I'm wearing and Evans jersey & it looks like he had 2 feet down

[Skooby]

Couldn't they challenge that play from the top inside 2 minutes?

[split71]

It sure looked like he had two feet down...

[MattyNH]

Catches in the end zone are different than catches on the rest of the field I belive. He would have had to maintain position through the guy trying to tackle him which he did not. It totally contradicts the rule when you are running into the end zone where as soon as the tip of the ball crosses the plain, its play over, touchdown. There was nothing to challenge.

[Skooby]

Catches in the end zone are different than catches on the rest of the field I belive. He would have had to maintain position through the guy trying to tackle him which he did not. It totally contradicts the rule when you are running into the end zone where as soon as the tip of the ball crosses the plain, its play over, touchdown. There was nothing to challenge.

This makes no sense to me because he had control of the ball in the end zone, so even if you lose the ball it's a TD.

[MattyNH]

This makes no sense to me because he had control of the ball in the end zone, so even if you lose the ball it's a TD.

Im not disagreeing, The rule is the rule though. All you have to do is look at the Calvin Johnson non TD from last year. He caught it, two feet possession and all that then flipped the ball out of the end zone, no catch was the rule!

[Crisis]

Ah, so the MitchMurray curse was the reason Baltimore lost. This explains everything.

[Skooby]

Ah, so the MitchMurray curse was the reason Baltimore lost. This explains everything.

Bases covered here, I also drink blood from my filet mignon steak. Things die do so I can live, sinner I am.

[BLeonard]

Couldn't they challenge that play from the top inside 2 minutes?

Could they have? Of course they could have. All replays come from the booth inside of two minutes...

Now, do you think they would have reviewed it if New England was down by three and that was Wes Welker on the receiving end of a Tom Brady pass?

Anytime you play in New England, you better be ready to play 11 on 18 football. Bills fans should know this by now.

-Bill

[Skooby]

Could they have? Of course they could have. All replays come from the booth inside of two minutes...

Now, do you think they would have reviewed it if New England was down by three and that was Wes Welker on the receiving end of a Tom Brady pass?

Anytime you play in New England, you better be ready to play 11 on 18 football. Bills fans should know this by now.

-Bill

Good point, I've seen fumbles that magically OT called down by contact.

[Night Train]

You screwed up "and" & "an" ??? :trance:

[Skooby]

You screwed up "and" & "an" ??? :trance:

I think I've been caught with a error, days since last error 0.

[Ickybaluky]

Anytime you play in New England, you better be ready to play 11 on 18 football. Bills fans should know this by now.

Bills fans know this? If you take away all the Patriots games, how to you explain the Bills sucking against everyone else?

[BLeonard]

Bills fans know this? If you take away all the Patriots games, how to you explain the Bills sucking against everyone else?

Not defending the Bills sucking... Still doesn't excuse some of the ****ty calls the Bills (and other teams) have been the victims of against the New England Patriots since the 1998 "Just give it to them" game.

Or, should we ask Raider fans how they feel about the "Tuck Rule?"

-Bill

[Skooby]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/22/league-defends-decision-not-to-review-evans-non-catch/

[Skooby]

Not defending the Bills sucking... Still doesn't excuse some of the ****ty calls the Bills (and other teams) have been the victims of against the New England Patriots since the 1998 "Just give it to them" game.

Or, should we ask Raider fans how they feel about the "Tuck Rule?"

-Bill

Changing the rules after the fact was about the biggest puke I've ever seen, the guy fumbled.

[Historian]

Sorry, I thought he had posession too.

But Bill is right.

Nobody ever gets that call except New England.

Maybe Dallas.

[RedEyE]

After seeing the slowed down replay several times this morning, I also feel this should have been a TD.

He clearly has possesion and gets two feet down a nanosecond before the bal is stripped.

I don't have a problem with the call on the field because real time, in the heat of the moment, this looks like an incomplete pass. My biggest concern is the replay. At the very least this should have been reviewed.

Any questionable play under 2 minutes the review decision is the responsibility of the upstairs officiating crew. If this was not the case and the Ravens were allowed to throw the red flag and challenge, I'm about 90% sure the call on the field is reversed.

[DraftBoy]

I just want to know when we stop blaming the refs for teams wins and losses?

I think it was close about if he got the second foot down, I can't say without a shadow of doubt he did or he didn't.

[RedEyE]

I just want to know when we stop blaming the refs for teams wins and losses?



When they stop becoming a deciding factor in a game.

I mean its one thing for people to ***** and whine over something like being down by 7 and official throwing an offensive interference call late in the game with time running out.

It's another when the officiating crew just flat out fails to do their job in one of the top three most important games of the season.

Should have been reviewed is all I'm saying. If the calls stands, then so be it. But with so much on the line for each team they have to at least review this "incomplete pass".

[k-oneputt]

Ha ha, does anyone actually believe that they would have overturned that call and given the Ravens a td. That's funny.
This is the Pats we are talking about. Every fan in the NFL knows the Pats get the calls.
Over rule and put the Ravens in the Superbowl over New Eng. LOL.

And before the apologists come back in, I had the Pats.

[EricStratton]

I think 5 years ago that's a TD but they have adjusted the rules for a catch and it turned out to be the correct call.

I would have liked, as RedEye said, to at least have the call reviewed and confirmed.

[Pinkerton Security]

After seeing the slowed down replay several times this morning, I also feel this should have been a TD.

He clearly has possesion and gets two feet down a nanosecond before the bal is stripped.

I don't have a problem with the call on the field because real time, in the heat of the moment, this looks like an incomplete pass. My biggest concern is the replay. At the very least this should have been reviewed.

Any questionable play under 2 minutes the review decision is the responsibility of the upstairs officiating crew. If this was not the case and the Ravens were allowed to throw the red flag and challenge, I'm about 90% sure the call on the field is reversed.

It doesnt matter if he has 2 feet down, thats not the ruling in the end zone...i dont get why but thats the rule. You need to maintain possession through the entire process, which as MattyNH pointed out above is asinine but is still the rule.

[Night Train]

In all fairness, they changed that call to finishing the possession years back, even if it's more than 2 steps. I thought it was the right call, with how they've been calling it recently.

Old timers will remember a ridiculous playoff TD from the mid 1970's when WR Mel Gray of St. Louis caught an end zone slant in mid air for half a second when hit. His feet never even landed in the endzone but it was declared a TD.

[trapezeus]

i hate the patriots. i agree, they get a lot of the calls.

this one was close. at real speed, it's in and out and looks like a drop.

in super slow mo, the ball is in, then feet are down and it's out. he doesn't make a "football move" to control the catch.

That being said, the giants had a touchdown to manningham i think who tossed the ball into the air close after to catching it. it reminded me of the calvin johnson TD. but that remained.

the nfl and their rules are becoming like a tech company that changes its product so often that no one at the store knows what is wrong with your item.

i hardly understand what is a fumble anymore. i don't know what is conclusive and inconclusive. they change things every year. best game in the world and they continue to tinker tinker tinker. kind of annoying

[Forward_Lateral]

it wasn't a catch. You have to maintain possession and make a football act. He didn't. He got two feet down, but the defender stripped the ball away. It's the same as if he fell and the ground knocked the ball out. He didn't have control, it was the right call.

[MattyNH]

So how do you determine the moment he has maintained possession and it is a TD? Lets say he walks around the endzone for 5 steps and then someone hits it out of his hands, catch or not a catch?

It just seems to be unknowable to a fan when you are granted possession in the end zone on a catch.

[Ickybaluky]

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

the ruling was he did not control the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game (pitch, pass, advance or ward off an opponent).

[stuckincincy]

Bases covered here, I also drink blood from my filet mignon steak. Things die do so I can live, sinner I am.

That's right. All creatures have their place...right next to the mashed potatoes and gravy.

[MattyNH]

the ruling was he did not control the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game (pitch, pass, advance or ward off an opponent).

Which is absolutely the correct call based on the rule. I think I just disagree with the rule, especially in the end zone. Take the Brady TD where the instant he holds the tip of the ball over the plane of the end zone, play over and it is a TD. Compare that to the Evans catch and the two dont seem to jive much to me. I understand in one case you already have possession and in Evans case it was not yet ruled possession but watching the play, it looked like a catch and possession to me even if the rule doesnt make it so.

[JCBills]

the ruling was he did not control the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game (pitch, pass, advance or ward off an opponent).

The ruling was easy mac bought something shiny for the suits :D

[YardRat]

"You can take the player out of Buffalo, but you can't take the Buffalo out of the player."

[Coach Sal]

I stopped the vid as close as I could to exactly the moment his 2nd foot touched the ground. I don't think it was a catch. I think the ball was already coming out (he no longer had full possession)... but it definitely was close that it should have been reviewed.

Here it is:

[The last buffalo fan]

Damn you, Lee! :ill:

[MattyNH]

I stopped the vid as close as I could to exactly the moment his 2nd foot touched the ground. I don't think it was a catch. I think the ball was already coming out (he no longer had full possession)... but it definitely was close that it should have been reviewed.

Here it is:

Control of the ball and 2 feet down does NOT qualify as a catch. Look above, someone posted the rule, you must also be able to evade a defender, pitch the ball, etc. You must have enough time with control to make a football move to qualify as possession. As the rule is written, it was not a close call at all.


Originally Posted by NFL Rulebook
Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

The part C was not satisfied.

[k-oneputt]

Doesn't matter if they reviewed it or not, there is no way they were giving the Ravens a td and knocking the Pats out of the Super Bowl.
Simple as that.

[Ickybaluky]

I think the ball was already coming out (he no longer had full possession)... but it definitely was close that it should have been reviewed.

All scoring plays are reviewed in the booth. If the booth thinks the play has a chance to be overturned on review, they buzz the ref to review it on the field. The booth review didn't think it needed to be reviewed on the field, but it was reviewed.

[Forward_Lateral]

All scoring plays are reviewed in the booth. If the booth thinks the play has a chance to be overturned on review, they buzz the ref to review it on the field. The booth review didn't think it needed to be reviewed on the field, but it was reviewed.

Only plays ruled a TD are reviewed by the booth. Plays ruled incomplete or not a TD are only reviewed inside 2 min, otherwise have to be challenged.

[Ickybaluky]

Only plays ruled a TD are reviewed by the booth. Plays ruled incomplete or not a TD are only reviewed inside 2 min, otherwise have to be challenged.

It is true that all TD plays reviewed at any point during the game.

However, in the last 2 minutes of each half, at any point in overtime or after any scoring play the replay official can generate a review. The Evans play came with 27 seconds left.

According to the rulebook:


Replay Official’s Request for Review. After the two-minute warning of each half, throughout any overtime period, and after all scoring plays, any Referee Review will be initiated by a Replay Official. There is no limit to the number of Referee Reviews that may be initiated by the Replay Official. He must initiate a review before the next legal snap or kick and cannot initiate a review of any ruling against a team that commits a foul to prevent the next snap. His ability to initiate a review will be unrelated to the number of time outs that either team has remaining, and no time out will be charged for any review initiated by the Replay Official.

Here are the reviewable plays:


Reviewable Plays. The Replay System will cover the following play situations only:
(a) Plays governed by Sideline, Goal Line, End Zone, and End Line:
1. Scoring plays, including a runner breaking the plane of the goal line.
2. Pass complete/incomplete/intercepted at sideline, goal line, end zone, and end line.
3. Runner/receiver in or out of bounds.
4. Recovery of loose ball in or out of bounds.
(b) Passing plays:
1. Pass ruled complete/incomplete/intercepted in the field of play.
2. Touching of a forward pass by an ineligible receiver.
3. Touching of a forward pass by a defensive player.
4. Quarterback (Passer) forward pass or fumble.
5. Illegal forward pass beyond line of scrimmage.
6. Illegal forward pass after change of possession.
7. Forward or backward pass thrown from behind line of scrimmage.
(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.
Note 2: If the Referee does not have indisputable visual evidence as to which player recovered the loose ball,
the ruling on the field will stand.
Note 3: This does not apply to complete/incomplete passes, or the ruling of forward progress.
5. Forward progress with respect to a first down.
6. Touching of a kick.
7. A field-goal or Try attempt that crosses below or above the crossbar, inside or outside the uprights
when it is lower than the top of the uprights, or touches anything.
8. Number of players on the field at the snap.
9. Illegal forward handoff.
Note: Non-reviewable plays include but are not limited to:
1. Status of the clock
2. Proper down
3. Penalty administration
4. Runner ruled down by defensive contact (not involving fumbles)
5. Forward progress not relating to first down or goal line
6. Recovery of a loose ball that does not involve a boundary line or the end zone.
7. Field-goal or Try attempts that cross above either upright without touching anything.
8. Inadvertent Whistle

[Forward_Lateral]

Dude, every play is reviewable inside 2 minutes. Welcome to 2011, where have you been?

[Coach Sal]

All scoring plays are reviewed in the booth.

It wasn't a scoring play. It was ruled incomplete.

And every play inside 2 minutes has to be looked at upstairs to determine if they need to buzz down.


If the booth thinks the play has a chance to be overturned on review, they buzz the ref to review it on the field. The booth review didn't think it needed to be reviewed on the field, but it was reviewed.

Yes, I know. But this is the issue.

I've seen many, many plays in the NFL that were not even as close as this one that were reviewed. Not just "we looked at it and there was no need to buzz" review, but actually buzz down and review.

It's the AFC title game. There are :30 seconds left.

I agree with the call on the field, no catch. But it was clearly close enough to take a few extra minutes to be sure you are right. Even if the Calvin Johnson rule was also supposed to come into play.

[RedEyE]

LOL - Awesome. Just glad it wasn't the Bills on the receiving end of this one for once.

[JCBills]

LOL - Awesome. Just glad it wasn't the Bills on the receiving end of this one for once.

It's usually just a matter of who the Pats are playing against so the refs know who they have to penalize to hand more games to NE.

[OpIv37]

Yes, I know. But this is the issue.

I've seen many, many plays in the NFL that were not even as close as this one that were reviewed. Not just "we looked at it and there was no need to buzz" review, but actually buzz down and review.

It's the AFC title game. There are :30 seconds left.

I agree with the call on the field, no catch. But it was clearly close enough to take a few extra minutes to be sure you are right. Even if the Calvin Johnson rule was also supposed to come into play.

I'm not one of the conspiracy nuts who thinks the NFL rigs games. It's just too difficult and there's a $9 billion-a-year enterprise at stake if they ever get caught.

But I do think the NFL has preferred outcomes: teams they want to see win and be successful because they have marketable players and/or play in large markets. The NFL benefits if the Patriots win because Boston is bigger than Baltimore (merch sales and TV viewership) and NE's best-known player is pretty-boy Brady and not "thug life" Ray Lewis.

So, I have to wonder if the refs are instructed to maybe facilitate that favorable outcome. Not outright cheat, but put close calls in the favor of the more desirable outcome.

It sounds crazy until you look at certain incidences, and it goes back a long time. Remember the Music City Mirage? With under 2 min left in the first half, one of the Bills' WR's caught a ball on 3rd down that would have been a first, but he was ruled out of bounds. Replay showed that he was in bounds, but no review was granted. Buffalo had to punt. Then, when Tennessee was driving, the same thing happens, only this time, a review is granted and the Tennessee WR was ruled in bounds after the refs saw the replay.

Then you have the Evans play from Sunday (and believe me, those aren't the only 2).... If it's close, and the NFL is getting the outcome they want, why mess with a good thing? Why bother reviewing?

At the very least, you have to wonder what the criteria for a review is, because from my perspective, it certainly doesn't seem to be applied consistently or objectively.

[YardRat]

Control of the ball and 2 feet down does NOT qualify as a catch. Look above, someone posted the rule, you must also be able to evade a defender, pitch the ball, etc. You must have enough time with control to make a football move to qualify as possession. As the rule is written, it was not a close call at all.


Originally Posted by NFL Rulebook
Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

The part C was not satisfied.

The contradictory bull**** to the rule revolves around possession and crossing the plane. Smith can not, for all intents and purposes, get anywhere near the end zone, but as soon as he drags the ball over the cone it's a TD regardless of fumbling it before he even touches the ground. Also, Brady's leaping TD holding the ball out over the line...as soon as the tip touches the line, it's a TD and the play is dead.

Be consistent with what determines possession for a score, that's all anybody is asking.

[Ickybaluky]

The contradictory bull**** to the rule revolves around possession and crossing the plane. Smith can not, for all intents and purposes, get anywhere near the end zone, but as soon as he drags the ball over the cone it's a TD regardless of fumbling it before he even touches the ground. Also, Brady's leaping TD holding the ball out over the line...as soon as the tip touches the line, it's a TD and the play is dead.

Be consistent with what determines possession for a score, that's all anybody is asking.

That is a different rule. If Evans had possession, it would have been a TD if it was knocked out.

However, he never had possession. He didn't maintain it long enough to "enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.)." That is pretty clear.

[Philagape]

The contradictory bull**** to the rule revolves around possession and crossing the plane. Smith can not, for all intents and purposes, get anywhere near the end zone, but as soon as he drags the ball over the cone it's a TD regardless of fumbling it before he even touches the ground. Also, Brady's leaping TD holding the ball out over the line...as soon as the tip touches the line, it's a TD and the play is dead.

Be consistent with what determines possession for a score, that's all anybody is asking.

Players who break the plane already have established possession.

[MattyNH]

The contradictory bull**** to the rule revolves around possession and crossing the plane. Smith can not, for all intents and purposes, get anywhere near the end zone, but as soon as he drags the ball over the cone it's a TD regardless of fumbling it before he even touches the ground. Also, Brady's leaping TD holding the ball out over the line...as soon as the tip touches the line, it's a TD and the play is dead.

Be consistent with what determines possession for a score, that's all anybody is asking.

I agree with you, if you are watching the game and dont have intimate detail of the complicated possession rule regarding catching a pass, it seems ludicrous. They have revised this rule so many times and I think it still is not right.

The consistency between the two rules is this: once you establish possession and the ball has crossed the plain, its a TD, play over. When you are rushing, you already have possession so the instant the ball touches the plain it is over. However in order to establish possession when receiving a ball you must 1) have control, 2) two feet or other body parts touching down and 3) Do 1 and 2 for a long enough time to make a football move.

[YardRat]

I'm not one of the conspiracy nuts who thinks the NFL rigs games. It's just too difficult and there's a $9 billion-a-year enterprise at stake if they ever get caught.

But I do think the NFL has preferred outcomes: teams they want to see win and be successful because they have marketable players and/or play in large markets. The NFL benefits if the Patriots win because Boston is bigger than Baltimore (merch sales and TV viewership) and NE's best-known player is pretty-boy Brady and not "thug life" Ray Lewis.

So, I have to wonder if the refs are instructed to maybe facilitate that favorable outcome. Not outright cheat, but put close calls in the favor of the more desirable outcome.

It sounds crazy until you look at certain incidences, and it goes back a long time. Remember the Music City Mirage? With under 2 min left in the first half, one of the Bills' WR's caught a ball on 3rd down that would have been a first, but he was ruled out of bounds. Replay showed that he was in bounds, but no review was granted. Buffalo had to punt. Then, when Tennessee was driving, the same thing happens, only this time, a review is granted and the Tennessee WR was ruled in bounds after the refs saw the replay.

Then you have the Evans play from Sunday (and believe me, those aren't the only 2).... If it's close, and the NFL is getting the outcome they want, why mess with a good thing? Why bother reviewing?

At the very least, you have to wonder what the criteria for a review is, because from my perspective, it certainly doesn't seem to be applied consistently or objectively.

The outcome of this game is already bought and paid for, payback for leading negotiations and a lost spouse.

[Bill Cody]

The outcome of this game is already bought and paid for, payback for leading negotiations and a lost spouse.

Cynics bore me.

[Skooby]

50 million people watching & they can't break for a commercial (one of the hundred they always do) to look it over??

[BLeonard]

I'm not one of the conspiracy nuts who thinks the NFL rigs games. It's just too difficult and there's a $9 billion-a-year enterprise at stake if they ever get caught.

But I do think the NFL has preferred outcomes: teams they want to see win and be successful because they have marketable players and/or play in large markets. The NFL benefits if the Patriots win because Boston is bigger than Baltimore (merch sales and TV viewership) and NE's best-known player is pretty-boy Brady and not "thug life" Ray Lewis.

So, I have to wonder if the refs are instructed to maybe facilitate that favorable outcome. Not outright cheat, but put close calls in the favor of the more desirable outcome.

It sounds crazy until you look at certain incidences, and it goes back a long time. Remember the Music City Mirage? With under 2 min left in the first half, one of the Bills' WR's caught a ball on 3rd down that would have been a first, but he was ruled out of bounds. Replay showed that he was in bounds, but no review was granted. Buffalo had to punt. Then, when Tennessee was driving, the same thing happens, only this time, a review is granted and the Tennessee WR was ruled in bounds after the refs saw the replay.

Then you have the Evans play from Sunday (and believe me, those aren't the only 2).... If it's close, and the NFL is getting the outcome they want, why mess with a good thing? Why bother reviewing?

At the very least, you have to wonder what the criteria for a review is, because from my perspective, it certainly doesn't seem to be applied consistently or objectively.

Interesting that you should mention this...

http://www.ibj.com/super-bowl-matchup-touchdown-for-city-experts-say/PARAMS/article/32111



But from an economic-impact standpoint, the game on Feb. 5 presents a better opportunity for local establishments to maximize revenue than if the Baltimore Ravens or San Francisco 49ers had advanced, experts contend.

The NFL estimates Indianapolis will draw 100,000 to 150,000 visitors who could spend $200 million over a 10-day span.

So, hosting a Super Bowl is a huge benefit, no matter which teams play. But hospitality industry experts such as Robert Tuchman, president of New York-based event-planning company Elite Experiences, say there’s no disputing that followers of the Patriots and Giants travel much better and have deeper pockets than fans of the teams they defeated.


-Bill

[G Wolly]

Players who break the plane already have established possession.

If they are entering the endzone with possession.

Evans didn't have control of the catch. It was knocked out. For an endzone catch you need to maintain control through your catch. Not the typical 2-feet down in the normal field of play.

[Cleve]

When they stop becoming a deciding factor in a game.

I mean its one thing for people to ***** and whine over something like being down by 7 and official throwing an offensive interference call late in the game with time running out.

It's another when the officiating crew just flat out fails to do their job in one of the top three most important games of the season.

Should have been reviewed is all I'm saying. If the calls stands, then so be it. But with so much on the line for each team they have to at least review this "incomplete pass".

You bring up a good point about the officiating.

The Patriots won by 3 points. That's an important fact.

If you'll recall, in the first half, the Ravens made a huge defensive play on 2nd down when the ball was on the Ravens 27 yd line that was overturned - an interception against Tom Brady overturned by a penalty for 'illegal' 'helmet to helmet' contact on Brady.

That was the weakest 'helmet to helmet' contact I'd ever seen in replay. The defender aimed low, hit Brady in the shoulder/upper arm, and as they went down, their helmets lightly grazed. And he hit him just as Brady was releasing, so it can't even rightfully be deemed a 'late hit' either.

Well, that penalty kept the drive alive, and the Patriots managed to get within field goal range before the Ravens stopped them again, and they got a field goal.

Ultimately that field goal was the game-winning points.

There's another example of the officials deciding the outcome of a huge game via a very questionable call. Is anyone in the NFL making sure these officials are "clean"?