The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Just trying to get an understanding of the rule.

The way I understand it, that play is reviewable, and if in the referee's judgement, the defense makes a clear recovery, possession can be changed. 

The Dolphins came up on the short end of a play like this against Pittsburgh in 2010, when the ref, (I think it was Gene Steratore) ruled that Miami did not come up with a clear recovery, even though the replay showed they had.

Do you EVER watch a game and get any enjoyment out of it without believing that the refs somehow robbed one side or the other of a win? I don't get how watching football can be fun for anyone who is more caught up on the zebras than the players.

which rule are you not clear on?

Keep in mind, rules change year-to-year, so the rule in 2010 was different than the rule in 2015.  If I'm not mistaken, the rule in 2010 was that the fumble recovery was not reviewable because the whistle had blown as the call on the field was a TD.  They later reviewed the call, ruled that the ball was fumbled before breaking the plane, but since the whistle blew, anything that happened after that was non-reviewable.

You mis-remember. The official announcement was that they could not determine which team recovered the football after if was fumbled into the endzone, despite having a clear view of a Dolphins player being the first to put his hand on the ball and the same player being the one who emerged from the pile holding the ball.

This is the one and only time I've seen a crew say "we can't tell who recovered the football". I also bet I never see the call again.

What a hose job that was.

If it's not the Zebra's it's the kicker. The kicker always either wins or loses the game because you know if you miss a kick in the first 2 mins of a game and then lose by 2, you would have won if you would have made that kick. Nevermind that the offense for the other team may have just decided to score 3 more points you know if they needed it to win the game.

Would you please stop derailing threads with posts like these? 

I wanted to talk about the fumble rule.

The fumble "rule" is annoying. Basically, there are quite a few rules that cover the same play and you cannot tell solely from the rule book which is the correct way to rule. Due to two relatively recent rule changes, the relevant bit now is that if a ball is fumbled, no matter the actual call on the field, recovery can be challenged even if that recovery happened AFTER the whistle as long as the refs determine that it was "in continuation of the play".

The way this was originally explained was that if the whistle and refs stopped the play and the players reacted on it, then recovering after that doesn't count. There's a lot of gray area, though, and the refs (apparently) determined that that a ref running onto the field blowing his whistle and waving his arms wasn't sufficient to stop "the continuation of the play", even though several players (including Hillmann) appeared to react to that (and stop playing), after which the ball was recovered.

Coaches now need to teach their players that they must continue to play EVEN AFTER A CLEAR WHISTLE if there is a lose ball and the ref tells them to stop. This has always been the case in the depths of the dreaded pile, but now it applies in all situations.

Note that progress after recovery does not count, since the play has been whistled dead.

Great explanation, fyo.

In addition, further gray area exists for the players, who have to determine playing a loose ball past the whistle vs. a late hit after the whistle.