Sanu fumble or Sanu Incomplete pass?

[thebullfrog24]

Am i the only person who thought that the sanu "fumble" was simply an incomplete pass?

He literally was just gettin ready to take his second step and the ball was already knocked out. It seems like no one is talking about that (probably because we won lol).

What are your guy's thoughts?

[pdub2005]

My thoughs enclosed:

Sannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!

This guy can play!

[djam]

They way they showed it, it kinda looked like a fumble to me, but it was dang close either way. Maybe is was just an incomplete pass, I'd like to see it again close nd I'll check it in rewind tonight after work. The whistle wasn't premature if it wasnt a catch, but it went how it went. The ref blew the whistle, some players stopped playing, others didnt. The result of the TD can't be counted because of that alone so it was the right call in the end. Just a premature whistle. I dont think that guy would've scored a TD had some of our player not stopped running to the ball at the whistle. He may have got the fumble, but probably would've been tackled.

[yellowxdiscipline]

It was a fumble. He caught it, tucked it in, and made a football move. We got lucky thats all.

[Atomic Orange]

It was a fumble. In my mind the final score was 34 - 17.

[Bull Durham]

It was definitely incomplete and would have been ruled as such if it were reviewed.

[djam]

Originally Posted by Atomic Orange

It was a fumble. In my mind the final score was 34 - 17.

It was 34-13 in my mind. No way you can reward a couple Raiders for keeping playing well after the whistle while other guys stopped running to the ball. That doesnt work and is the reason there is this rule in the first place. IMO they would've gotten the fumble and been tackled if the play werent whistled dead. Our D would've held them to a FG based on the evidence of the game. Even the TD Carson threw was practially all luck. I dont think he would've done it again. I can only bring myself to give them 3 points out of the play.

[Atomic Orange]

Originally Posted by djam

It was 34-13 in my mind. No way you can reward a couple Raiders for keeping playing well after the whistle while other guys stopped running to the ball. That doesnt work and is the reason there is this rule in the first place. IMO they would've gotten the fumble and been tackled if the play werent whistled dead. Our D would've held them to a FG based on the evidence of the game. Even the TD Carson threw was practially all luck. I dont think he would've done it again. I can only bring myself to give them 3 points out of the play.

Fair enough.

Would have been 7 points if the bad call was made against us though...right?

[thebullfrog24]

Originally Posted by Bull Durham

It was definitely incomplete and would have been ruled as such if it were reviewed.

Yeah thats what i thought

He definately tucked the ball but there definately wasn't a football move if he didn't even have 2 feet on the ground before the ball was knocked loose.

Either way though, this was a great win and its nice looking forward to bengals game and not wondering what team is going to show up lol.

[djam]

Originally Posted by Atomic Orange

Fair enough.

Would have been 7 points if the bad call was made against us though...right?

Well hell yeah it would've lol. I can't give the Raiders any love.

[BengalzHacker]

It was one of those plays that was so close it could have gone either way and I've seen it called both ways.

Regardless of that, we've had a ton of bad calls from ref's cost us TDs and even games over the years, so it's only fair that we get one back every once and a while.

[oldschoolomen]

My initial reaction was an incomplete pass. After the replays, I was less convinced, but I still thought he didn't have two down or make a football move. It became a moot point after the whistle though.

I think the inadvertant whistle was blown because the ref thought the raiders player was out of bound before putting the ball back into play. Marvin Jones completely stopped playing because the whistle was blown, and I don't subscribe to changing the final score in my mind based on what may have happened.

[Interceptor]

Does not matter. The whistle blew (inadvertent or not), therefore an official signal that the play has stopped. For the first time I am in complete agreement with Marv - time to move on.

[Brunz]

It was very close could have gone either way. But we got a heck of a deal out of it that's for sure lol

[jj22]

It was an incomplete pass only cause it was a Bengal. If it was a Raider it was clearly a fumble.

[ODRAB14]

I still think it was an incomplete pass due to the new rule of "seeing the catch through". The problem would have been they ruled it a fumble on the field.

[BengalBaron]

If the Gresham catch against the Ravens was incomplete, this catch was also incomplete. If I remember correctly, Gresham caught the ball and had firm passion of it. He made a couple of football moves and in his attempt to get a TD, he extended it across the goal line and fumbled it.

[jj22]

Originally Posted by BengalBaron

If the Gresham catch against the Ravens was incomplete, this catch was also incomplete. If I remember correctly, Gresham caught the ball and had firm passion of it. He made a couple of football moves and in his attempt to get a TD, he extended it across the goal line and fumbled it.

Greshams TD was a TD cause he had possession prior to crossing the endzone. I agree that was a bad call. But this is a different situations, and a little different rules. Sometimes the eye test is the best test. Greshams TD was a TD and it looks like Sanu caught the ball.

[SurvivorMatt]

Kind of reminds me of the 2005 game at Baltimore. Then Bengals TE Matt Schobel fumbled at the Baltimore 42 yard line where then Ravens safety Will Demps picked up the ball and went the distance for an apparent defensive TD. But an official inadvertently blew his whistle as Demps was about to pick up the ball. That cost the Ravens a defensive TD which turned that game in our favor. Anybody remember that game? The exact same thing happened yesterday and again the game turned in our favor.

[yellowxdiscipline]

Im trolling the Raiders forum and they swear that if it were called a fumble they would have won... Delusional fanbase.

[Slappy from New Haven]

Originally Posted by thebullfrog24

Am i the only person who thought that the sanu "fumble" was simply an incomplete pass?

He literally was just gettin ready to take his second step and the ball was already knocked out. It seems like no one is talking about that (probably because we won lol).

What are your guy's thoughts?

You would be the only one, it's a fumble

[graphicguy]

Didn't really matter, although I do think it was a bad call. You could clearly hear the whistle, at which point the Bengals (and most of the Raiders) quit on the play.

So, instead of beating them by 24, we would have beat them by 17. It's still a blow-out. Actually, we could have beat them by 38. Raiders got lucky we didn't hang 50+ on them.

[RumbleCat]

Originally Posted by graphicguy

Didn't really matter, although I do think it was a bad call. You could clearly hear the whistle, at which point the Bengals (and most of the Raiders) quit on the play.

So, instead of beating them by 24, we would have beat them by 17. It's still a blow-out. Actually, we could have beat them by 38. Raiders got lucky we didn't hang 50+ on them.

^ This.

[tlotharw]

Originally Posted by djam

It was 34-13 in my mind. No way you can reward a couple Raiders for keeping playing well after the whistle while other guys stopped running to the ball. That doesnt work and is the reason there is this rule in the first place. IMO they would've gotten the fumble and been tackled if the play werent whistled dead. Our D would've held them to a FG based on the evidence of the game. Even the TD Carson threw was practially all luck. I dont think he would've done it again. I can only bring myself to give them 3 points out of the play.

I disagree. The only two players near the play for the Bengals were Sanu, who was knocked down, and Marvin Jones who was jogging towards the play as the Raiders kept playing. To me that play was a reflection of the lackadasical approach the Bengals took to the 2nd half and the Raiders playing with desperation. My recollection is that the Raider had possession before the whistle blew.

Who knows what the score would have ended up, but a touchdown there would have made it a 10 point game with over seven minutes to go. No telling what would have happened from there.

[khamla]

That was a fumble, refs messed up big time. We still would have won no matter what though.