11-14-2017, 02:10 AM
Not sure if this was reported yet. Yesterday during the GB(putrid/urine) and Chi.(Bear down---eat a salad for gawds sake) game there was an interesting challenge I thought. Chi Rb going right dives for the inside of the pylon as he's being driven out of bounds. Ref initially says he stepped out of bounds at the 1. Fox challenges and after review they say he didn't step out but fumbled as he reaches for the pylon(touchback GB ball).
If you look at the replay you see that he didn't step out but as the defender drives him out his toe is dragging in the white (out of bounds area) prior to him reaching the pylon. So basically a team gets another bite at the apple with out expending a challenge. Think of it like this--- in a future game AR rolls out takes off on a run for the end zone and EG chases him down and stops him one yard short as the clock expires. MM challenges the ruling that he didn't make in the endzone. come back from commercial and learn that no he didn't make it but EG may have made open hand contact to the helmut area. Additional untimed down for GB to kick the game winning Fg.
If you look at the replay you see that he didn't step out but as the defender drives him out his toe is dragging in the white (out of bounds area) prior to him reaching the pylon. So basically a team gets another bite at the apple with out expending a challenge. Think of it like this--- in a future game AR rolls out takes off on a run for the end zone and EG chases him down and stops him one yard short as the clock expires. MM challenges the ruling that he didn't make in the endzone. come back from commercial and learn that no he didn't make it but EG may have made open hand contact to the helmut area. Additional untimed down for GB to kick the game winning Fg.
