These Refs Are Terrible

[War Admiral Buc]

Screwed on the Pittman fumble

Reversed on the Dunn fumble- screwed

Screwed as June was tripped and the ground caused his fumble

Askew wasn't down when he fumbled. That makes up for it a little bit.

[mjs020294]

Pitmann's was hard to over turn.

[Biggs3535]

The June thing was UNBELIEVABLE.

[mjs020294]

The June thing was UNBELIEVABLE.

Bad call for sure but did you see it in the first 27 replays?  The Bucs challenged that the FIRST runner was down, which was wrong.

If you make a specific challenge does the official review everything 

[OpTiOnMaStA]

I never knew you had to make a "specific" challenge. I just thought the play was challenged and then that entire play was reviewed. I guess that isn't how it works, though.

Is it possible that June being down wasn't reviewable?

[Biggs3535]

I have heard both ways.  Sometimes they review the whole play, sometimes they have to look at specific things.

The main goal should be to get the play right.

[mjs020294]

I never knew you had to make a "specific" challenge. I just thought the play was challenged and then that entire play was reviewed. I guess that isn't how it works, though.

Is it possible that June being down wasn't reviewable?

I would like to know exactly what the challenge rules say.  If they are meant to review the whole play then they made a mistake. IMO

[BUCFAN4LIFE]

I always thought it did not matter-- once a play was challenged the whole play was up for review including the spot. Isn't the point to get the play right? Everyone knows June was down by illegal tripping not to mention contact. Hde should have had the flag thrown on tripping. To screw the call once it is reviewed for 10 min is complete BS.

[samsdad]

i didnt see it but from your descriptions.....once a play is reviewed I believe just the specific thing the coach challenges is what they are supposed to look at.....BUT
watching NFL REVIEW on teh Nfl network.....the head ref has repeatedly said they review the whole play.

[sammy8887]

i didnt see it but from your descriptions.....once a play is reviewed I believe just the specific thing the coach challenges is what they are supposed to look at.....BUT
watching NFL REVIEW on teh Nfl network.....the head ref has repeatedly said they review the whole play.

This happened in one of Denver's games at the end of last year...the other team challenged something that would go in their favor (something like down by contact after they recovered a fumble)...the referee saw the play and ruled an incomplete pass before there was ever a fumble...

So yes, once a play is reviewed, all aspects of the play are supposed to get reviewed...

[keeponbucn]

Askew wasn't down when he fumbled. That makes up for it a little bit.

yes he was, the ground caused that fumble, clear as day.

[bizkitlimped]

It makes you mad that because of how you worded the challenge it works against you. but you would think that the refs would have enough common sense to make the right call on the field when it was clearly shown. but whatever it didn't change the outcome of the game so we'll just get our apology letter from the league and be done with it

[Uncle Stan]

IIRC,

There was a play last year that was challenged. The coach did what Gruden did and called for a "specific" review. The specific review was reviewed and the challenge was upheld. But had the whole play been reviewed the challenge would have been reversed.

This info was provided by the league after the game was over.

[ryan24]

I never knew you had to make a "specific" challenge. I just thought the play was challenged and then that entire play was reviewed. I guess that isn't how it works, though.

Is it possible that June being down wasn't reviewable?

As I understand it the coach has to ask for a specific aspect of a play to be reviewed. In this case either Gruden got some bad info from whoever it is in the Bucs booth who decides these things or he simply asked for the wrong guy to be reviewed. The rule itself is pretty stupid although this is a very unusual case.