Angel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2006
- Messages
- 2,264
- Reaction score
- 1
NFL to Raiders: Don’t wait for that apology
By John Ryan
Monday, November 27th, 2006 at 4:57 pm in General news, NFL, Raiders.
If you’re reading this, you already have an opinion on whether Vincent Jackson’s celebratory flip was a fumble. I said in an earlier post that it wasn’t — I mean, it was to you and me and Jackson himself, but based on the rule book it was an illegal forward pass. I’d be all for a rule change, specifically something that punishes the idiots who think they’re the next Michael Irvin after every 8-yard catch, but I still believe that as it stands now, the call was right.
Kawakami disagrees. Rather vehemently. So it’s my sad duty to inform him, and you, and Randy Cross (who said on CBS that the Raiders could be expecting an apology), that Raider Nation will be getting no satisfaction from the league.
I talked to NFL V.P. Greg Aiello this morning. “This was properly called,” he said. “That’s a long-standing rule. An intentional forward fumble is a forward pass by rule, and it’s been that way for a long time.”
(Contrary to my guess in my earlier post, Aiello said the rule change was not prompted by the Holy Roller. I still think it derives from the same principle, though.)
The difference with the oft-cited Plaxico Burress Precedent of 2000, Aiello said, is that “he spiked it backwards and it was a fumble. He threw it backwards. You throw it forward, it’s a pass.”
None of which soothed Raiders Coach Art Shell. He worked in the league office, so maybe he knows more about this than he’s letting on publicly, but the man sounded today like he was buying hook, line and sinker into the conspiracy theory.
“It’s unfortnate, when those plays happen we do seem to catch the wrong end of it, like the tuck rule,” he said. “Somewhere hidden in the rule book there’s something there, but they seem to dig it up when we play. This is another scenario that when something comes up, we’re involved in it, and it goes against us.”
I don’t know what to make of that. Maybe it was deep in the rule book, but the point is, it was in the rule book.
I’d say the bigger concern is that the front office will obsess over this one call, with 11 minutes left, that may or may not have been the difference in the team being 2-9 vs. 3-8. And they’ll ignore the far more controllable problems they’ve created all on their lonesome.
–I don’t plan to shill for the NFL Network regularly. But on Wednesdays they have a segment with director of officiating Mike Pereira, who already gave his defense to ESPN.com. They’re usually pretty good about examining controversial calls on this segment. If they lead with anything else this week, call your local cable provider and ask them to remove NFL Network.
http://www.mercextra.com/blogs/buzz/2006/11/27/nfl-to-raiders-dont-wait-for-that-apology/
By John Ryan
Monday, November 27th, 2006 at 4:57 pm in General news, NFL, Raiders.
If you’re reading this, you already have an opinion on whether Vincent Jackson’s celebratory flip was a fumble. I said in an earlier post that it wasn’t — I mean, it was to you and me and Jackson himself, but based on the rule book it was an illegal forward pass. I’d be all for a rule change, specifically something that punishes the idiots who think they’re the next Michael Irvin after every 8-yard catch, but I still believe that as it stands now, the call was right.
Kawakami disagrees. Rather vehemently. So it’s my sad duty to inform him, and you, and Randy Cross (who said on CBS that the Raiders could be expecting an apology), that Raider Nation will be getting no satisfaction from the league.
I talked to NFL V.P. Greg Aiello this morning. “This was properly called,” he said. “That’s a long-standing rule. An intentional forward fumble is a forward pass by rule, and it’s been that way for a long time.”
(Contrary to my guess in my earlier post, Aiello said the rule change was not prompted by the Holy Roller. I still think it derives from the same principle, though.)
The difference with the oft-cited Plaxico Burress Precedent of 2000, Aiello said, is that “he spiked it backwards and it was a fumble. He threw it backwards. You throw it forward, it’s a pass.”
None of which soothed Raiders Coach Art Shell. He worked in the league office, so maybe he knows more about this than he’s letting on publicly, but the man sounded today like he was buying hook, line and sinker into the conspiracy theory.
“It’s unfortnate, when those plays happen we do seem to catch the wrong end of it, like the tuck rule,” he said. “Somewhere hidden in the rule book there’s something there, but they seem to dig it up when we play. This is another scenario that when something comes up, we’re involved in it, and it goes against us.”
I don’t know what to make of that. Maybe it was deep in the rule book, but the point is, it was in the rule book.
I’d say the bigger concern is that the front office will obsess over this one call, with 11 minutes left, that may or may not have been the difference in the team being 2-9 vs. 3-8. And they’ll ignore the far more controllable problems they’ve created all on their lonesome.
–I don’t plan to shill for the NFL Network regularly. But on Wednesdays they have a segment with director of officiating Mike Pereira, who already gave his defense to ESPN.com. They’re usually pretty good about examining controversial calls on this segment. If they lead with anything else this week, call your local cable provider and ask them to remove NFL Network.
http://www.mercextra.com/blogs/buzz/2006/11/27/nfl-to-raiders-dont-wait-for-that-apology/