Was the last play a fumble?

[ewing6]

What do you think??

[etothep]

I think that Goodell will closely follow the results contained within this poll

[gRYFYN1]

I didn't think it was, But it was borderline, even watching the replay. Even so too much is being made of it. Even if they gave Arizona the ball back, they would be at the 35 after the penalty was assesed.


What are the chances they score in that situation? 1 in 100, 1 in 1000? maybe not even that much.

[TheBigBomber]

With Larry Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Breaston I think their chances are better than what you put it as. Warner could've thrown up 35 to 30 yards and I think Zona was killing on the pass, the game ain't over until it hits 00.00 on the clock.

[filihok]

Good Poll

[TheNamelessPoet]

I didn't think it was, But it was borderline, even watching the replay. Even so too much is being made of it. Even if they gave Arizona the ball back, they would be at the 35 after the penalty was assesed.


What are the chances they score in that situation? 1 in 100, 1 in 1000? maybe not even that much.

With Larry Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Breaston I think their chances are better than what you put it as. Warner could've thrown up 35 to 30 yards and I think Zona was killing on the pass, the game ain't over until it hits 00.00 on the clock.

agreed with the Big Bomber here... warner EASILY could have thrown it up. plus dont forget... if they called it an inc pass there would be a few mor seconds left. 30-35 yards is NOTHING for warner and when you have those 3 recievers you just toss it up.

[etothep]

With Larry Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Breaston I think their chances are better than what you put it as. Warner could've thrown up 35 to 30 yards and I think Zona was killing on the pass, the game ain't over until it hits 00.00 on the clock.

don't forget that a pass interefernce penalty on said pass would give the cards the ball at the 2

[lebsoccer02]

i understand it's an opinion thread, but they confirmed that it was a fumble. Should they have reviewed it? Sure. But like every play inside 2 minutes the booth looks at every play, and maybe they already knew it was a fumble, so why stop the game, when they didn't need extra time to look. I don't have any doubt in my mind it was a fumble, but I'm sure others do, and that's why the NFL came out and confirmed the ruling. Like I said, maybe the booth didn't feel the need to delay the inevitable when they knew it was a fumble in the first place. If they were unsure I really think they would've looked at it again before the kneel.

[lebsoccer02]

I also understand that a majority of football fans, well anyone not a fan of the Steelers wanted that so BADLY to be an incompletion. The game was great, and to have it come down to 1 final desperation play would've made this Super Bowl even better. but, the NFL did come out and confirm the call later. So, yeah.

[OregonDuck1989]

The point is they should have at least reviewed the play for the integrity of the game...

[gRYFYN1]

agreed with the Big Bomber here... warner EASILY could have thrown it up. plus dont forget... if they called it an inc pass there would be a few mor seconds left. 30-35 yards is NOTHING for warner and when you have those 3 recievers you just toss it up.

To say he could of "easily" done that is way off the mark .. no team can ever under any circumstance "easily" complete a 30 yard pass. Let alone when the defense know the ONLY thing the offense can do is attempt a pass into the endzone.

People waaaaaaay over estimate the chances a team has in that situation. Sure it woulda been neat to see, but, again, the cahnces of coming away with a score/penalty is well south of 1%.

[gRYFYN1]

The point is they should have at least reviewed the play for the integrity of the game...

I do agree with that! what's the harm.

[lebsoccer02]

but if the people upstairs reviewed the play, like they do every play under 2 minutes of each half and found nothing, why would they stop the game to just "delay it" so that the fans don't have to worry.

If they decided it wasn't worth reviewing that it was clear, then why delay the end of the game?

[acetoolguy]

It looked pretty clear to me that his arm was moving forward but he did not have controll of the ball. It was a fumble. just pushing the ball forward does not make it a pass.

[OregonDuck1989]

but if the people upstairs reviewed the play, like they do every play under 2 minutes of each half and found nothing, why would they stop the game to just "delay it" so that the fans don't have to worry.

If they decided it wasn't worth reviewing that it was clear, then why delay the end of the game?

Because it was controversial, a close play and also, oh yeah, the last damn play of the Super Bowl.

The review official takes a look but he doesn't "review" it. He takes a quick look and sees if the play needs further review. The play was incredibly close, and could have gone either way.

The fact is, the play needed a review. The Cardinals were not likely to win, and I agree after a CLOSE look it appears as though Warner did lose the ball but the review official needed to take an extra look. Seeing as how it was the biggest game of the year and it was an extremely close play.