Can't they review force outs?

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

I seem to recall a few years back in an Arizona game at the end of the season they had a force out and it couldn't be reviewed, but after that I thought they changed it so that force outs could be reviewed.

Well, at the end of the AZ CLE game today there was a possible force out and the announcers were saying that couldn't be challenged, am I wrong, or did they have that rule and then put it back the way it was?

 

[BelichickFan]

No, it's a judgement call.

 

[JaredOfNazareth]

100% force out! The sideline ref didn't call it though. You can't review them. So Browns are SOL.

Edit: They got screwed on that one!

 

[BelichickFan]

100% force out! The sideline ref didn't call it though. You can't review them. So Browns are SOL.

Edit: They got screwed on that one!

That's the call I think they should have made. He was pushed but there's no way to say he would have been in bounds. You can't give the game to a team based on that - throw the ball in bounds next time.

 

[JaredOfNazareth]

His leading foot was in bounds and the other leg was kept up by the force out. It was an amazing catch. You're right though Anderson should have thrown it in bounds and to make a force out call to win the game would be questionable. I do beleive it was a force out.

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

I found the game I'm talking about, I thought they changed it so force outs could be reviewed after this.

It was Arizona's last game of the season, I remember it because the last play was reviewed, the reciever was ruled forced out which wasn't able to be reviewed so the refs reviewed whether he had control, and I remember it cuz it knocked a team out of the playoffs (Which I now see was the Vikings)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/recap?gid=20031228022

 

[Seymour93]

His leading foot was in bounds and the other leg was kept up by the force out. It was an amazing catch. You're right though Anderson should have thrown it in bounds and to make a force out call to win the game would be questionable. I do beleive it was a force out.

I agree. Also Winslow had three Cards around him when he made the catch.

 

[BelichickFan]

His leading foot was in bounds and the other leg was kept up by the force out. It was an amazing catch. You're right though Anderson should have thrown it in bounds and to make a force out call to win the game would be questionable. I do beleive it was a force out.

I can understand the PoV but I just don't want refs getting to make the deciding call. Like PI, don't call it unless it's pretty much for sure.

I also would have hated it to be a TD because I thought the refs blew an obvious replay call that upheld a 60 or so yard TD for Cleveland earlier.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

IMO the force out rule is one of the stupidest rules (along with half the distance calls) in the NFL. No sideline play should be left to the discretion of an official as to whether or not it's a force-out. The rule should be simple; are both feet in or out of bounds? If they are in then it's complete. If they are not it's incomplete. Leave it up to the receiver to ensure he gets both feet in bounds and leave it to the defender to force the receiver to not be able to get both feet in bounds.

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

Here's the end of the game in case some of you didn't see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmY2l-UQj9M

 

[BelichickFan]

IMO the force out rule is one of the stupidest rules (along with half the distance calls) in the NFL.

I prefer the college rule of no force out too. The only force out I want to decide a game is if the receiver went straight up and is coming straight down in bounds and is forced out. If he momentum is heading out of bounds, it's too difficult to make a game deciding judgment.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I prefer the college rule of no force out too. The only force out I want to decide a game is if the receiver went straight up and is coming straight down in bounds and is forced out. If he momentum is heading out of bounds, it's too difficult to make a game deciding judgment.

Still too complicated IMHO, BF.

The receiver either gets both feet in bounds or he doesn't. Nothing left to interpret this way.

If the defender is capable enough to force the receiver out then good play defender. If the receiver gets his feet in then good play receiver.

Nice and simple.

 

[BelichickFan]

Still too complicated IMHO, BF.

The receiver either gets both feet in bounds or he doesn't. Nothing left to interpret this way.

If the defender is capable enough to force the receiver out then good play defender. If the receiver gets his feet in then good play receiver.

Nice and simple.

Agreed. But as we have a force out rule, that's how I think it should be enforced.

 

[Metaphors]

You can't review an incomplete call and determine upon review that it was a forceout. The only thing you could review is that the player actually got 2 feet in with possession (which Winslow obviously didn't).

If a forceout is called, you can review that the player had possession all the way to the ground. So it is possible to get a forceout completion reversed, but no way to get an incomplete call reversed to a forceout completion.

 

[FloridaPatsFan]

Here's the end of the game in case some of you didn't see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmY2l-UQj9M

You can see how Winslow's direction changed completely from the contact.

The ref making the call was in the wrong position to determine if he was forced out of bounds by contact.

They made the wrong call.

 

[Hardboiled]

Earlier this year, a Patriot clearly forced out an opposing reciever ( I can't remember what team). It went to review and the pass was called incomplete due to the reciever having a foot out of bounds. For better or worse, no review for force outs. Tough play for Cleveland.

 

[PantsB]

Earlier this year, a Patriot clearly forced out an opposing reciever ( I can't remember what team). It went to review and the pass was called incomplete due to the reciever having a foot out of bounds. For better or worse, no review for force outs. Tough play for Cleveland.

It was Owens. It would have been called force out, but the refs incorrectly thought he'd gotten both feet inbounds.

 

[apricissimus]

I think the refs made the correct call here. Whether this should be a reviewable play is another issue, but it's not clear to me that Winslow would have been inbounds had the defenders not been there. And if that's not clear, then it's not a force out. I don't think you can assume he would have made the acrobatic, toe tapping inbounds catch that he would have been required to make if the defenders weren't there.

 

[Hardboiled]

It was Owens. It would have been called force out, but the refs incorrectly thought he'd gotten both feet inbounds.

Why do you say "it would have been called a force out"? Are you assuming that since it was clear to us that it was clear to the ref?

If so, a safe call for a ref would be to call a force out. "Looked like he was in, but if he wasn't, he was forced out."

I've also seen this year (you'll help me out again) when a Patriot was called catch complete by forceout but the replay showed both feet in.

I believe, if a forceout is called, it can still be reviewed as a catch without regard to inbounds, i.e. bobble, possession.