Re-establishing position

[bent09]

Does not matter, inside two minutes they can review anything they want.

[olafberserker]

legal bump because freeman was out of the pocket.  I did not know you could bump recievers when the QB was out of the pocket. 

Live and learn.  Great game.

except he wasn't out of the pocket when the bump occurred

Really tough to tell.  Man its close so I give it to the officials.

My quesiton is why did they not take a look on replay?

it was clear he was in the pocket in slow mo, the lack of a replay is my question as well.  that is absolutely the kind of play that should be reviewed.

[Knucknbuc]

Freeman wasn't even out of the pocket yet mike periea is a **CENSORED**ing dumb **CENSORED** with nerdy as glasses on **CENSORED** him

[olafberserker]

I want to see this out of the pocket rule in writing otherwise I call bs! And if it is a rule I am not so sure free was out of the pocket when it happened anyways

he wasn't

[olafberserker]

Freeman wasn't even out of the pocket yet mike periea is a **CENSORED**ing dumb **CENSORED** with nerdy as glasses on **CENSORED** him

exactly, why are these putzes only looking at part of the play and calling it the right call?

[m_j]

But II must be honest and say that I am much more upset how cheap Schiano  is tan about us being screwed by refs again!

[3rd String Kicker]

Player eligibility is reviewable, but an illegal contact penalty is not. Since no penalty was called on the field, had they reviewed it, it would not have went our way anyway.

It all comes down to, was Mike Williams pushed out of bounds utilizing illegal contact, which.... even if he had, the TD catch would not have stood because we later went out of bounds again lol. However, we'd at least have one more shot at it.

[Knucknbuc]

Player eligibility is reviewable, but an illegal contact penalty is not. Since no penalty was called on the field, had they reviewed it, it would not have went our way anyway.

It all comes down to, was Mike Williams pushed out of bounds utilizing illegal contact, which.... even if he had, the TD catch would not have stood because we later went out of bounds again lol. However, we'd at least have one more shot at it.

Exactly at the least that play was a redo.

[m_j]

Does not matter, inside two minutes they can review anything they want.

yes, but they almost never do it unless they give a score or turnover!
thats why I brought that superbowl example. good ref would have given TD and review it!

they simply protect themselves

as.s.holes

[olafberserker]

Player eligibility is reviewable, but an illegal contact penalty is not. Since no penalty was called on the field, had they reviewed it, it would not have went our way anyway.

stupid to not be able to review that play.  everything should be reviewable at that point

[Coburn1]

According to Mike P in the post game show it only goes that way if the QB is in the pocket.  If he is out of the pocket... he is not allowed to be the first player to touch the ball...

Yeah, I don't get it either...

Well that's not written in the rule that was just presented is it? Unless you can pull up the rule that has this particular exception.
Sure would be interesting to see DBs start trucking WRs near the sidelines/back of end zone the moment a QB rolls out.

EDIT: Just saw what 3rd string quoted. If true technically it may be correct but a really really stupid rule. Sometimes I think there should be a certain amount of common sense factor when a loop hole is tested. There's no way a receiver shouldn't be able to catch that TD because the DB decided to be a little puss and push him out because he was getting beat.

and how can you not take a minute out of a 3.5 hours game to make sure you decide the correct winner of the game or whether it needs to go into OT?

[olafberserker]

According to Mike P in the post game show it only goes that way if the QB is in the pocket.  If he is out of the pocket... he is not allowed to be the first player to touch the ball...

Yeah, I don't get it either...

Well that's not written in the rule that was just presented is it? Unless you can pull up the rule that has this particular exception.
Sure would be interesting to see DBs start trucking WRs near the sidelines/back of end zone the moment a QB rolls out.

exactly, the contact was right after Freeman turned and started to roll.  he was in the pocket still

[TBTrojan]

Player eligibility is reviewable, but an illegal contact penalty is not. Since no penalty was called on the field, had they reviewed it, it would not have went our way anyway.

stupid to not be able to review that play.  everything should be reviewable at that point

I'm of the opinion that everything should be reviewable during the entire game as long as you have a challenge.
Why should you have to accept a PI call if it is complete BS, you should be able to call the refs on their many mistakes.

[m_j]

i checked a  replay 5 times
mike was bumped out before free was out of the pocket

this all sucks. I'm going to the pub to get loaded! We have the cheapest coach n the league and refs screw us! real sh**!!!

[jerseybucsfan]

They made THREE errors on this play: 1. If you watch the replay, MW is actually bumped at the goal line long before Freeman ever is getting ready to throw.
2. He's bumped out of bounds before Freeman goes out of the pocket, therefore Foul No. 2 is committed.
3. He re-establishes position according to the rules.
This might be a historic call. Never saw a team get burned three different ways ERRONEOUSLY on one call. If that's not a fix, I've never seen it.