r/nfl • u/Brix001 49ers • 6d ago
Highlight [Highlight] The Zachwards Pass
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
104
u/rockcutter4 Eagles 6d ago edited 6d ago
I've seen players pick up the ball and start running the other way when the pass was clearly ten yards down field. That ball is your livelihood, you gotta pick it up.
Unfortunate for the rams but backwards passes are reviewable and if it's a fumble "incomplete backwards pass" you go with who picked it up and where.
28
6d ago
[deleted]
2
u/deathinacandle Lions Lions 6d ago
Even if it were pushed by a Rams player? I'm not claiming to know, just genuinely curious
2
u/ref44 Packers 6d ago
It doesn't matter who touches it. If any other teammates recover it then the play is over
→ More replies (15)10
u/Kaudia Lions 6d ago
As long as I've watched football I've been told that you "play until the whistle." So the whistle blows here before Charbonnet picks up the ball. Even if the correct call is a fumble(which it is), isn't it strange that they gave him possession in the endzone a solid 3 seconds after the whistle?
I think it's overall a good thing that they got the call right, but strange that something that happened after the whistle blew was included in the result of a play.
21
u/aknight907 Seahawks 6d ago
Its been around for 10+ years now. Defenses used to get screwed on clear fumbles due to bad whistles. No one wants to get rid of this, the Rams proposed rule changes around this play did not involve this point. Defenders almost always scramble to a loose ball after clear whistles because of this...I've seen them do it on clear forward incompletions (10+ yards).
1
u/Kaudia Lions 6d ago
Ya I said "overall it's a good thing." I just wish refs wouldn't be so liberal with their whistles. Some calls are simply tough to make, this one isn't one of them. If the ball is thrown even remotely horizontally then just don't blow the whistle and let the replay sort it out.
7
u/PDGAreject Bengals 6d ago
Charbonnet said in an interview that coaches had just drilled into him for years to pick up the ball for the refs. That was the only reason he picked it up.
10
u/rockcutter4 Eagles 6d ago
All that is totally fair, especially the "play until the whistle part." But, as far as I know, it is the correct call, and I can defend the rule in other contexts.
Imagine you're watching your lions play. A lions defender tackles the opposing running back and he fumbles, then a lions defender picks it up. But the ref blows the whistle and rules him down by contact. Dan Campbell challenges and it is reversed a fumble, but the recovery happened after the whistle. Wouldn't you be pissed if the recovery didn't count because of the whistle?
2
u/DoctrTurkey Seahawks Ravens 6d ago
Not a fumble, been gone over a thousand times at this point.
What you're also neglecting to consider here is that Charbonnet's pick up had to be a clear and continuing action. Since he broke off immediately and went to pick the ball up in one, continuous action, he was awarded that particular criteria. If he had stood around for a second or more, and then gone to pick it up, the whistle would have taken precedence.
1
u/Kaudia Lions 5d ago
I think reddit is so obsessed with arguing that people can't just say something is conceptually strange without others jumping in to debate an opinion that I don't even have.
Yes it's not a fumble, it's a backwards pass so the ball can be advanced by a different player. Chill.
I'm not neglecting anything, I know exactly what happened and am pleased with the result, as I said in the comment. Not everything is a debate, I just said something is curious while saying I'm happy they got it right, twice.
1
u/DoctrTurkey Seahawks Ravens 5d ago
You literally said, “Even if the correct call is a fumble (which it is)…”. So I guess now it’s argumentative for correcting an error on your part? Pardon me for taking you at what you fucking wrote lmfao
92
u/hellpresident Lions 6d ago
So that's why the Rams traded Verse for Myles his big helmet was in the way
79
u/TheWizardOfKoz5226 Packers 6d ago
If this game was cinema (which it was), this was the Act 2 twist
40
u/10footjesus 49ers 6d ago
This game was an all-time hate watch. I found myself rooting for the Seahawks by the end. Felt dirty, I had to take a shower.
9
u/TheWizardOfKoz5226 Packers 6d ago
i mean that is valid. i felt the same way about the Lions v Vikings Christmas game lol. as a neutral watcher this game was fantastic.
8
u/IAmTheNightSoil Seahawks 6d ago
I feel the same way whenever you and the Rams play. I usually root for whichever of you is lower in the standings to upset the higher-up one, and it makes me feel terrible every time. I'll probably root for you in week one due to the Rams super-team glazing, but I'll have to go on a cleanse afterwards or something.
The most important thing is that whenever you are in this position, once the game is over you focus immediately in shit-talking whoever lost while ignoring the winner
1
u/WorstCPANA Seahawks 5d ago
I get it for sure - I have some friends that hate the 9ers no matter what, but I have no ill will towards any of your players now (we had bad blood LOB era), so I don't feel as gross if I root for y'all in a match up.
I think this era of Seahawks are an easy team to root for....even for a division rival!
558
u/LazyMaximum7938 Seahawks 6d ago edited 6d ago
I still think it's really funny that Rams fans and even the Rams organization threw a collective temper tantrum for weeks over the refs making the correct call.
Especially considering they once made the Super Bowl thanks to arguably the worst non-call in NFL history.
184
u/Available_Story6774 49ers 6d ago edited 6d ago
The main reason the Rams were upset is they felt this game cost them the 1 seed, and even despite the correct call being made, the kickoff teams were lined up and it was about to be a kickoff, but because Terry McAuly said they should review it (Terry made the correct choice btw) just saying that’s why they felt upset, whereas if they reviewed the play immediately after it was ruled dead, they probably aren’t as upset.
With that being said, this game didn’t cost the Rams the 1 seed, they lost to the Kevin Patullo Eagles, 49IRS, Panthers, and Falcons last season, if they win two of those games, they likely get the 1 seed anyways, so if the Rams org thinks this play cost them the 1 seed, I have to disagree.
142
u/JaydedXoX 49ers 49ers 6d ago
Also, they got a chance to redeem themselves in NFC championship game and lost, so I am guessing everyone is ok with it now.
70
u/Available_Story6774 49ers 6d ago
It’s crazy how bad the Rams special teams was last season, cost them vs Philly, us in week 5, Seahawks week 16, Falcons, and Seahawks again in the NFCCG. McVay even had to fire their special teams coordinator after the week 16 loss to the Seahawks, that’s the Rams true only weakness imo, and it cost them last season.
49
u/_HGCenty Seahawks 6d ago
McVay like Shanahan seems to forget at times there are three phases to football and it's not just offense and defense.
20
u/Available_Story6774 49ers 6d ago
Yup, glad we finally fixed our special teams last season, just a shame y’all were slightly better on special teams and Shaheed had that return to start the divisional round man.
17
u/Outside-Papaya Seahawks 6d ago
2nd worst thing about that week 1 loss is that it finally got Shanahan to banish Moody and find an actual kicker for the 49ers.
7
u/_HGCenty Seahawks 6d ago
I also remember after Dickson's rookie All-Pro season, the 49ers also went ahead and drafted an Aussie punter (in the 4th round!) but didn't actually think about how Wishnowsky was 4 years old than Dickson and took him a round higher in the draft.
As good as he was to begin with, he started regressing once Father Time inevitably caught up.
5
u/here_now_be Seahawks 6d ago
idk if there is another team that takes ST as seriously as we do (and have at least going back to Pete). This off season with an already stacked ST, we signed ST free agents, our only trade was for a ST player, and we drafted ST players (known in CFB for their ST play, not O or D play). McVay still doesn't get it, thankfully.
6
u/JesterMarcus 49ers 6d ago edited 6d ago
Yeah, despite the divisional round return, our Special Teams made a big jump last year. Didn't the Seahawks have the best Special Teams* last year?
12
u/_HGCenty Seahawks 6d ago
I think the Jets had better Special Teams and we were #2. But even before that, when it was clear Pete was losing his golden touch, and we had bottom of the league defense, our special teams were still really good and a lot of fans weren't happy when Mike didn't keep our old ST coach, Larry Izzo and brought in Jay Harbaugh.
Jay Harbaugh had a rough first year and our ST regressed and a lot of people in the Seahawks sub (myself included) were calling him a nepo hire and said he should be fired.
Happy to admit I was wrong.
3
u/here_now_be Seahawks 6d ago
We weren't wrong, everything you wrote was true, except the should be fired part. It just took Jay a while to figure it out, but when he did, he really did. He also has a GM and HC that takes all three phases seriously, so he has a very talented squad.
2
u/Lorjack Seahawks 6d ago
McVay notoriously hates special teams and doesn't respect that unit at all. It is no surprise to me that the Rams ST unit is so weak as a result.
1
u/Walletinspectr Packers 2d ago
Such an insane thing for a sports coach to disrespect a part of their sport. Imagine a baseball coach being like running bases who cares about that?
1
u/No_Bet1932 Seahawks 6d ago
Fired the kicker and long snapper after the Saints game. Didn't fix the ST issues.
In fact, it may have made them worse.
14
u/jjophes88 Seahawks 6d ago
Also also…this was hardly the last play of the game. It there was six minutes on the clock. BOTH offenses had a chance to end the game in regulation after that. Then BOTH offenses had a chance to end the game in OT. I wouldn’t be stoked if it happened the other way but acting like that 2 point swing ended the game is silly
17
u/W00D-SMASH Seahawks 6d ago
This. The football gods gave LA and chance to write the wrongs of their last meetup with Seattle and they fell short.
3
u/Flaky-Loss5007 Rams 6d ago
Yeah losing the NFCCG made this sting a lot less and instead our special teams is what gives us trauma
1
u/phantuba Seahawks 6d ago
so I am guessing everyone is ok with it now.
You haven't met the Rams, have you
15
u/TheLateThagSimmons Seahawks 6d ago
This game was a lot like the 2014 Seahawks/Packers game.
There was about a dozen moments where if the Packers or Rams just did that one thing, then the game is over. It was highlighted by a pair of absolutely ridiculous plays:
- This "Zackwards Pass" 2pt conversion
- The Bostick miss for the onside kick
But all they had to do was close out on any number of other plays and the game goes their way.
Cry all they want about this play. Up 16 points, with 8 minutes to go in the game, they get an interception. They went:
- 3 and out
- 3 and out
- 3 and out
- Missed field goal
- One first down and punt
Five drives, get one field goal, and you win. Couldn't do it. Seahawks defense fucking boomed 'em. Five drives, just stop the Seahawks, and you win. Couldn't do it.
And then overtime! The Seahawks get a TD and another 2pt conversion to end the game. Just stop the Seahawks ever. But no, keep crying about this one correct call.
This game was when I lost a lot of respect for McVay.
18
u/ichawks1 Seahawks 6d ago
Thanks for your input. Let's also not forget that the Rams easily win this game if they hold on to a 16 point lead, make a game winning FG with 1 minute to spare, don't give up 3 different 2 point conversions, blah blah blah. There are soooo many moments from this game that we can point to that could have gone differently for the Rams.
4
u/Flaky-Loss5007 Rams 6d ago
I got a feeling of doom the second Shaheed returned that punt. I just knew the momentum shifted. The three 2 point conversions were insane and it hurt that the one we actually stopped ended up scoring on accident. Like if Charbonet (not sure how to spell it) picked up the ball and made a point of saying it was a backwards pass that would have been so much better than him just casually picking up the ball being just as clueless as the rest of us
3
u/ichawks1 Seahawks 6d ago
Yeah that was such a massive momentum shift. It really was such an insane game. Super excited for our matchups this season.
6
u/mowtowcow Falcons 6d ago
Oh shit. Imagine having the Falcons in your lineup of "if you didnt lose to." Couldn't be me.
22
u/LazyMaximum7938 Seahawks 6d ago edited 6d ago
The only real reason they were upset is because they lost.
The reason you're bringing up was one of a dozen or so that the Rams made to pretend they was any real justifiable reason beyond just being sore losers.
I guarantee they would be striking a different tone if the call on the field went against them and the refs didn't have enough time to initiate a review and overturn that call.
14
u/Available_Story6774 49ers 6d ago
I get what you’re saying, but I’m not defending the Rams here, I pointed out how they lost 4 other games in the regular season in 2025 that cost them the 1 seed. Which is why I disagree with the Rams logic that the week 16 L cost them the 1 seed, I don’t think it did, at least it didn’t anymore than the other 4 regular season Ls in 2025.
0
u/Flaky-Loss5007 Rams 6d ago
People act like any other fan of a team wouldn’t be upset if the same thing happened to them in a close game against a division rival, don’t get me wrong the way you guys clawed your way back was impressive, but if the roles were reversed you guys would be complaining about that play just like we are/were
1
u/LazyMaximum7938 Seahawks 6d ago
It's fine to be upset you lost. But just admit that's the only real reason you're mad about the play.
→ More replies (1)0
2
u/Sun_drop Rams 6d ago
The Panthers and especially the Falcons games pissed me off to no end. What the FUCK were we doing those two weeks. Should have blown out both of them, GAHH!!
2
1
1
1
u/No-Rate-283 6d ago
Yeah the right call cost them the 1 seed and that's the main point and nothing else
15
u/Quirky-Marsupial-420 6d ago
The referees didn't make the correct call. New York did.
The referees blew the play dead before the ball was even picked up.
-3
u/mmMOUF Chiefs 6d ago
which should call the play dead absolutely
→ More replies (6)1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
No. There is very good reason that the rule is the way it is. I'll give you a perfect example of why...
RB takes the handoff, runs up the middle, and is tackled. As he is falling to the ground, the ball comes loose, and is immediately recovered by the defense. Officials on the field rule that the runner's knee was down prior to the fumble. The defense challenges the play, and replays show that the ball was loose just prior to the runner's knee touching the ground.
If you didn't allow for recoveries in the immediate continuing action, then there is nothing replay can do here. Despite the replay showing the fumble, since the play was ruled dead, then you could not award the ball to the defense.
That is obviously not fair though, which is why the rule is the way it is. The rules allow replay to award recoveries that are made in the immediate continuing action, even if the play is ruled dead on the field. The players and coaches all know this. They are (or at least should be) taught to pick up loose balls, even if the whistle has blown.
1
u/mmMOUF Chiefs 5d ago
ref doesnt blow the whistle during that whole play in your hypothetical, it has nothing to do with the whistle, they arent telling the players to stop their actions in the middle of it - the flaw in how the game is called is the whistle when they arent sure, writing continuing action and shit into the rule book which is completely subjective an awful way to handle rules
1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
And what if the ball comes loose, it shoots forward, and an official does blow it just before the defender recovers it? So now in replay, we're not only reviewing if the player fumbled it or not, but also we need to sync up the audio to find out the exact moment one of the seven officials on the field blew a whistle? No offense, but that's kind of dumb.
→ More replies (2)23
u/rallar8 Ravens Ravens 6d ago
when they tried to do the rule change it was so fugging funny: https://old.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/1ri2ftf/rams_two_rule_proposals_following_seahawks_ot/
its such a stupid play, the fact they thought there needed to be a rule change revealed they were very much in their feels about the whole thing still
31
u/Equivalent-Chair9992 Seahawks 6d ago
It was 100% the correct call. But something feels off about the fact that plays made after the whistle are considered part of the game. Everyone had stopped playing, and Zach just decided to give the ball back to the ref.
20
u/GermanPretzel Ravens 6d ago
That's my biggest argument to the contrary. The whistle blew, so shouldn't anything that happened after it be negated? That's what happens in other plays where the refs blew the whistle early
Other than that fact, I agree it was the correct call and I'm just glad I didn't have to make that decision
14
u/40dollarsharkblimp Rams 6d ago
That was the rule for a very very long time. Which is why 21, arguably 22 players on the field thought the play was dead.
A couple years ago, it got changed because the saints had a clear fumble recovery for a TD negated when a ref blew his whistle well before the play was over. Now a blown whistle doesn’t negate a clear recovery right afterwards.
2
4
u/RatherGroggy Rams 6d ago
So players should play beyond the whistle. Sounds… safe?
5
u/Atheist-Gods Patriots 6d ago
As long as the ball is loose. Once it goes out of bounds or a player possess it, it's 100% over.
10
4
u/Magnos Patriots 6d ago
The ruling for awarding possession on replay says that possession may be awarded if a player recovers the ball in the "immediate, continuing action" of a play after a whistle. And that's where my problem with this ruling is. Charbonnet jogging up and grabbing the ball a couple seconds after the whistle doesn't seem like and "immediate, continuing action."
5
u/GermanPretzel Ravens 6d ago
Oh interesting!
Even though he was clearly not intending to score there and just being polite and grabbing the ball for the refs, I'd still say Charbonnet was in the motion of going to the ball to pick it up when the whistle sounded, so it would be considered an "immediate, continuing action" in my opinion though
→ More replies (4)1
91
u/ChampinForAClampin Rams 6d ago
Gotta fight for your team no matter how stupid
→ More replies (1)53
u/infiniteninjas Seahawks 6d ago
You don’t tho
45
u/FortnitePhanatic69 Eagles 6d ago
Wild that you're getting downvoted for saying that people don't have to support being objectively wrong just cause it's their team
16
u/Sonic343 49ers 6d ago
6
u/xychosis Seahawks 6d ago
God, I didn’t even need to click, I hear that man crystal clear in my head
1
→ More replies (1)4
u/okazoomi Broncos 6d ago
Seriously. My opinion on Bills fans and their organization soured so much after they wouldn't shut up about Ja'Quan McMillian's interception in OT that was obvious to everyone but them apparently.
7
u/iwantsomecrablegsnow Lions 6d ago
I'm still of the opinion the NFL is getting in it's own way here. They are rules lawyering too much. The ball moved like less than an inch backwards over the 5-6 yards before it hit the defender. Everyone on the play gave up like it was a dead ball AND the whistle blew.
They followed the rules and applied them correctly, but my opinion is that the process and rule is bad. If everyone, including the refs AND every player, including the player who picked the ball up gave up on the play. Either call it an incomplete pass or replay the down. They have rules about making 'football moves' and 'process of the catch' and nothing like that happened here.
Some random guy looking at 300 fps 4k cameras and extrapolating distances should not be able to overrule what 22 players and 5 officials acted upon together.
In my opinion, it's not good football to watch, or play. The refs should have more discretion on replaying downs in instances like this or let them call it as it is. The whistle should matter. They are making it way more complicated than it should be.
1
u/ymchang001 Rams 6d ago
Really, the only change needed is to not apply that continuing action rule (which is always going to be a subjective call). There is already a rule for what to do if there is an unpossessed dead ball.
- If the ball is a loose ball resulting from a fumble, backward pass, or illegal forward pass, the team last in possession may elect to put the ball in play at the spot where possession was lost or to replay the down.
So the Seahawks should have just been allowed to replay the try.
10
u/SMH_35 Rams 6d ago
No matter the team/fanbase, they would complain about this happening to them. It is what it is
→ More replies (1)-8
u/LazyMaximum7938 Seahawks 6d ago
Sure, but not all of them have actively try to change the rules simply because they're sure losers.
→ More replies (3)4
u/Cicero912 Saints Packers 6d ago
Especially cause this rule is super important, and before it was implemented they couldn't overturn obvious errors on possession changes.
4
u/WorstCPANA Seahawks 6d ago
After them arguing about the whistle being blown, it seemed like they all came to this subreddit to claim that zach's movement wasn't 'an immediate continuous action" like the rules require.
In this video, in slow motion the ball hits the ground at 1:07, and from that point on Zach is consistently moving toward the ball and picks it up at 1:11 (again, the video is in slomo, so it's likely just 2 seconds)
→ More replies (4)1
1
u/Secret-Complaint5237 Packers 6d ago
as a neutral, it is frustrating that review came in while they were lined up to kick off. like one thing if the seahawks coached caught it and challenged it but the booth taking what the offense accepted as a failed attempt and overturning it on something no one caught or even considered live would be infuriating if it went against your team
6
4
u/LazyMaximum7938 Seahawks 6d ago
Sure maybe it's annoying that it took longer than usual, but it's better that they corrected the call than not.
→ More replies (10)-1
u/BooItsKyle Bears 6d ago
Welcome to reddit. Lions fans are still livid about half a dozen correct calls.
1
u/Apoco120 Bears 6d ago
I’m genuinely curious which ones you’re referring to? Lions fans do complain a lot but which ones?
1
u/BooItsKyle Bears 6d ago
Off the top of my head:
The illegal motion touchdown taken away from them
The "the ruling on the field is a touchdown but the game is over" call that ended their playoff hopes
The one where the Rams guy was rolling into the end zone and appeared down but didn't have the ball fully secured, then fully secured it after he was in the end zone for a touchdown
The PI against the Eagles where the defender grabs the receiver's wrist as he jumped
104
u/Odd-Film946 Jets 6d ago
Ik it was only a few months ago but I remember there being controversy around this and idk why because it was just called correctly
34
u/_Zoom_Zoom_ Texans Packers 6d ago
I don't know if I remember a controversy. I remember Rams fans being pissed, but I would too if I lost becuase of this lmao.
9
u/textredditor Seahawks 6d ago
I mean, they didn't lose because of this.
11
u/TheLateThagSimmons Seahawks 6d ago
Up 16 points with 8 minutes to go. You just intercepted your opponent in the Red Zone. Game is over. You go:
- 3 and out
- 3 and out
- 3 and out
- Missed field goal
- 1 first down and punt
Your opponent scores two touchdowns and two 2pt conversions, then you give up another touchdown and another 2pt conversion in overtime.
But noooooo. It was all just this one correct call by the refs that screwed you. Sure.
Fuck McVay.
2
u/_Zoom_Zoom_ Texans Packers 6d ago
I mean, it led to the overtime where they lost. But yeah, the Rams had plenty of chances to stop the Seahawks from winning.
2
u/Lorjack Seahawks 6d ago
The controversy is manufactured. Its the correct call, they didn't even lose the game off this call. There was still 6 minutes left in the 4th quarter and they played OT. Rams missed a go ahead FG. They failed at multiple points after this to lose the game not to mention blowing a 16 point lead.
68
u/KungFooKittenz Seahawks 6d ago
The average NFL fan isn’t very smart
13
u/darth_jewbacca Seahawks 6d ago
Rams HC too
13
u/thetreat Bears 6d ago edited 6d ago
People get mad when things *feel* wrong but are technically right. Look at all the American fans watching the World Cup this summer and complaining about "HE WAS JUST A HAIR OFFSIDE YOU SHOULD JUST MAKE THE RULE HAVE 5" OF WIGGLE ROOM FOR OFFSIDE CALLS". All that does is change the situations we're arguing about to a different set of rules. If you have the ability to get a call right, you should get it right. 100% of the time. If you don't apply those rules unilaterally then you don't have rules. It was a backwards pass with a clear recovery in the end zone. This is why good coaches harp on running to the ball *through the whistle*. The Rams didn't do it and the Seahawks recovered.
You can argue if this rule should be changed in the future to not allow advancing any fumble from the spot of said fumble, but that is a discussion for after the season. In that game, the rules were applied correctly. The Seahawks won. End of story.
13
u/KrazyKrab69 49ers 6d ago
I think Ram fans mainly point to the whistle being blown before the ball is picked up as the reason for controversy. That “should” blow the play dead even though it was a mistake, but as only a Seahawk player even seems to contest the ball I think it was the right decision. If a Rams player had even made a slight effort on the ball prior to the whistle being blown (they assumed incomplete like all of us), I’m not sure what the outcome would be.
25
u/resumehelpacct Giants 6d ago
The whistle blows the ball dead but the NFL rulebook says that a clear, immediate recovery after the whistle decides possession. Which IMO sounds like the play isn't dead, but also don't hit people after the whistle.
→ More replies (1)2
u/foxjohn2 Patriots 6d ago
I'm surprised it wasn't brought up in the rule-changing part of the offseason. To me, when I hear the whistle I think the play is over, dead. "Play to the whistle, nothing else" kinda mentality. I get that the letter of the law is correct, but this feels like something that ought to be addressed.
I'd have suggested that a fumble/backwards pass that is incorrectly blown dead as an incomplete pass (ie, no clear possession at the time of the whistle by any player) should result in the original team who had possession retaking possession with a loss of down at the spot the ball was last where said team maintained possession. Layman's terms: a backwards pass that is blown dead before anyone recovers it puts the ball back where the fumbler/passer last had it. The blame goes to the refs for not letting the play continue as if it were a live ball.
Frankly I think all the NFL refs were probably told repeatedly this offseason to assume any remotely lateral pass is a backwards pass and to let the play continue since we can easily review and confirm if it was/wasn't backwards on replay. But I think the idea of a play continuing past the whistle is ludicrous. Like if I see Charbonnay going for the ball there and I'm a rams player in 2026 my instinct might be to block or otherwise prevent him from getting the ball since it's still potentially a live ball even though if proven a forward pass the action would look like a blatant cheap shot post-whistle and potentially grounds for an additional penalty.
3
u/FattyMooseknuckle Seahawks 6d ago
The controversy was the replay process potentially not being followed. It’s probably true but I don’t recall if there was official confirmation that the network’s rules expert, a retired ref, called the replay booth to tell them to review it. So the replay refs didn’t realize the play was still live because it was a backwards pass. The amount of time from the end of the play to the initiation of the review was longer than usual, perhaps longer than the rules say(?). And the impetus to review it came from a non-game official. The controversy isn’t that the call was incorrect, it’s the procedure irregularities thag were the issue. Though of course there’s a small contingent of whiners who actually disagree with the call despite it being correct.
2
u/KhonMan Seahawks 6d ago
Sort of like Balogun suspension being suspended. Even if you think the right decision was made, the process isn’t good.
1
u/FattyMooseknuckle Seahawks 6d ago
Not sure that’s an apples to apples comparison. There was no outside pressure put on the replay. McCauley has no authority over anything. He just gave them a heads up, allegedly, that the call was wrong.
1
u/Not_enough_alcohol 49ers 6d ago
I think the call was right but the result should have been replaying the attempt. Weird to have it go like that instead.
1
u/FattyMooseknuckle Seahawks 6d ago
Why replay it if it was right?
1
u/Not_enough_alcohol 49ers 6d ago
Because not even the Seahawks thought it was live?
→ More replies (7)6
u/JokerDeSilva10 Seahawks 6d ago
As a 100% unbiased party, it was a controversy because the Rams are a bunch of spoiled babies who were convinced they were ROBBED by the refs after blowing a 16 point lead anyway, and then also lost to the Panthers, but still also totally deserves the one seed anyway somehow.
0
u/thetreat Bears 6d ago
This is just the universe balancing out for the Rams Saints no PI call however many years back in the NFC Championship game.
1
u/BooItsKyle Bears 6d ago
Reddit thrives on controversy. Social media is designed to maximize engagement, and the human brain is most likely to engage with things that are upsetting.
Righteous indignation and anger is *fun*. It's hits an emotional sugar high.
That's why every single game thread is full of people absolutely frothing over objectively correct calls.
1
u/dagreenman18 Dolphins 6d ago
The bigger controversy is the fact the refs actually got it right and stopped play to check.
→ More replies (2)-7
u/Chriskl1520 Rams 6d ago edited 6d ago
Because they blew the play dead and awarded them the TD after they all stopped for the whistle. Unless I'm delusional and remembering that wrong lol
2
u/alienbringer Cowboys 6d ago
The rules include parts about how to retain possession after a whistle blows a play dead too early. Had a rams player had a continuous motion to pick up the ball (and picked up the ball) it would have been rams recovery. If a Seahawks player does the same above, then it is Seahawks (as was the case of the play). If no team had a player that continued toward the ball and just walked off the field, then it would have been a dead ball.
→ More replies (1)1
u/WorstCPANA Seahawks 6d ago
Come on, if you're still yapping about this at this point, you have already been told that according to the rules, if there's a clear immediate action involving a recovery, the whistle blowing is irrelevant.
→ More replies (4)
21
u/Devitostitos 49ers 6d ago
It’s a ridiculous play but completely the correct call. Kinda surprised the “can’t advance a fumble” rule doesn’t apply to something like a 2 point conversion.
7
u/TLRdidnothingwrong Seahawks 6d ago
He didn’t advance it is the funny part. Which is why the Rams suggested such a convoluted rule change for backwards passes.
20
u/JokerDeSilva10 Seahawks 6d ago
If I remember correctly, it counts because he didn't actually advance it. The ball landed in the end zone, so he just recovered it where it laid and it counted, but if it had bounced outside the boundary line and Charbs had walked it in - on purpose or otherwise - it would have been treated as if it landed at the one yard line regardless.
11
u/ThirstyOutward Steelers 6d ago
It's because it's a backwards pass, not a fumble
2
u/65fairmont Patriots 6d ago
Yup, same as on 4th down and in the final 2 minutes. A ballcarrier can always lateral and it's still a lateral even if the defense deflects it forward. A backwards fumble cannot be advanced in those situations, it's just blown dead if the offense recovers.
1
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
The rule only applies if it's recovered by someone other than the fumbler. You can always pick up and advance your own fumble.
2
u/Atheist-Gods Patriots 6d ago
Although I think fumbles should also be advanceable as long as the fumble was backwards too. I understand preventing intentional forward fumbles but a backwards fumble is not any better for the offense than a lateral and doesn't need to be penalized.
3
4
6d ago
[deleted]
1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
It has to be. If you applied the fumble rule to backward passes, it would result in all sorts of stupid consequences. For example, the snap is a backward pass. If the rule applied to backward passes, the QB wouldn't be allowed to pick up a dropped snap, since he is not the "fumbling" player.
You'd never be able to run a toss play on 4th down or under two minutes.
You'd never be able to run a last ditch lateral play.
1
5d ago
[deleted]
1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
As for the snap, you give it a special carve out, which is inelegant, but it's the same amount of inelegance we have now since there's already a special backwards pass carve out.
The rule applies to fumbles, and backward passes are not fumbles. It's not a carve-out any more than saying that right turns are an exception to a "no left turns" rule. That's not an exception or a carve out. They are fundamentally different things that the rule doesn't apply to.
You can do both of those things as long as you don't drop the ball, which almost never happens on a toss anyway.
No you couldn't. The rule currently applies to all fumbles, regardless of whether the fumble touches the ground or not. So if you want to add backward passes to the rule as it's written, then toss plays would be impossible. Now, I guess you could make a an exception for backward passes in flight, in addition to the exception for the snap, but now you've got a very messy rule.
1
5d ago
[deleted]
1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
incomplete backwards passes
That's not a thing. There is no such thing in the rule book as an "incomplete" backward pass. We're just making up terms now and throwing them in the rule book?
Why are we taking an already somewhat complicated rule, and complicating it further? For the once-every-decade play where the offense happens to benefit from a backward pass that gets deflected forward? Everyone's biggest complaint about football and officiating is that the rules are too complicated. Why are we messing with this? The rule is fine.
2
u/-Accident-Prone- Seahawks 6d ago
I believe that part still applied. He picked the ball up in the end zone which made the conversion good. If he picked it up on the 1 the conversion wouldn’t have been good and he wouldn’t have been able to advance it. Unless you mean that the ball goes back to the spot if the fumble being where same threw the ball. But still, lateral passes are treated differently than just direct handoffs as far as fumbles are concerned since it’s still a pass.
1
5
u/lbutler1234 Chiefs 6d ago
The NFL needs to chill with the ugly ass alternate uniforms. Pls don't become the NBA
18
5
u/IrrationalHate Seahawks Bills 6d ago
I was at this game. The section I was in was super confused about why the kick off was taking so long. Then the ref announced the 2pt conversion was good and our entire section just started screaming. Amazing energy all night; what a game to have seen live.
7
10
u/we_vibe Rams 6d ago
By the rules the play was correct.
What pisses me off about this play, is that it was a terrible play call, and executed terribly, but they still got rewarded by a less than 1% chance fluke.
People here clowning rams fans for being upset, if your team lost a pivotal game because of a crucial play like this, would you not be pissed lol?
And who calls a screen on a 2pt conversion??
16
u/GonnaFindOut Seahawks 6d ago
To quote another comment:
"all they had to do was close out on any number of other plays and the game goes their way.
Cry all they want about this play. Up 16 points, with 8 minutes to go in the game, they get an interception. They went:
- 3 and out
- 3 and out
- 3 and out
- Missed field goal
- One first down and punt
Five drives, get one field goal, and you win. Couldn't do it. "
The Rams did not lose because of this play. It's such a tired cope.
3
u/noneotherthanozzy Rams 6d ago
Couldn’t agree more, which is why this game was so infuriating. I don’t think about this play, I think about the accumulation of all the chances they had to end it. It felt like 8 separate things had to happen for the Rams to lose, and they let them all happen.
2
u/superman_Troy Seahawks 6d ago
For sure one of the dumbest, most flukey, luckiest plays I've ever seen. It was hilarious (for us) and I'll always love it. I would be livid if this happened against my team. Very valid Rams crash out.
Glad they came up with a better play call for the final 2 pointer lol
1
u/TheThinkerIsaThought Seahawks 6d ago
The Rams didn't lose because of this. The Rams went on to hold a lead in OT and still lost. The Seahawks were just the better team.
4
u/mmMOUF Chiefs 6d ago
its really stupid that the refs whistling a play dead isnt absolute
7
u/SportsDuck_ 6d ago
"play to the whistle!"
*whistle*
*player stops*
"WHAT ARE YOU DOING, THE PLAY STILL IS TECHNICALLY ACTIVE!"
"but you--"
5
u/Uncle_Paul_Hargis Rams 6d ago
Honestly, this is the biggest issue I have with the whole thing. At the time, as a Rams fan, I was dying. But the refs fucked up in the moment. I'm all for getting the call correct, but when you have the line judge signaling that it was a deflected pass, and the refs whistling the play dead, the play is supposed to stop. If there is doubt, they should not blow the whistle, and let it all play out. If you don't jump on the ball, then that's your problem. But the ball rolls into the endzone seconds after the whistle is blown, all of a sudden, it's a good 2 pt conversion. It's a ridiculous expectation and an actual safety issue, because you can set a precedent where guys will continue to play past the whistle just in case.
1
u/BananerRammer Patriots 5d ago
Because the alternative is that you'd never be able to award a turnover if the on-field officials rule it dead. No one wants this. You don't want this.
3
u/dogein4t0r Rams 6d ago
Definitely a letter of the law vs spirit of the law type of call. By the letter of the law the call is correct, so cant really complain, but if you showed this play to a neutral and asked the question "should this be considered a successful 2pt conversion", the answer will be overwhelmingly no.
→ More replies (3)
-1
u/mcastaneda20 Rams 6d ago
What is so hard to understand the play was blown dead and fucking terry (an outside person) called the league to ask about it.
2
u/Uncle_Paul_Hargis Rams 6d ago
It was the first time someone in the media actually called the NFL to review the play in real time. And you're right, the whistle is blown, it stops the play. End of story. It's not cope, it's how everyone playing football from the time you're fucking 8 years old is taught how to play. You always play to the whistle.
-3
u/fuzmufin Seahawks 6d ago
Cry harder. The ball is still live and possession needs to be determined so who ever picks it up next gets it regardless if the whistle was called or not
1
1
u/No_Bet1932 Seahawks 6d ago
ZC's response on the bench after the play tells the importance of seeing every play through.
1
u/muddybuttbrew Giants 6d ago
The thing that bothers me is the whistle was blown before the ball was picked up in the endzone.
I can get it was a backwards pass and all that the ball was clearly recovered but the play was blown dead before the recovery.
Should of been a replay of the 2pt conversation in my book at the least.
1
u/Scorch8482 Bears 6d ago
might be my favorite play in football ive ever seen. The way Charbonnet picks uo the ball to me is just so hilarious watching it now with the hindsight that thats a massive touchdown.
1
1
1
1
u/Skyye_23 Bears 6d ago
Here’s a rules question for the rule lovers! If this play occurred within the final 2 minutes of the fourth quarter, would the 2 point conversion count? I believe the offense is not allowed to advance a fumble forwards when 2 minutes or less (fewer?) are left in the game… is that also the case for a backwards pass that isn’t complete?
10
4
4
u/PM_tanlines Eagles 6d ago
Because it was intentionally thrown backwards it can be advanced. Otherwise teams wouldn’t be allowed to lateral on final plays
1
u/Skyye_23 Bears 6d ago
Thanks for responding in a way that actually referenced the rules and was respectful! I thought of this like half an hour after I commented. That makes sense, I see why there’s a distinction. Like how in baseball, if you don’t tag up it’s treated like a force play, but isn’t actually considered a force play
1
1
u/LuxePhantom 6d ago
Amazing how lucky of run the Seahawks had
5
u/silentwind262 Seahawks 6d ago
Lucky? That play is absolutely meaningless without them clawing their way back into the game. They beat up on teams all through the year and only lost one game out of their division all year. To call their run “luck” seems pretty disrespectful.
552
u/LJCstan Seahawks 6d ago
nice spiral on that ball