the officiating in the Dallas game was a real joke. let's review a nonreviewable play. let's review a challange only to figure out it is the coaches 3rd challange. he lost one , won one so where did he get the 3rd? after further review there is no review because this coach has no challanges .

What a bunch of B.S . i dint see it it but it sound's like we got screwed

Bad call plain and simple

Bull$#!t. Complete bull$#!t. Clayton was clealy down. He had both knees down and was touched by a defender while he was on the ground. The play should be over at that point.

How many times do we have to see this call go against the Bucs? I still say E. Sheppard caught that ball in the end zone in the playoffs in 2005. How long does a receiver have to hold onto that damn ball until it's considered a catch? The amount of time should be clearly presented in the NFL rule book so the referee can look at the play and a timer during the review to rule it fairly.

Pinkstob - I agree. I never knew the ground could cause a fumble, except in the end zone.

Thanks Clayton "Hands of Stone". Got your money and you don't care anymore. PROTECT THE BALL. But #80 is a great blocker. Just more evidence that Gruden/Allen can't draft worth spit and us season ticket holders are paying top dollar to watch slop.

This was a competitive game and fun to watch. However, the zebras determined the outcome. Looks like we found a FG kicker and a money QB. Freeman to Winslow, we like that.....

@brooks55hof - How is Clayton still Gruden and Allen's fault? Dominik re-signed him, so it is Morris and Dominik's fault now.

The correct call should have been: 'The receiver caught and possessed the ball and was down by contact before the ball was stripped loose. 1 down Tampa Bay.' Period!!

christopher - You are correct, The fact remains #80 is still a bumm. We have no quality WR's and that is why Clayton applied leverage in his contract year. A good draft will send Clayton traded, packing and on his way....

IMO Pewterpain is correct. I'll be very interested in what the NFL has to say. Won't change anything, except possibly erasing an interception.

Actually, I think it sucks but I think from what I understand they got the call correct.

First off that was not an interception he caught the ball was tackled he and the defender were on the ground when the defender ripped the ball out of his hands and went into the air. That is not a fumble that is not an interception that is a BS call and on Tuesday they will contact the Bucs and tell them they screwed that up. Dont know how u r on the ground and someone touches you are not down by contact. Terrible call and the Refs should be fined.

But we still had the lead and lost it need to get a new Defensive Coach. Cause Bates gots to go he is terrible.

Of course it was an interception. Clayton didn't hold onto the ball until Thanksgiving day before it came loose! I think someone might have had a little something to gain by the call. That or it's just simple incompetence. Boy, I'm sure glad the call didn't cost us the game!

I know, I know one play shouldn't make the difference in a game...yada yada yada.

Looking at the replay it sure looked liked Clayton's elbow was down and he still had control of the ball while being tackled. Not sure how you could call it otherwise. Again, there will probably be a "we're sorry" from the league, but what are you going to do. Watched a lot of games today where the officiating has been really questionable. Must be one of those weeks.

This crap all started with the Bucs and the "Burt Emauel" rule. Refs screwed that up and have been trying to justify it ever since. What is a catch? Soon guys will have to get on the bus with the ball before it's a completion. This kind of S%$# ruins the game and the League explaining it is a joke.

His explanation did not match anything that the rest of us saw.

Dude yeah it was a bad call, but we are a 1 win team. lets just hope morris and his staff get canned and we can get a real coach in here like Billick or well anyone else. There is no leadership and very little experience here now, this is a sad day for Bucs fans. Good job Glazers firing Gruden and screwing the team!

Wow. Can't even admit when they make a bad call? Claytons ass, entire back, and elbow were down for a good 2 seconds before the ball came out. He was so clearly down it is ridiculous that Corrente would sit there and say it was a good call. It was either a completion and down by contact or it was an incompletion cause he didn't maintain control long enough, but it was NOT a fumble. I hate when grown ass men can't take responsability for thier mistakes and would rather lie like a child to bury thier mistakes.

There is far too much gray matter in the officiating this season. These officials are horrible. One time a play is called one thing and the next time it is a completely different outcome. It is a waste of time to even have replay. When a team is struggling like the Bucs they are never going to get the call. I do know that Raheem was visibly upset by this terrible call that could and ultimately would change the game in Miami's favor. Another useless penalty that drives me crazy is the block in the back penalty, It is called on almost every kick off return or punt return. Let these guys play football and not give these refs their moment of fame.

P.S. This referee is full of shite!!!! Come on NFL rules committee, or whoever is in charge, do something about these horrible calls. These refs should be held accountable for their screw ups too.

Guys, again the call was right. You can't blame the refs, blame the NFL. The call by the book was right, and I knew it all along. Screwed the Raiders out of a win earlier this year.

It's the rule, and YES, they got it right by the book, which is what you want any ref to do in a game. Although it sucks the Bucs had to be on the other end.

garbage

@bucfan47
This call was wrong by rule and by common sense.

Here's what Corrente said: "If he’s going to the ground to complete a catch, he has to maintain possession of the ball completely through the entire process of hitting the ground and thereafter showing control."

The precedent set in the Raiders game was clear: Lou Murphy had two feet and a butt hit but his elbow and the ball hit the ground at the same time on the way down. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d812a3858/NFL-GameDay-Chargers-vs-Raiders-highlights (@ the 1:36 mark) It doesn't make common sense but the refs can point to the fact that the possession wasn't "clean".

First, Clayton catches it plants his right foot, gets hit in the left leg his butt hits, then left hand, left elbow, left shoulder hit all while the ball is tucked. He starts to roll over onto his left shoulder/back and left knee...and right before his right knee and hand hit the ball pops out. He already hit the ground with all those parts of his body, he's on the way up from the ground and that's not good enough? At no point was there any doubt that the ball was in Clayton's possession and the on-field ref said "the receiver was in possession of the ball" on this video http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009111501/2009/REG10/buccaneers@dolphins#tab:watch...so I ask when does the process end?

The possession is never in doubt until Clayton is on the way up off the ground. There was no gray area on this one. This was an EASY call. Corente just expanded the rule to protect his guys and we got jobbed because of it. It robbed us 7 points and a ton of momentum going into half.

Sorry Bucfan

Just saw on NFL network where 2 analysts think thought this was a horrible call and an incorrect assessment by the ref.

As they showed on their replay, the ball did not pop out - it was stripped out AFTER Clayton had control, was down, and had been touched by a defender. A player cannot be stripped of the ball after he is down by contact.

They stated that the referee was focusing on the wrong aspect of the play - whether it was incomplete or an interception - when he should have been focusing on whether it was a catch and was the receiver down.

They were unanimous in calling this a horrible call. The ref is covering hi tracks with rulebook jargon rather than admitting he focused on the wrong aspect of the play.

And before stating a rule is a rule...

The commentators and the research department pointed out there are 3 other rules that contradict that rule, including a player cannot lose possession once ruled down by contact. the play can be called incomplete - but a turnover cannot be caused once the player is down.

They couldn't call it incomplete because the ball never hit the ground - what the ref failed to realize is that he also could not rule the play a turnover because the player was down by contact. If the ball had hit the ground - the correct call would have been an incompletion.

Since it did not - that rule does not apply - meaning the ref should have resorted to the ruling that the player had possession when down by contact. Period.

basically we got screwed.

(On whether the receiver was down by contact) – "We (the refs) clearly didn't think about that."