I'm a Raiders fan, so I may not be able to be 100% biased-free, but are the Raiders playing MUCH better than they did last season.....or is it just me?

 

Later.

Because even with both feet down according to the rules he must maintain control of the ball upon contact with the ground. The ball moved enough to show the official loss of control. It's the same as Chad has gotten them overturned when tight roping the sideline. He had 2 down those times too.

 

The ground can't cause a fumble. That should've absolutely been a TD, IMO (but I respect your opinion, as well) :thumb:

I'm a Raiders fan, so I may not be able to be 100% biased-free, but are the Raiders playing MUCH better than they did last season.....or is it just me?

 

Later.

 

The running game is much improved and the Jamarcus Russell seems to have made alot of improvements over the offseason. The Raiders could very well be in the hunt for the division this year. *Knocks on Wood*

The ground can't cause a fumble. That should've absolutely been a TD, IMO (but I respect your opinion, as well) :thumb:

 

Yeah, I know it should and that the ground can't cause a fumble. I hate that rule especially in the end zone. Once you have possession in the end zone on a run the ref blows the play dead correct? So why according to NFL rules isn't the play dead once both feet were down and possession was had, meaning the ground causing the loss of possession would be obsolete?:idunno: Some things the world may never know.

I don't see what's so confusing about the reversed TD call. It clearly states it in the rules that an offensive player must maintain complete possession of the ball while coming down on the ground, if the ball comes out then it's an incomplete pass.

 

Yes, it's different on running routes and stuff but it's because of when a WR is in the air that this rule is applied.

 

It's not the first time this call has been made and it won't be the last. The refs got the call right!

I don't see what's so confusing about the reversed TD call. It clearly states it in the rules that an offensive player must maintain complete possession of the ball while coming down on the ground, if the ball comes out then it's an incomplete pass.

 

Yes, it's different on running routes and stuff but it's because of when a WR is in the air that this rule is applied.

 

It's not the first time this call has been made and it won't be the last. The refs got the call right!

I afree and said that in some previous posts. I just don't like the gray areas on some NFL rules.

I don't see what's so confusing about the reversed TD call. It clearly states it in the rules that an offensive player must maintain complete possession of the ball while coming down on the ground, if the ball comes out then it's an incomplete pass.

 

Yes, it's different on running routes and stuff but it's because of when a WR is in the air that this rule is applied.

 

It's not the first time this call has been made and it won't be the last. The refs got the call right!

 

It may have been the right call but my gripe is with the rule that caused the play to be ruled an incompletion.

 

However that takes a backseat to all these new QB rules they have put it out to try and protect them. Play the game, its football! Injuries happen, its apart of the game. If your line blocks right then injuries don't happen!

Mitchell with the stop on Sproles on the return.

 

Later.

It may have been the right call but my gripe is with the rule that caused the play to be ruled an incompletion.

However that takes a backseat to all these new QB rules they have put it out to try and protect them. Play the game, its football! Injuries happen, its apart of the game. If your line blocks right then injuries don't happen![/QUOTE]

 

 

That's a big one I hate! I saw 2 penalties today for hitting a QB below the waste. I've seen them in the past for hitting them in the head. (The only rule I agree with is the head to head) Then I see one this weekend because they say his helmet hit in the chest which IMO was a good form tackle with his head on the ball. My question is where do you hit the QB if you can't hit him high, low, or in the middle?

Because even with both feet down according to the rules he must maintain control of the ball upon contact with the ground. The ball moved enough to show the official loss of control. It's the same as Chad has gotten them overturned when tight roping the sideline. He had 2 down those times too.

 

The ground can't cause a fumble. That should've absolutely been a TD, IMO (but I respect your opinion, as well) :thumb:

 

He's not stating an opinion. He's telling you what the rulebook says.

I absolutely cannot believe how bad San Diego looks. If this is a Super Bowl contender, I'll turn in my law license. I've been a fan since Air Coryell back in 1979, but this team looks like they've not had a preseason practice yet. First time I've said it - Turner needs to go.

Because even with both feet down according to the rules he must maintain control of the ball upon contact with the ground. The ball moved enough to show the official loss of control. It's the same as Chad has gotten them overturned when tight roping the sideline. He had 2 down those times too.

 

I still think he caught it even with that rule. It looked like to me he still had possession after he hit the ground, and lost it when he was trying to quickly stand up to celebrate. There is no way that should have been overturned.

 

I know I had people getting all over my saturday for saying that refs still mess up calls even after a replay, and once again I think we saw that they probably messed up AGAIN.

I absolutely cannot believe how bad San Diego looks. If this is a Super Bowl contender, I'll turn in my law license. I've been a fan since Air Coryell back in 1979, but this team looks like they've not had a preseason practice yet. First time I've said it - Turner needs to go.

 

Too many people make to many judgements about teams after just one game. Don't people remember that when the Patriots one their first super bowl this decade that they lost their first game, and it was against a very bad Bengals team. People are way to quick to judge teams for the good or bad just after one game.

Too many people make to many judgements about teams after just one game. Don't people remember that when the Patriots one their first super bowl this decade that they lost their first game, and it was against a very bad Bengals team. People are way to quick to judge teams for the good or bad just after one game.

 

Nobody, with the exception of Sproles, is doing ANYTHING for the Chargers. Its almost as if they all have the flu, they are that lifeless.

Good God. If the Chargers hang on and win this, I might almost consider declining the victory in the win column. Nobody should play this bad and win. I probably just jinxed them by even saying that, but this right here is real File 13 material. Stinkeroo.