Green (ref), in a postgame interview with a pool reporter, said that call was errant -- even though his explanation for the confusion was almost as confusing as the play itself.
"We should have let the play go through in the end, yes," Green said. "It was misinterpreted that instead of killing the play, we should have let the play go through."
Green said the confusion occurred because there was a misunderstanding about whether Rivers' pass or Tomlinson's lateral was in question.
"The first pass was the one that was illegal, but it only kills the play if it hits the ground," Green said. "That was incorrect to have killed it at that point. The ruling should have let the play go on. That's just the way that it played out. We believe the second pass (by Tomlinson) was legal."
Green was asked why, since the first pass by Rivers did not hit the ground, the officials decided after huddling that the play should have ended there.
What?!?! Somebody please explain this to me. A question about Rivers' first pass being illegal? I'm seriously lost. So in the New Age NFL, you can no longer block, tackle, or have your QB throw a forward pass.
Want more proof? Phil Simms was speechless after the play. You know...when the man who has an expert analysis opinion about every second of the 3 hour game...has no explanation, that something is afoul.
The source? Empties Crushed
Documented? Anybody with DVR capabilities.
In other NFL news, Abraham Zapruder filmed Roger Godell on the grassy knoll.
No comments:
Post a Comment