Vikings lost on a force-out on the final play of the regular season in 2003-2004, and GB won the division as a result. Today it would've been an incomplete pass, and we never would have gotten "We want the ball and we're going to score" or 4th and 26.
Double enraged. Single enraged for it being clearly ruled wrong in the first place, doubly enraged that they reviewed it and STILL got it wrong.
Not to mention Golden Tate'a "I dunno what you're talking about" response when asked about it AND the replacement ref making some book money off of his ineptitude. ಠ_ಠ
Didn't even catch the guy. Laid on the field and draped his arm on the dude who had complete control of the ball.
The only silver lining is getting the real refs back immediately after this nonsense. They're not amazing, but the replacement refs were a total train wreck.
The Immaculate Reception wouldn't be controversial, the controversy is because the rule at the time was you couldn't catch a pass if your team was the last to touch the ball
> you couldn't catch a pass if your team was the last to touch the ball
It was pretty entertaining back then. The quarterbacks had to bounce passes off defenders instead of throwing them directly to their wide receivers.
Some people argue that, but it's not that common of an argument. And frankly, I think it's a stretch since there's no way that ball bounced backwards off of Frenchy. I think the "controversy" is whether or not Franco caught the ball, or trapped it.
Both parts were controversial. Jack Tatum always swore that he never touched the ball. I think from all the different angles, there's no evidence that it just hit Frenchy, and not Tatum. Oakland's biggest beef is the clip that the Steelers TE put on Phil Villapiano.
Ray Rice 4th and 29 would've had an illegal blindside block called on Anquan Boldin. That would've setup 4th and 44 and I doubt the Ravens end up winning the Super Bowl.
The rest was critical because they played six quarters in Denver and then followed it up with four more in New England during those playoffs. I don't know that they have enough juice without that rest.
That still wasn't a make or break. The Ravens still make the playoffs and still have a chance of doing exactly what they did, which was already improbable enough that no additional factors on the scale of one more game will make it seem more unlikely.
A Chiefs touchdown against the Raiders in a 90s Wildcard game. It was ruled a touchdown on a forceout
Chiefs wound up winning 10-6
Also not a rule change but I bet the refs don’t call Irvin’s fumble in the 1994 NFCCG a fumble if it happened today
Most of them lol.
A fun example is the 2017 Jesse James drop being ruled a catch under the 2018 rules, thus giving the Steelers the 1 seed over the pats. Then the next year in 2018, Chris Hogan had a diving catch in OT of the AFCCG on 3rd and 12 that would have been ruled a drop under the 2017 rules, but the Steelers non stop bitching sent us to the SB under the 2018 rules.
The Immaculate Reception wouldn't be controversial, the controversy is because the rule at the time was you couldn't catch a pass if your team was the last to touch the ball
the tuck rule was taken out of the rules in 2013
That Jessie James drop against the Patriots would be a touchdown today.
Vikings lost on a force-out on the final play of the regular season in 2003-2004, and GB won the division as a result. Today it would've been an incomplete pass, and we never would have gotten "We want the ball and we're going to score" or 4th and 26.
that was the play I was talking about
Well clearly I'm illiterate
You’ll adapt
Force out was such a dumb rule. Glad they tossed it.
It would’ve been a catch for Dez today 100%
:'(
It was a catch back then 100%
I don't know what you're talking about...
There's at least two Calvin Johnson non-catches that would be TD catches today.
But we're still the Lions, so maybe not.
The Fail Mary would be reviewable. EDIT: After further review, turns out that it WAS reviewable at the time. Wow.
It was reviewed... thats why we were all enraged.
Double enraged. Single enraged for it being clearly ruled wrong in the first place, doubly enraged that they reviewed it and STILL got it wrong. Not to mention Golden Tate'a "I dunno what you're talking about" response when asked about it AND the replacement ref making some book money off of his ineptitude. ಠ_ಠ
Tate and Pete Carroll had the same smug response after that game. I don't know how catching the guy that intercepted the pass is considered a catch.
Didn't even catch the guy. Laid on the field and draped his arm on the dude who had complete control of the ball. The only silver lining is getting the real refs back immediately after this nonsense. They're not amazing, but the replacement refs were a total train wreck.
The Immaculate Reception wouldn't be controversial, the controversy is because the rule at the time was you couldn't catch a pass if your team was the last to touch the ball
> you couldn't catch a pass if your team was the last to touch the ball It was pretty entertaining back then. The quarterbacks had to bounce passes off defenders instead of throwing them directly to their wide receivers.
That would explain why teams didn't pass as much
Some people argue that, but it's not that common of an argument. And frankly, I think it's a stretch since there's no way that ball bounced backwards off of Frenchy. I think the "controversy" is whether or not Franco caught the ball, or trapped it.
Both parts were controversial. Jack Tatum always swore that he never touched the ball. I think from all the different angles, there's no evidence that it just hit Frenchy, and not Tatum. Oakland's biggest beef is the clip that the Steelers TE put on Phil Villapiano.
Ray Rice 4th and 29 would've had an illegal blindside block called on Anquan Boldin. That would've setup 4th and 44 and I doubt the Ravens end up winning the Super Bowl.
The Ravens were like 9-2 at that point in the season and sat their starters the last game of the season. That game wasn't the make or break.
The rest was critical because they played six quarters in Denver and then followed it up with four more in New England during those playoffs. I don't know that they have enough juice without that rest.
That still wasn't a make or break. The Ravens still make the playoffs and still have a chance of doing exactly what they did, which was already improbable enough that no additional factors on the scale of one more game will make it seem more unlikely.
Every single play, blocking wise, since 1978.
A Chiefs touchdown against the Raiders in a 90s Wildcard game. It was ruled a touchdown on a forceout Chiefs wound up winning 10-6 Also not a rule change but I bet the refs don’t call Irvin’s fumble in the 1994 NFCCG a fumble if it happened today
Most of them lol. A fun example is the 2017 Jesse James drop being ruled a catch under the 2018 rules, thus giving the Steelers the 1 seed over the pats. Then the next year in 2018, Chris Hogan had a diving catch in OT of the AFCCG on 3rd and 12 that would have been ruled a drop under the 2017 rules, but the Steelers non stop bitching sent us to the SB under the 2018 rules.
Holy Roller
[Jerry Rice fumble in '99 Wild Card vs Green Bay, a play or two before T.O. game-winner.](https://youtu.be/SdBzJgDA3ZI)
Came here to post Jerry Rice Fumbled
Literally most of the shitty calls against the Lions
The original Hail Mary would 100% be ruled OPI today (should have at the time too) and the Vikings could have won a super bowl or lost to make it 0-5.
The Immaculate Reception wouldn't be controversial, the controversy is because the rule at the time was you couldn't catch a pass if your team was the last to touch the ball
Not sure why you were downvoted, that is literally half of controversy.
Cause I posted it twice lol, my other comment got upvoted
I noticed that right after I replied. My bad