SD Tight end catches the ball. Not touched and throws the ball to the ground (forward) and recovered by the RAIDERS. Ruling on the field is illegal forward pass and five yard penalty against the offense. The original catch minus the penalty is still a first down for San Diego. WTF? Tell me that that is the correct (not legal) call after you see it. The MFer wasn't down with contact and then threw the ball forward. The later resulting play after retaining possession is a TD. Is it the NFL or the crew that just fucked the RAIDERS?
Here's the drive as reported by the NFL San Diego Chargers at 13:26 1-10-OAK48 (13:26) L.Tomlinson left tackle to OAK 47 for 1 yard (T.Brayton). 2-9-OAK47 (12:47) P.Rivers pass incomplete short right to L.Tomlinson. 3-9-OAK47 (12:39) (Shotgun) P.Rivers pass short left to E.Parker to OAK 40 for 7 yards (S.Schweigert). 4-2-OAK40 (11:53) (Shotgun) P.Rivers pass short middle to V.Jackson, dead ball declared at OAK 27 for 13 yards. PENALTY on SD-V.Jackson, Illegal Forward Pass, 5 yards, enforced between downs. 1-10-OAK32 (11:25) L.Tomlinson right tackle to OAK 30 for 2 yards (T.Kelly). 2-8-OAK30 (10:45) P.Rivers pass incomplete short left to A.Gates. 3-8-OAK30 (10:40) (Shotgun) P.Rivers pass incomplete short right to V.Jackson. PENALTY on OAK-F.Washington, Defensive Pass Interference, 5 yards, enforced at OAK 30 - No Play. 1-10-OAK25 (10:34) L.Tomlinson left end to OAK 19 for 6 yards (N.Asomugha). 2-4-OAK19 (9:52) L.Tomlinson pass deep right to A.Gates for 19 yards, TOUCHDOWN. N.Kaeding extra point is GOOD, Center-D.Binn, Holder-M.Scifres. OAK 14 SD 14, Plays: 8 Yards: 48 Possession: 3:40. That's not right. How about the part where the RAIDERS got the d*ck shoved up their *ass? Left that part out, didn't they? The RAIDERS may not have been the better team today, but they hadn't expected to have had to beat the league too. That play was a 7-10 point swing.
Yeah, I saw that. At first, I thought he celebrated too early and it was going to be ruled a fumble. But it was ruled a forward pass. I don't really know exactly the rules but he threw the football towards the direction of the goal so he was spared. I hearded the announcers make some comparisons to Plaxico Burress. BTW, the Raiders played a good game but the momemtum clearly moved to the Chargers after that call.
Sorry Al but that is the rule. In this case it's called the "you got screwed rule" but it is what it is. Stupid thing to think if he was pointing the other way it's a fumble. Man would I lose sleep if that happened against us. Seems the Raiders are getting a lot of the shaft recently
CFF, I will assume until I hear otherwise that you mean that it would be stupid (as a rule) that if the ball was thrown the other way it would be a fumble. It was a bail-out for the idiot TE, pure and simple. It took several minutes of "on field" discussion to decide what the call was going to be. Never let the facts get in the way of a ruling on the field?... And then they came back before giving the final ruling and said that if the point of gain was not met after the fumble... er... play, the ball would stay in the hands of the Chargers. Face facts folks. Marty is the newly "Anointed one". Pardon me for being candid, but that was a totaly fucked up ruling/call. The tuck ruling was the correct ruling a couple of years ago. This ruling is wrong! CFF, send me the rule from the book and we can talk. That was never the intent of the rule as far as I'm concerned.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>4th Qtr. - 11:40 One of the most egregious mistakes of the season was just committed by Vincent Jackson of the Chargers. On fourth-and-two Rivers hits Jackson for the first down, Jackson jumped up celebrating the play by spinning the ball on the ground, only problem, he was never touched. The refs let him off the hook by somehow calling it an illegal forward pass, allowing the Chargers to maintain possession. However, there is a five-yard penalty assessed on the play, before the first down is awarded. After everything is settled the Chargers have the first down, and if they win this game should send a thank you note to the head referee.</div> LMAO! :rock:
Al that's what I was trying to say that the ruling was correct but it is definatley not the intent of the rule. That's what I find crazy (maybe a better word then stupid) that if he's pointing one way it's an incomplete pass but the other it's a fumble. Don't have a link for you just heard them discussing it on the post game.
i saw it and disagree with the refs as well. I saw the same thing a few years back in a Steelr/Jaguar game, it was ruled and Fumble and a turnover.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Zackman)</div><div class='quotemain'>LMAO! :rock:</div> Hey thanks for chiming in again with a 30:1 cut and paste to your own idea post. :/
The ruling on the field was a fumble. I sat there motionless after the ref changed the ruling 3-4 times before allowing the next snap of the ball. They hate us.
Whether or not they hate us, the official ruling seemed to take a long time to get to the field, if you get my drift.
Ok the conspiracy theory thing about the NFL being against the Raiders just doesn't make sense and is really annoying to hear from fans. I guess one excuse for a loss is as good as another. Face it....LT got the best of you in the long run. Nothing to be ashamed of there....he gets the best of everyone. The play was a forward pass. It might suck that it took them some time to figure that out, but it was the correct ruling.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cubuffsman78)</div><div class='quotemain'>Ok the conspiracy theory thing about the NFL being against the Raiders just doesn't make sense and is really annoying to hear from fans. I guess one excuse for a loss is as good as another. Face it....LT got the best of you in the long run. Nothing to be ashamed of there....he gets the best of everyone. The play was a forward pass. It might suck that it took them some time to figure that out, but it was the correct ruling.</div> Right after the whole thing went down, people came forward with identical situations from the recent past in which the referees ruled it a fumble. The same can be said for the "tuck". All prior rulings on that one were "fumble". Is it just coincidence that Oakland always gets the shaft on anything close like that? Perhaps it is all coincidence, but these things always seem to mark a turning point in a football game, that shifts all momentum to the other team in closely contested games. For me, that is really frustrating. Also, who the hell was that guy throwing the ball to if it were indeed a forward pass, as they claimed it was? The difference between intentional grounding is whether or not there is an elgible receiver close enough to make a play on a pass (when the QB is passing from inside the pocket). Why can't that same logic be applied in this case, as he was clearly spinning the ball on the ground in a taunting sort of way after he thought he just made a first down catch. That receiver really got away with one there, no doubt.
I'm a Chargers fan and I agree that the call was bogus- the Raiders definitely got screwed on that one..There was still a lot of time left in the game so the Chargers could have still won even if the play was actually ruled a fumble, but all the momentum the Raiders had was immediately killed after the Chargers got a first down from that...It was before my time, but after the game a lot of old school Charger fans were claiming that this was redemption from the Holy Roller play 20 years ago.. Watching the replay, and seeing the look on Vincent Jackson's face go from complete excitement as he celebrates by spiking the ball-to utter disbelief and confusion as he notices the Raiders players jumping on the footbal is priceless though, especially when Antonio Gates goes over and taps him on the shoulder and he just stands there motionless and dumbfounded, because you know Gates probably said something to the effect of, "Uhhh, you were down by contact, right dude?"
