Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 06:21 PMnot that i really mind that much, but that fumble-pass whatever you want to call it should have been a touchdown for seattle. if you want to call it a fumble then its a touchdown. if they want to call it a pass then he threw it backwards and is then a loose ball. if i was a seattle fan i would be pissed as hell
ddpatterson09-10-2000, 06:24 PMI have no idea what game you were watching, but his arm was clearly moving forward, and so did the ball which means incomplete pass. If that was a bad call, then someone can make an argument that the Grant Winstrom overturn was incorrect as well.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 06:25 PMif you look at the replay the ball goes backwards as it leaves his hand.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 06:26 PMand i know his arm was moving forward but that still doesn't change the fact that the ball went backwards
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 09:16 PMAt the stadium they only re-played it once so, I was unsure what happened, I am looking forward to seeing it on the highlights.
Dave Lane09-10-2000, 09:20 PMWarner's arm and the ball were definitely moving forward. I don't think Kurt meant to release the ball, but none the less, the ball was moving forward and the officials got it right. Seattle should be happy that that Int. by Winstrom was overturned that allowed Seattle to go down & tie the game at 34.
milkman09-10-2000, 09:32 PMMizzou is right, that INT by Wistrom was not conclusive at any angle, yet they overturned it because one of his hands moved to get better posistion on the ball. So even if it was a bad call it made things equal.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 09:53 PMi know his arm was going forward but he tried tucking the ball back in. the ball then went backwards. does anyone understand what i'm saying? maybe i'm just misunderstanding the rules here but the ball clearly went backwards.
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 09:57 PMI understand what you are saying but, We still had a chance to win despite that. Giving up that 3rd and 17 pass with 30 seconds left killed us! Rams are tough to stop,unfortunately the weather was dry and pleasant. Had it been pouring down rain like it was when I woke up today, we would have beat them IMO.....Joe
milkman09-10-2000, 09:59 PMSlim - I saw that too, but if your arm is going forward and the ball slips out it is still a forward pass. At least that is my understanding of the rules, which is what the Ref's must have been thinking.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 10:01 PMthanks morphius
Herzig09-10-2000, 10:13 PMIf anyone got screwed it was the Rams. The Wistrom overturn was horrible. The game should have been over long before the Warner pass.
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 10:41 PMLooks like a fumble to me... http://www.ChiefsPlanet.com/ubb/smile.gif
milkman09-10-2000, 10:45 PMJoe - Wistroms INT looked like a catch too, but what ya gonna do. Welcome to third place, at least you can say it isn't lonely down here.
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 10:56 PMJeff, I know, I'm not going to make any excuses, the Rams played a good offensive game and we just couldn't quite hang with them. I saw improvement in my team and thats the only positive about it..
Shootr09-11-2000, 06:44 AMJoe Seahawk:
DoktorSmith09-11-2000, 09:45 AMThey showed the replay enough times that everyone should have seen that Warner's hand was IN FRONT of the ball and he brought it back right before he was hit.
DoktorSmith09-11-2000, 09:46 AMThey showed the replay enough times that everyone should have seen that Warner's hand was IN FRONT of the ball and he brought it back right before he was hit.
milkman09-11-2000, 09:48 AMGaz - Appearntly you feel pretty strongly about that.
Dave Lane09-11-2000, 09:55 AMI think both calls were right. The int did hit the ground before Winstrom had control of it & Warners arm was moving forwards. The main reason that St Louis won is because they had the ball last.
Gracie Dean09-11-2000, 12:29 PMIn the Winstrom "int" the ball clearly hit the ground and he rolled over on it. That was correctly overturned. I agree with everyone else that Warner either fumbled or lateralled the ball.
Gracie Dean09-11-2000, 12:30 PMmizzou - clearly his arm was moving forward but it was a backwards pass....
Dave Lane09-11-2000, 12:48 PMI didn't notice whether the pass was backwards on the replay. I think the officials were just looking at whether his arm was moving forwards or not. What I didn't understand is why St Louis didn't run some more time off the clock before that last field goal. Warner could have just taken a knee & let the clock run down to about 10 seconds left & then spike it again.
Tribal Warfare09-11-2000, 04:36 PMhey mizzou not to be rude or anything, but it doesn't matter what direction his arm is going, the fact is the ball went backwards. they showed the replay several times during the game. i just can't understand what the hell the ref was thinking when he was reviewing that play
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 06:21 PMnot that i really mind that much, but that fumble-pass whatever you want to call it should have been a touchdown for seattle. if you want to call it a fumble then its a touchdown. if they want to call it a pass then he threw it backwards and is then a loose ball. if i was a seattle fan i would be pissed as hell
ddpatterson09-10-2000, 06:24 PMI have no idea what game you were watching, but his arm was clearly moving forward, and so did the ball which means incomplete pass. If that was a bad call, then someone can make an argument that the Grant Winstrom overturn was incorrect as well.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 06:25 PMif you look at the replay the ball goes backwards as it leaves his hand.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 06:26 PMand i know his arm was moving forward but that still doesn't change the fact that the ball went backwards
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 09:16 PMAt the stadium they only re-played it once so, I was unsure what happened, I am looking forward to seeing it on the highlights.
Dave Lane09-10-2000, 09:20 PMWarner's arm and the ball were definitely moving forward. I don't think Kurt meant to release the ball, but none the less, the ball was moving forward and the officials got it right. Seattle should be happy that that Int. by Winstrom was overturned that allowed Seattle to go down & tie the game at 34.
milkman09-10-2000, 09:32 PMMizzou is right, that INT by Wistrom was not conclusive at any angle, yet they overturned it because one of his hands moved to get better posistion on the ball. So even if it was a bad call it made things equal.
Tribal Warfare09-10-2000, 09:53 PMi know his arm was going forward but he tried tucking the ball back in. the ball then went backwards. does anyone understand what i'm saying? maybe i'm just misunderstanding the rules here but the ball clearly went backwards.
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 09:57 PMI understand what you are saying but, We still had a chance to win despite that. Giving up that 3rd and 17 pass with 30 seconds left killed us! Rams are tough to stop,unfortunately the weather was dry and pleasant. Had it been pouring down rain like it was when I woke up today, we would have beat them IMO.....Joe
milkman09-10-2000, 09:59 PMSlim - I saw that too, but if your arm is going forward and the ball slips out it is still a forward pass. At least that is my understanding of the rules, which is what the Ref's must have been thinking.
Tribal Warfa
re09-10-2000, 10:01 PMthanks morphius
Herzig09-10-2000, 10:13 PMIf anyone got screwed it was the Rams. The Wistrom overturn was horrible. The game should have been over long before the Warner pass.
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 10:41 PMLooks like a fumble to me... http://www.ChiefsPlanet.com/ubb/smile.gif
milkman09-10-2000, 10:45 PMJoe - Wistroms INT looked like a catch too, but what ya gonna do. Welcome to third place, at least you can say it isn't lonely down here.
Buzzbait09-10-2000, 10:56 PMJeff, I know, I'm not going to make any excuses, the Rams played a good offensive game and we just couldn't quite hang with them. I saw improvement in my team and thats the only positive about it..
Shootr09-11-2000, 06:44 AMJoe Seahawk:
DoktorSmith09-11-2000, 09:45 AMThey showed the replay enough times that everyone should have seen that Warner's hand was IN FRONT of the ball and he brought it back right before he was hit.
DoktorSmith09-11-2000, 09:46 AMThey showed the replay enough times that everyone should have seen that Warner's hand was IN FRONT of the ball and he brought it back right before he was hit.
milkman09-11-2000, 09:48 AMGaz - Appearntly you feel pretty strongly about that.
Dave Lane09-11-2000, 09:55 AMI think both calls were right. The int did hit the ground before Winstrom had control of it & Warners arm was moving forwards. The main reason that St Louis won is because they had the ball last.
Gracie Dean09-11-2000, 12:29 PMIn the Winstrom "int" the ball clearly hit the ground and he rolled over on it. That was correctly overturned. I agree with everyone else that Warner either fumbled or lateralled the ball.
Gracie Dean09-11-2000, 12:30 PMmizzou - clearly his arm was moving forward but it was a backwards pass....
Dave Lane09-11-2000, 12:48 PMI didn't notice whether the pass was backwards on the replay. I think the officials were just looking at whether his arm was moving forwards or not. What I didn't understand is why St Louis didn't run some more time off the clock before that last field goal. Warner could have just taken a knee & let the clock run down to about 10 seconds left & then spike it again.
Tribal Warfare09-11-2000, 04:36 PMhey mizzou not to be rude or anything, but it doesn't matter what direction his arm is going, the fact is the ball went backwards. they showed the replay several times during the game. i just can't understand what the hell the ref was thinking when he was reviewing that play