The "Challenge"

**RavensRule21215** · 12-23-2012, 07:29 PM

Shouldn't John Harbaugh have challenged the fumble by Manning recovered by Upshaw? Wouldn't the Ravens have been given the ball at the spot where Upshaw clearly recovered the fumble, at around the Giants 25?

**arnie_uk** · 12-23-2012, 07:33 PM

He should have especially after the ref saying there will b no advantage for the giants, in others words the advantage would be the ravens.

That's how I understood that

**brown2RAVEN** · 12-23-2012, 07:36 PM

Shouldn't NY have been charged a timeout or penalized?

**Ravenswintitle** · 12-23-2012, 07:36 PM

If Coughlin threw the red flag, how in the hell is it ok for the refs to talk him out of it and disregard? Once it's thrown that should be it

**Haloti92** · 12-23-2012, 07:37 PM

It was clusterf*ck by the refs, so I am not sure they would have given us the ball. In reality, the Giants should have gotten the ball first and 10, except the refs blew the ball dead. Neither Aikman nor Pereira explained the situation well, but suffice it to say there is no rule preventing the advancement of a fumble (fumble returns for TDs happen all the time).

But after the whistle blows is the issue, and I am still not sure exactly when the whistle blew. I suspect the refs would have claimed it was blowing before Upshaw picked it up just to cover their own mistake of blowing it prematurely in the first place.

**Haloti92** · 12-23-2012, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

If Coughlin threw the red flag, how in the hell is it ok for the refs to talk him out of it and disregard? Once it's thrown that should be it

Because the refs realized they had f*cked up and were in "nothing to see here" mode. I really am not sure what the rule says regarding premature whistle being blown, but that is what made the play an issue. Without a premature whistle it would have been Giants ball 1st and 10 after Upshaw's fumble.

**arnie_uk** · 12-23-2012, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

Because the refs realized they had f*cked up and were in "nothing to see here" mode. I really am not sure what the rule says regarding premature whistle being blown, but that is what made the play an issue. Without a premature whistle it would have been Giants ball 1st and 10 after Upshaw's fumble.

Not according to mike pereira. He said upshaw can't advance that fumble and therefore his fumble ceases to exist. 1st and 10 for us.

But why couldn't it be advanced?

**Haloti92** · 12-23-2012, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by arnie_uk

Not according to mike pereira. He said upshaw can't advance that fumble and therefore his fumble ceases to exist. 1st and 10 for us

Yeah, Pereira did not explain why. And the only possible reason is (and I am still trying to find the exact language of the rule) that the ref blew the whistle after the fumble. It used to be that after the whistle blew no one could recover, but a few years ago I am pretty sure they changed it so that a team could still recover (but I suspect not advance) a fumble after an inadvertent/premature whistle. As I said, standard fumbles can be advanced, it happens all the time obviously.

**arnie_uk** · 12-23-2012, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

Yeah, Pereira did not explain why. And the only possible reason is (and I am still trying to find the exact language of the rule) that the ref blew the whistle after the fumble. It used to be that after the whistle blew no one could recover, but a few years ago I am pretty sure they changed it so that a team could still recover (but I suspect not advance) a fumble after an inadvertent/premature whistle. As I said, standard fumbles can be advanced, it happens all the time obviously.

i had no idea why he said that you see strip sacks being returned for tds almost weekly. But harbaugh should then have challenged once he said there would be no advantage to the giants.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 12-23-2012, 07:58 PM

Once they ruled that it was an incomplete pass, the play would have stopped at the spot of the clear recovery of Upshaw.

I thought it was a horrible "non challenge" by Harbaugh...particularly after his horrible thinking process over the last couple weeks with challenging.

Frankly, I think he didn't understand that the play wouldn't have continued after Upshaw's recovery...that he thought it may have been a fumble, but feared that if the ref's changed it to a fumble, they would have given the ball back to New York because of Upshaw's fumble.

It was a bad no challenge.

**Haloti92** · 12-23-2012, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by arnie_uk

i had no idea why he said that you see strip sacks being returned for tds almost weekly. But harbaugh should then have challenged once he said there would be no advantage to the giants.

I agree, though I think this could have been a case where the replay official might have just covered for his on-the-field brethren (and their mistake) and said the arm was coming forward and it was inconclusive and incomplete (despite the fact it was a fairly clear empty-hand fumble). But I agree, the ref basically verbalized that a challenge could only benefit us, not hurt us, so if Harbaugh was worried the Giants might have gotten a 1st and 10 after a review/challenge then he was being an idiot.

**Haloti92** · 12-23-2012, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

Once they ruled that it was an incomplete pass, the play would have stopped at the spot of the clear recovery of Upshaw.

I thought it was a horrible "non challenge" by Harbaugh...particularly after his horrible thinking process over the last couple weeks with challenging.

Frankly, I think he didn't understand that the play wouldn't have continued after Upshaw's recovery...that he thought it may have been a fumble, but feared that if the ref's changed it to a fumble, they would have given the ball back to New York because of Upshaw's fumble.

It was a bad no challenge.

You beat me to it (I am a slow typist

), but like arnie is saying, Harbaugh's idiocy is especially egregious once the ref comepletely rules out any review result that would benefit the Giants (like a double fumble and 1st and 10 Giants would). The ref basically is saying "Baltimore could/should challenge."

**MarkS** · 12-23-2012, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

Yeah, Pereira did not explain why. And the only possible reason is (and I am still trying to find the exact language of the rule) that the ref blew the whistle after the fumble. It used to be that after the whistle blew no one could recover, but a few years ago I am pretty sure they changed it so that a team could still recover (but I suspect not advance) a fumble after an inadvertent/premature whistle. As I said, standard fumbles can be advanced, it happens all the time obviously.

Here's the applicable section, from the NFL rulebook:

Section #9: Instant Replay
Reviewable Plays, paragraph c), Other reviewable plays:

1. Runner ruled not down by defensive contact.
2. Runner ruled down by defensive contact when the recovery of a fumble by an opponent or a
teammate occurs in the action that happens following the fumble.
3. Ruling of incomplete pass when the recovery of a passer’s fumble by an opponent or a teammate
occurs in the action following the fumble.
4. Ruling of a loose ball out of bounds when it is recovered in the field of play by an opponent or a
teammate in the action after the ball hits the ground.

Note 1: If the ruling of down by contact or incomplete pass is changed, the ball belongs to the recovering
player at the spot of the recovery of the fumble, and any advance is nullified.

The reason for this is: The NFL wants players to stop playing when the whistle blows, but doesn't want to punish a team that clearly would have recovered a fumble if the Ref hadn't screwed up the call.

It must be CLEAR that the player would have recovered the ball if the correct call (i.e: fumble, not incomplete pass) had been made on the field, and then the play is dead at that point, with the recovering player not allowed to advance the ball.

So yea, Harbaugh should have challanged.

ETA: I'm working off the 2011 NFL rulebook: If someone has the 2012 version, please let me know

http://www.blogandtackle.net/wp-cont...FLRuleBook.pdf

**Ravenswintitle** · 12-23-2012, 08:06 PM

I think he relies on someone upstairs to tell him when to challenge.

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 12-23-2012, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle

I think he relies on someone upstairs to tell him when to challenge.

He must have hired a new person midseason because he used to be very good at when and when not to challenge.

It's been really, really bad the last couple weeks.

**Ravenswintitle** · 12-23-2012, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

He must have hired a new person midseason because he used to be very good at when and when not to challenge.

It's been really, really bad the last couple weeks.

Maybe they are letting Cam do it

)

**Haloti92** · 12-23-2012, 08:12 PM

Yeah, I was getting to that section, but stumbled upon this confusing part of the rulebook (that looks to be specifically overruled by the part you mentioned):

Section 2. Dead Ball
Article 1: Dead Ball Declared

....

(n) when an official sounds his whistle while the ball is still in play, the ball becomes dead immediately;
(i) If the ball is in player possession, the team in possession may elect to put the ball in play where it
has been declared dead or to replay the down.
(ii) If the ball is a loose ball resulting from a fumble, backward pass, or illegal forward pass, the team
last in possession may elect to put the ball in play at the spot where possession was lost or to
replay the down.

**NC Raven** · 12-23-2012, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

Frankly, I think he didn't understand that the play wouldn't have continued after Upshaw's recovery...that he thought it may have been a fumble, but feared that if the ref's changed it to a fumble, they would have given the ball back to New York because of Upshaw's fumble.

After the called back JJ TD, and the bizarre calls and explanations in the game, I would not have trusted the refs to make the right call whether they reviewed it or not. When the refs told Coughlin the challenge would do him no good, and we knew it was 4th down, the thing to do was leave well enough alone. Giants couldn't challenge, and knowing the Giants had to punt.

If we had challenged, I am not at all sure the idiot in the replay booth would have done the right thing.

I think the thought process was, "Screw it, let's just take the punt and not give these morons in the booth another chance to **** us with a replay review. They're liable to give the Giants the damn ball. Screw it."

**Ravenswintitle** · 12-23-2012, 08:25 PM

But they didn't blow the whistle, they let it play out. I may be missing the point here

**Boulderraven** · 12-23-2012, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

Once they ruled that it was an incomplete pass, the play would have stopped at the spot of the clear recovery of Upshaw.

I thought it was a horrible "non challenge" by Harbaugh...particularly after his horrible thinking process over the last couple weeks with challenging.

Frankly, I think he didn't understand that the play wouldn't have continued after Upshaw's recovery...that he thought it may have been a fumble, but feared that if the ref's changed it to a fumble, they would have given the ball back to New York because of Upshaw's fumble.

It was a bad no challenge.

Thats what happened, he didn't know what to do basically. But he knew he would get the ball back and didnt want to jeopardize losing the ball somehow. Football coaches and officials are far from geniuses. Why isnt UpStupid just falling on the football instead of trying to run with it?