clearly out of the endzone. I thought that it should have been a touchback, considering it's projected path. Once they explained that the ref was "part of the field", I knew that the ball should have been placed on the 2.

In fairness to the refs, they did "give us" the call on the fumble, that should have been a safety. There was no way Chris got out of that endzone, and placed the ball on the one. It evened out.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:03 pm

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:In fairness to the refs, they did "give us" the call on the fumble, that should have been a safety. There was no way Chris got out of that endzone, and placed the ball on the one. It evened out.

His foward momentum stopped at the one... that's were he picked up the ball... and then was pushed back into the endzone... that's why they gave it to us on the one...

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:16 pm

BringThePain! wrote:His foward momentum stopped at the one... that's were he picked up the ball... and then was pushed back into the endzone... that's why they gave it to us on the one...

Ahh... But, wasn't he moving backward to get the ball?

Either way, it was some tasty "home cookin'". :wink:

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:20 pm

He might have been moving backwards to get the ball... but when he picked up the ball, officially that's when his foward momentum began... that's how the rule works anyways... I don't think there was too much they gave us... even if they called it a safety... it would've probably been reviewed and reversed...

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:22 pm

Samuels picked up the ball at the one, it didn't matter about his movement prior to that because as soon as he had the ball Carolina knocked him into the endzone.

Back on topic.

If the refs really wanted to "make things right" they wouldn't have turned over the decision to place it on the 20 - even if it was correct to place it at the 2. #-o

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 1:24 pm

BringThePain! wrote:...when he picked up the ball, officially that's when his foward momentum began... that's how the rule works anyways...

Ah, okay. Thanks for the info.

On a side note, I was glad to see some of the "illegal contact" calls I complained about in another thread last week go our way.

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:33 pm

I, for one, think this is a great example of why there should be a "new rule" in the league.

If/when something like this happens again (it probably never will), instead of simply stating that the ref is "part of the field", the new rule should state something like:

"When a field official impedes the path of a live ball heading into the endzone resulting in the ball not entering the endzone, that ball will be deemed a 'touch back' and placed on the 20-yard line."

Watcha think?

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 2:39 pm

Justice Hog wrote:I, for one, think this is a great example of why there should be a "new rule" in the league.

If/when something like this happens again (it probably never will), instead of simply stating that the ref is "part of the field", the new rule should state something like:

"When a field official impedes the path of a live ball heading into the endzone resulting in the ball not entering the endzone, that ball will be deemed a 'touch back' and placed on the 20-yard line."

Watcha think?

Plain English? I like it. When the ref explained it that night, it said something about a receiver touching the ball, yet made no mention of the ref. I was surprised to see that a play involving a receiver would apply to a field judge.

I just knew that the application of the rule would be challenged by the panthers.

As for chaning it. I think it would be clear. That was the first time I'd ever seen something like that happen. It would help future instances, should they happen. Also, it would be nice to say I was at the game that established the precedent for the new rule.