Sunday, November 26, 2006

The Call

You will hear the cover up from the NFL officials this week about how the fumble committed when Vincent "Doesn't Know Bo" Jackson spiked the ball wasn't really a fumble. They'll call it a forward pass, and the NFL's fans will nod like Pavlov bobblehead dolls.

You will hear them spin the story to sound like they did a bunch of research and discussed their findings on the field, then interpreted the rule book correctly to the best of their zebraness, so help them Mr. Magoo.

We have heard these lies before, from The Immaculate Deception to The Snow Job. Incomplete passes are Frency Fuqua to Franco Harris touchdowns and Tom Brady never fumbles, he just tucks it. You know the lies.

The truth is, there is a precedent for a player catching a first down pass, going down without being touched, then celebrating in a Michael-Irvin-ass-clown manner by spiking the ball... only to have the other team recover their inadvertent celebration fumble. The difference is the receiver wasn't a Raider.

Here is your precedent.

"Plaxico Burress (a Pittsburgh Steeler at the time) spiked the ball at the end of a 19-yard pass play (vs. the Jaguars on October 1, 2000).

The rookie stumbled and fell to the ground without being touched by a defensive player. When Burress got up and slammed the ball to the ground, Jacksonville's Danny Clark scooped it up and ran it back 44 yards.

Burgess said, 'I thought the play was over. I learned a lesson. I'll never spike it again except in the end zone.'"

Would calling the Jackson play legitimately as a fumble have changed the outcome of today's San Diego game? Probably.

Is there one set of rules for the Raiders and one for the other 31 teams?

Ask Danny Clark. When he was a Jag this very same play was a fumble. Had Clark been wearing Silver'n'Black at the time - as he did years later - clearly it would not have been a fumble. It would have been an illegal forward pass. Those are the Raider Rules.

Nevermind the fact that receivers clearly don't pass after they have just made a first down catch; this is irrelevant to the matter at hand because it involves the Raiders.

For all those outsiders who think the Raider Nation is rampant with zebra paranoia, remember, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you. These plays happen every year to Oakland... such as Marquez Pope's fumble recovery in the Seattle rain that was called a... nevermind.

Do they happen to your team regularly? When's the last time the *Patsies or Squeelers squeeled about being ripped off on the outcome of a referee's decision on a game-deciding play?

Let the lies begin... again.


Blogger Calico Jack said...

My take Stick'Em on the "illegal forward pass" is that it is irrelevant.

Although this play will get a lot of attention, the difference in this game was simply the Brooks' interception with 13:50 left in the game.

This INT was the 1 play that was the difference in a win and a loss. Brooks has now thrown back to back interceptions (KC & SD) at the worst possible times. Both INTs were bad reads, bad decisions, and bad throws. Both showed a lack of regard for game management. Down, distance, time, score should factor into his decision making. Both INTS were unnecessary, unacceptable and completely avoidable with sound decision making.

Bottom Line: If Brooks throws the ball away out of bounds, the Raiders go up 17-7 and are fimly in charge of this game.

November 26, 2006 10:07 PM  
Anonymous raider00 said...

This isn't the first time the Raiders were robbed this season.

How about the call against Chris Carr a few games ago ?

I've watched enough football in my life to know that NFL officials are bad in every game, for every team, but...

...They sure seem to save their strangest calls for the Raiders.

November 26, 2006 10:43 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...


I agree with you on all but one point, and I disagree with Calico. Calico, Brooks' interception was a mistake. He suffered the consequences of that mistake on the field. Jackson made a mistake, and suffered the consequences on the field, until the officials figured out a way to take him off the hook.

Stickem, I don't think, necessarily, that it's a conspiracy against the Raiders. I don't think the officials were attempting to hurt the Raiders, I think they were attempting to help the Chargers. This type of thing happens most often to the Raiders because, as one of the most hated teams, more gambling money is involved than other teams. I think they thought that the big gambling centers could handle SD not covering the spread, but they couldn't handle the losses if the Raiders actually won. Don't forget, this was a division rivalry where the team with the 2nd best NFL record was playing the team with the NFL worst record. The rivalry insures lots of interest (all of California), and the records put a lot of that money on SD.

November 27, 2006 9:12 AM  
Anonymous Cavalrysword said...

IF you call that fumble a forward pass, then it was a 2nd forward pass, which is illegal. And the 5 yard penalty is from the spot of previous possession, not where the receiver made the "illegal forward pass"

BlitzChick pointed this out from the NFL rule book.

This game was stolen from us by the refs. Art should have taken the team and walked off the field.

The refs should be fired.

November 27, 2006 12:11 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

BR - I guess we can cordially agree to disagree.

The Brooks mistake was something he had control over. This mistake was both physical and mental.

Alot of Raider fans are getting hung up on the fact that the ball was tipped. Even if the ball wasn't tipped, Brooks had no business making this throw. Did you see the coverage prior to Brooks' release? Jammer was in front of the Raider WR. Even if it is completed it doesn't serve any purpose since it wouldn't be enough to pick up the 1st down. The risk (INT) wasn't worth the reward (10 yard completion on 3-15) based on the read, the down/distance, clock, and score.

The official ruling (aka "illegal forward pass" play) mistake was something the Raiders had no control over. I don't buy into any of your wild gambling conspiracy theories whatsoever. I sincerely believe that the officials (through negligence not malice) just blew the call.

November 27, 2006 12:27 PM  
Blogger BlandaRocked said...

Calico, if the refs simply had let the call on the field stand, absolutely nobody, including the Charges, would have ever questioned it. They actually had to go to a great effort, involving over 10 minutes of conversation, to figure out a way to give SD the ball back. This was not simply a bad call. It was a bad call that the refs went out of their way to make.

Also, since Brooks' pass was tipped, we have no idea what Brooks intended. My impression at the time was that he was attempting to throw over the players' heads, giving the receiver the chance to catch it heading toward the endzone. But since the ball was tipped, it fell short and was picked off.

November 27, 2006 4:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i am not even a raider fan and i am embarrassed for the nfl...

the worst part about it (other than it's possibly the worst decision i've ever seen) is that the NFL isn't even worried about fallout because "it's just the raiders"

i still can't believe the official decision... it's unreal

November 27, 2006 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and... it's NOT about the outcome of the game... it's about DOING YOUR JOB... and the refs certainly aren't above par on that call.

i remember a raider game earlier this year when Moss got called for Unsportsmanlike Conduct cause he tossed (lightly flipped) the ball to an opposing player after running out of bounds... it wasn't a huge play and and it wasn't with malice

raider fans get shafted regularly... it's not paranoia

November 27, 2006 6:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are two points I want to raise here:

First and foremost, it is way past due for the NFL officials to be compensated to the point where they are full-time employees and not part-time misfits. The NFL is rich and getting richer. Referees need to be brought in under the NFL umbrella to share in the wage-earning, not be accountants in their real jobs. That is the only long-term answer that I see to solve this ridiculous situation;

2) All the other anti-Raider examples were important games with serious ramifications: the loser ended their season. In the Seattle 2000 game (which happened right in front of me), an AFC West division crown was in play. This latest Spin game was a joke, of as much impetus and importance as a washed car. There is no comparing this ludicrous mis-ruling with the Mount Everest heights of the Lytle fumble.

Critics will say Oakland would have found a way to lose anyway. Judging from the many games I have listened to on the radio from Brazil, I tend to agree. Cleveland, Kansas City, San Diego 2: this Silver-and-Black team should be 5-4. They are not, because they do not play under pressure, they do not close victories, and they do not ever cover for an LT end-zone throw.

Finally, if you take care of this problem, you will rob me of one of the true joys I embrace as a Raider fan: condemning the officials.

Victory over Houston.

Tenacious P
Sao Paulo, Brazil

November 30, 2006 7:38 AM  
Blogger R-8-er Mike said...

I never like to disagree with CJ, but I have to say, I think this call did effect the game's outcome. A call like that can suck the life out of a team. And that wasn't the only bad call in that game against the S&B. Alas, Stick'Em your only too correct. The league actively makes calls against the Raiders. Of course they do. What other owner has caused the league such misery, what other team has sued the league for Billions of dollars; of course there is no other owner like the legendary, maverick Al Davis. It is league policy to hurt him at all times. That is life. Art Shell knows this. Al Davis knows this.
We just have to be good enough that one, two, three plays each game, every game, will not stop us from getting another championship.
God Bless the Silver & Black !

November 30, 2006 5:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I completely disagree that the officials need to be full time employees of the NFL. All this would do is make them incompetent 7 days a week instead of only on game day.

November 30, 2006 5:21 PM  
Blogger Calico Jack said...

Tenacious P -

I totally agree with your point about the need for the officials to be well paid, full-time employees of the NFL. The NFL is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. The integrity of the league and the quality of the officiating would be greatly enhance by your recommendation.

r-8-er Mike:

I realize I'm probably in the minority by singling out the Brooks interception as the play that had the biggest impact on the final outcome. I don't discount the significance of the "illegal foward pass" play but sincerely believe that if the Raiders come away with 3 points instead of the INT it is a moot point. With a 17-7 lead and 13:00 minutes to go in the game, the Raiders would have been able to withstand any unjust calls by the officiating crew.

November 30, 2006 6:19 PM  
Blogger Stick'em said...

Tenacious Pussycat ~

Your view that the game in question was meaningless is exemplary of the tragedy that has befallen us of late as Raider fans.

While I agree that certainly the Immaculate Deception, The Snow Job, and the Lytle Fumble were the turning points of much more significant circumstances (e.g., they were playoff games), it is a sad commentary when games against division rivals are shrugged off as meaningless.

Perhaps losing 13 straight vs. AFC West opponents will do that to ya...

But what gets me ready to go Falling Down on the refs is them making up obscure bull$hit to justify calls even the most myopic, Mr. Magoo football fan at his/her first game on peyote could make correctly from the stands.

In the immortal words of Al Davis, "They say things as if we were ever-loving idiots."

"The point is, these mistakes happen," Davis told reporters. "But what I don't like is when they come up with policy explanations. The Big Lie …"

Don't p!ss on my head and tell me it's raining. It insults my intelligence.

Raindrops ain't yellow... but the downpour of unjustifiable flags falling at Raider games certainly is.

December 01, 2006 4:42 PM  
Anonymous raider00 said...

I guess in the end, we should just be happy that the Raiders were not flagged for pass interference, on the 2nd "pass", by Jackson.

December 02, 2006 12:19 AM  
Blogger deng said...

happy good
packers throwback jersey
womens packers jersey
youth packers jersey
jordy nelson jersey
jordy nelson jersey cheap
Charles Woodson jersey
Aaron Rodgers jersey

December 09, 2011 9:44 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home