The fake punt

[EatonFan]

Anyone else think Marvin should have challenged that? I thought he fumbled and recovered before the 30 yard line (about a 1/3 of a yard).

Anyone got that replay?

[jfkbengals]

(09-27-2015, 06:42 PM)EatonFan Wrote: Anyone else think Marvin should have challenged that?  I thought he fumbled and recovered before the 30 yard line (about a 1/3 of a yard).

Anyone got that replay?

He recovered past the line, but I always thought the rule was that on 4th down a fumble recovered by the offense reverts back to the spot of the fumble.

Ref claimed it could be advanced because the player who fumbled recovered it, but I've never seen or heard of that one.

[yellowxdiscipline]

Thought it was a garbage call to begin with… The refs made it up as they went the whole game..

[Brownshoe]

(09-27-2015, 06:45 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: He recovered past the line, but I always thought the rule was that on 4th down a fumble recovered by the offense reverts back to the spot of the fumble.

Ref claimed it could be advanced because the player who fumbled recovered it, but I've never seen or heard of that one.

Yeah the refs tried to keep the Ravens in the game.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(09-27-2015, 06:45 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: He recovered past the line, but I always thought the rule was that on 4th down a fumble recovered by the offense reverts back to the spot of the fumble.

Ref claimed it could be advanced because the player who fumbled recovered it, but I've never seen or heard of that one.

IIRC, when Peerman fumbled V Stoolers last year, they said the same rule as today; where he recovers the ball, its dead.

I didn't think he recovered it past the 30, let alone the 31.

[jfkbengals]

(09-27-2015, 06:45 PM)jfkbengals Wrote: He recovered past the line, but I always thought the rule was that on 4th down a fumble recovered by the offense reverts back to the spot of the fumble.

Ref claimed it could be advanced because the player who fumbled recovered it, but I've never seen or heard of that one.

To further elaborate on my point in the prior post, it's Ken Stabler's Holy Roller rule from Oakland.

[HarleyDog]

(09-27-2015, 06:46 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Yeah the refs tried to keep the Ravens in the game.

Maybe crowd or home team motivated but your right. Douchebags!

[EatonFan]

Love to see that play again and see. But it sure seemed he recovered BEFORE the 30 yard line and scooted forward on the ground to get the 1st down.

[jfkbengals]

(09-27-2015, 06:53 PM)EatonFan Wrote: Love to see that play again and see.  But it sure seemed he recovered BEFORE the 30 yard line and scooted forward on the ground to get the 1st down.

While I wouldn't have called the view conclusive by any means, there was one that looked like he was crawling along trying to gain posession.

[Au165]

It was legal because the time it happened. At a certain time the ball can't be advanced (think its like 2 or 4 minutes left in half) because of the holy roller. It was the right call.

[StripesInSuffolk]

I think he collected the ball at the 31 yard line and *may* have pulled it back to the 29.5 or 30 to truly possess it. I think it was too close to have a good chance at being overturned. I don't fault them for declining to challenge.

[jtsmith38]

Lets not forget, Peerman made a good, veteran play that made it that close. Many here were calling for his head on cut down day. I liked Wlider jr too in the preseason, but i don't think he would have contributed anything to this game.

[The Caped Crusader]

Garbage play. One of those plays that I chalk up as poor officiating, especially the explanation.