The CONTROVERSIAL Play That Caused an NFL Referee to QUIT
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 лип 2024
- In a 1988 game between the Dallas Cowboys and New York Giants, replay official Armen Terzian was involved in a play so controversial that he wound up quitting just a few days after. This is the story of the play that caused a referee to take the unusual move of quitting in the middle of the season.
NOTE: One part at the 2 minute mark had to be removed due to copyright. It was 5 seconds explaining how the Giants were coming off of a heartbreaking loss to the San Francisco 49ers the week before
LINK TO PATREON: / jaguargator9
Get early access to videos, your name featured in the credits, and the ability to request future video topics by joining today for as low as $3!
LINK TO TWITCH: / jaguargator9_nfl
Play live NFL trivia every Tuesday night at 9 PM Eastern/6 PM Pacific with the chance to win cash prizes!
Check out the video below to learn more: • WEEKLY LIVE NFL TRIVIA...
LINK TO TIK TOK: vm.tiktok.com/ZMJmVTKpr/
See videos like this condensed down to 60 seconds by following JaguarGator9 on Tik Tok!
SUBSCRIBE TO 60 SECOND NFL HISTORY: / @jaguargator8
See videos like this condensed down to 60 seconds by subscribing to 60 Second NFL History on UA-cam!
#nfl #cowboys #giants #nflthrowback - Спорт
Seems like the UA-cam algorithm is picking this video up, so for those of you who are new to the channel, welcome! We do NFL history videos like this every single day, and once a week, we'll do a Cowboys themed video. Here's one from today on how Emmitt Smith was seconds away from never getting drafted by the Dallas Cowboys: ua-cam.com/video/E2uc40xZ5Go/v-deo.html
Also, we do live NFL trivia every Tuesday night on Twitch at 9 PM ET. We've given away roughly $2,000 in cash prizes this year alone! Here's the link to play: www.twitch.tv/jaguargator9_nfl
I'm confused. Were the rules different back then about touching the ball in the field of play and then the ball going into the endzone? Because by today's rules that's a safety all day long.
That’s still a touchback today. It has to do with the impetus. I spoke with Dean Blandino about it in a previous video (one with a very similar play involving the Giants and Broncos in 1980)
Does it seem unfair? Yes. But that’s a touchback
@@OfficialJaguarGator9 He was out of the end zone when he touched the ball so it was a saftey
@@lyndsietrawick1945 He never had POSSESSION of the ball outside of the endzone. TOUCHBACK.
Don't know why I'm see this. I do know this entire story could have been told in about 45 seconds. What the extra 8 minutes is for I have no idea.
I have often said, it would be fantastic if the referees did a post-game presser. It will never happen, but it would be great to ask them "What did you see?" or "What were you thinking?"
The answer would always be "that is what we saw." That is how they call the plays, based on what they saw. There is nothing else to add.
Also, the white hat doesn't make all the calls. So if it's a pass interference, he couldn't answer "what did you see" because he didn't make the call himself.
They actually do have a conference with the league office in new york
If you look at it he rumbled the ball outside the endzone and then the ball was in the end zone that is a safety
Like tony gilbert said, they have a meeting w/the league each week and they are graded on their performance also. They aren't paid enough to have a dog and pony show in front of the media.
Another effect -- and this one's positive for Dallas. They lost this game and finished with the worst record in the NFL by a game, earning them the No. 1 pick. With that, they took Troy Aikman. If they win, then they're in a 3-way tie with Detroit and GB for the worst record in the league and I honestly don't know how that's broken. Granted, 4 of the Top 5 picks that year reached the HOF (Aikman, B. Sanders, Derrick Thomas, D. Sanders) but who knows, if the Cowboys win this game, maybe they end up losing the No. 1 pick and getting Tony Mandarich.
Looking back on that draft I don't think anyone would've wanted Mandarich but at the time he was called the greatest O-line prospect in the history of the NFL Draft and no one knew he took steroids to make himself big. Also could've been the effect of the Sports Illustrated curse as well since SI only put him on the cover and not Aikman, Barry Sanders, the late great Derrick Thomas, or Deion Sanders. I don't believe in curses btw but when you get on the cover of something whether it's Madden or SI, there most likely will be pressure to perform at a higher level than what you've been doing and that does tend to lead to dismal performances unless you're Tom Brady.
@@Tdull-tv1ds uhh...looking back at that top 5, of course you avoid the non HOFer lol
To answer your question about the draft order, The strength of schedule tiebreaker is the top one. It simply involves counting up the wins, losses, and ties and figuring out the win percentage of a team's opponents. The team with a lower win percentage wins the tiebreaker. It wasn’t always this way. If you like butterfly effects, consider in 69 when the bears and Steelers were tied for the worst record in the league. Back then, it actually came down to a freakin COUN FLIP. Lol. The Steelers won the toss, and drafted Terry Bradshaw, whom the bears also would have drafted. Imagine the changes that would have caused for the league and for the city of Pittsburgh.
@@ryanmarshall4332Yeah, Another one of the videos on here is about the 49ers almost trading for Bob Griese in the late 70s but the trade not going through because the organization was a constant mess in the pre-Walsh era. It would have made them better in the short term but who knows if they draft Montana a few years later with Griese?
Oh mandarich is TOTALLY the type of guy jerry is taking. I’m slightly surprised he didn’t tbh.
that fan had a pretty good arm to hit a referee with a bottle from the stands.
I remember that play, cowboy receiver pushed off and the ref called interference on the Vikings I have hated the Cowboy since, bad call!!!
The Met was one of those weirdly configured stadiums. It wasn't that difficult
Did they ever catch the fan who threw the bottle?
@@curtisjacobson7338 they didn’t call anything on that play and it was a touchdown and win for the cowboys . The fans were upset that they didn’t call offensive pass interference on drew person who clearly pushed off but they rarely call that on offensive players even today and never in the 70s
@@jewsco Especially on a hail Mary
He fumbled it in the field of play, not the end zone. Then he recovers it and tries to advance it, not take a knee. I think it was a right call for a safety.
Part of me thinks he didn't just forget to review and just got confused about the rules.
No sympathy for Terzian. If you don't know the rules after 21 years, you should quit.
Assuming the following NFL rules from 2011 applied in 1988, I analyze the play as follows:
Article 5: A Muff is the touching of a loose ball by a player in an unsuccessful attempt to obtain possession of it.
Section 37: A Touchback is the situation in which a ball is dead on or behind a team’s own goal line, provided the impetus came from an opponent and provided it is not a touchdown.
Section 5, Article 1. Safety. It is a Safety: (a) if the offense commits a foul in its own end zone; or (b) when an impetus by a team sends the ball behind its own goal line, and the ball is dead in the end zone in its possession or the ball is out of bounds behind the goal line.
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE: The impetus is always attributed to the offense, unless the defense creates a new force that sends the ball behind its own goal line by muffing a ball which is at rest or nearly at rest[.]
ANALYSIS: The kick returner muffed the ball. The ball became dead when the returner was tackled in the endzone without fumbling. The kick returner was a defensive player who may have created a new force that sent the ball behind his own goal line by muffing the ball. But the ball was not at rest or "nearly at rest" when he muffed it. Thus, the play should have been ruled a touchback.
Cut the refs some slack. The rule can easily be confused on a kickoff, especially when the returner tries to run the ball out of the endzone.
Absolutely, even worse they claim that it cost them the game, uh what?
Cowboys had 59 minutes to play the rest of the game!
Nice assessment, spot on!😎
@@paulcoover7057 We can't say for sure if it cost them the game, but there's a strong probability it did. Not only is it giving the Giants 2 points but it's also taking away the Cowboys kickoff and giving it to the Giants, essentially meaning that the Giants start two halves with the ball instead of 1 for the Cowboys and 1 for the Giants.
Well, we Cowboys fans can forgive this one. If the Cowboys had won this game we would not have had the #1 pick in the 1989 draft. If you remember, we drafted a rough-hewn quarterback out of UCLA, by way of Henrietta, Oklahoma, #8 on your program, #1 in your heart, one Troy Aikman. Perish the nightmare of Troy in a Packers uniform and Tony Mandarich in silver & blue. Yikes!!!
The way this play was called should be the official rule and it makes no sense that its not.
Agreed. The refs messed up by not calling it according to the rule. BUT this rule is dumb. Impetuous, pff. The player tried to make a play on the ball and failed. This is how safeties generally occur (someone failed at something)
Harry Carson was such a bad ass.
Awesome vid. watched NFL Network for years and never heard the story. You are da man!
I remember watching this game with my Grandfather, he was not too pleased at the call.
So he knew the rule? Horse manure.
He was out of the end zone when he lost the ball which means it was a saftey
@@lyndsietrawick1945 He never had possession of the ball in the field of play nor did he provide the impetus for the ball going into the endzone. TOUCHBACK.
@@Namath1000 It’s amazing!! Some people, like LT, want to keep reciting their myth even after the nfl rule was explained in simple terms.
That amount of content you get from the giants is nothing short of amazing
Lots of comments saying it was a safety. IF YOU THINK THIS WAS A SAFETY YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE RULES! It isn't a matter of opinion, you're just wrong.
The biggest surprise in this video is how badly the Jets hammered the Oilers that week. Holy cow. How the eff did that happen?? O'Brien had a helluva game! 5:38
I was thinking the same thing! lol
The Jets were always good for one of those 1-2 times a year.
@@area.man. J-E-T-S
JETS!
JETS!
JETS!
@@diaz5292 They were still chanting 'Joe must Go' after the game
@@frankgifford207 Take your dementia pills, Frank. You need em.
I was binge watching your videos when this popped up
And after 30 years, Cowboys fans still complain about the ONE time a bad went against them.
No, you must be thinking about the 1994 NFC Championship game when Deion Sanders blatantly interfered with Michael Irvin
Michael "The Offensive Pass Interference Call Was Created Because Of Me" Irvin
@@londonwerewolves Still pass interference, though
Moral of the story.... *"Hang onto the firckin' ball!"* If your team's victory is dependent on referees making all the right calls, then you aren't a championship team.
Such a bullshit answer. Refs fucking up constantly change all kinds of plays and games. You can do everything right and a ref still fuck it up for you.
It's a touchback not a fumble
@@BigUnk49 It's a muff and a touchback. A muff is not a fumble.
FINALLY a video about something I actually remember! 🤘🤘🤘
Worst call ever was playoffs Rams vs Saints with ex Ram as a ref!
Holy shit that was an ex-ram? I didn't know that. It was already horrible but that makes it criminal.
100% true
I see things differently. That was one of the worst "no calls" ever.
Talking about no harm no foul blind azz ray Charles and even Stevie wonder could see that tragedy on that play
Awesome vid...especially tie back to ‘75 play-offs and the original Hail Mary game. I remember it like yesterday.
Cowboys won far and square.
@@trumanupchurch364 It was clearly a grotesque push-off, so no. They did not win “far” and square lol
@@danielpenrodii2389 They won by '"farce and unfairly"
@@danielpenrodii2389 IDK about "grotesque". The push off itself looked really smooth and well done to me.
NBA and NFL protect their officials by not releasing their reprimands to the public.
That's what unionization in the hardest profession in the world does for you
Also, Drew Pearson definitely pushed off and got away with it.
no doubt Pearson pushed off, but michael irvin pushed off all the way to the hall of fame. he got away with pushing off more than any player i've ever seen
who cares, all of the top WR's of every winning team EVER, would push off. If it isn't called, you didn't do it.
No, Pearson did not push off. There was incidental contact but Nate Wright tripped his own feet up. You can see it in ultra slow motion replays. Good no call.
At least he apologized. Most don’t do that.
Your channel is new to me, hey I remember this game, what a what the hell game, I even knew the call was wrong, love you on UA-cam...ps GO STEELERS!!!🙏✊😎
I thought if the runner tried to exit the endzone and tackled doing so then it was a safety. I learned something today. great video!
Me too. Guess I'm still a little confused. Is it only on a muffed punt or could the player receive it at say, the 1, and then decide to step back into the end zone for a touchback?
@@JH-ji6cj I thought the same!
Replay official quits the easiest job in the NFL because he admitted he made a mistake and didn't want to take responsibility for it.
@David Perrier so he admitted he made the mistake and he quit because of it. how much more responsibility could he take?
@@steveswangler6373 He thought if he admitted the mistake they would drop it. When they didn't he quit.
Officials are human and they are going to make mistakes. Most of them are far better at getting it right than any of those criticizing them ever could hope to be.
The ball was first touched in the field of play and then picked up in the endzone and an attempt to return it took place so the call was correct
@Solstice Grey You'll fit in with the rest of the referees in the NFL.
@@someperson8151 Just stating the rules !!!
It was touched, not fumbled. Only thing that matters is where you have possession. Touch or no touch, possession was in the endzone so it is a touchback,
Dumbass, did you even watch the video? It was clearly and thoroughly explained what the rule was.
smh and 🙄
Looked like a safety to me ! You are right about this J G .
The issue is with force. A muff is not considered a new force on a free kick. The force of the kick is what sent the ball into the end zone. Had the Giants recovered in the end zone, it would have been a touchdown, regardless of whether the muff is viewed as a new force or not. Had Dallas possessed the ball outside of the end zone, run it back in, and then be tackled in the end zone, that would have been a safety. However, because the force of the kick put the ball n the end zone, and because Dallas possessed the ball in the end zone after that force, it's a touchback.
It's really one of the most confusing aspects of the rules, from middle school through the pros. We spend a lot of time on this topic in training and reviewing it every year, and it's still confusing to rule on, especially when a split second decision is required. However, this should have been part of the pre-kick checklist every covering official has in their head.
Never heard of this "new force" you are talking about. It is just a muff and nothing else. You can muff it from 50 yard line back into your own enzdone and it is still just a muff. Possession is what counts.
@@RoyalMela try picking up a rule book.
I can’t speak to the NFL rule book, but I am very familiar with HS rules. A kick remains a kick until it is recovered. The location of the muff doesn’t matter, the kick doesn’t end until the ball is recovered. The “force” that put the ball in the end zone is still the kick, therefore it’s a touchback. Now under NFL rules, I do know that the receiving team does have to recover the kick, unless it goes through the back of the end zone.
apparently not anymore, I believe the rules were updated where an untouched ball in the EZ is NOT a live football, for whatever reason.
We need more punishments like this for referees. They get absolutely no repercussions for their incompetents
At 5:00, might I suggest the newspaper overlay be placed on the left side so that we can see the pushoff?
What an esoteric rule. If the receiving team touches a kicked ball, it should be a live ball.
We also see the inconsistency of the NFL's rules on kicked balls, and the goal line itself, on full display. If the muff happened at the 10, and the Giants picked up the ball, who would would have it? Yes....The Giants going inward. So in basic terms....the muff has a consequence. If the muff happened at the 10, and the Cowboys recover at the 5, who would have it? Yes...the Cowboys from their 5. The muff still has a consequnce. If the Cowboys want to possess the ball, they need to recover it. Now that still applies in this type of play, but the fact is, the Cowboys gain 19 yards of field position from muffing a kick (had the play been adjudicated per the rules). Frankly, the result on this play is how it ought to be. But that's not the job of the officials. It's the job of the competition committee to see these inconsistencies on display and correct them.
The muff doesn't allow for the kicking team to get the ball, they can always get the ball on a kickoff. You are thinking of a punt.
Even though he quit because of a bad call,. He's still sworn to "Secrecy". Don't tell anyone that the games are rigged.
I'm confused about why the ref needed to review the play. The issue was what the rules required, not whether the player muffed the ball or tried to run it out.
Because the on field officials got it 100% wrong.
smh and 🙄
@@sludge4125 And as far as we know were never punished for it while Terzian lost his job for their mistake.
@@DolFan316 Agreed.
So the ref took responsibility for the bad call but was then upset when he was held accountable?
@Leroy Brown What does “being held accountable” mean then if it doesn’t mean being punished in some sort of way? Perhaps they could have fined him or punished him in some other way, but the article makes it seem like he was expecting nothing to happen to him at all. If that’s true, then he certainly wasn’t truly taking responsibility for the bad call.
Why it wasn't ruled a TB on the field because the rule about such an instance around that time was if the runner (man with the ball) makes an effort to run it out of the end zone and is tacked in the end zone, it's a safety. If the runner puts his knee down voluntarily, then it's a touchback.
I don't know how or if this rule changed.
How do you screw up the very 1st call of the game?
If the ball would have been recovered by the other team after the muff,it would be a touchdown for the kicking team!
Here’s my question. The kick returner first contacted the ball outside the end zone, before muffing it back into the end zone. Today, if the returner stays in the end zone, and either lets the ball go through the end zone, or has the ball and takes a knee, that is a touchback. I don’t know what the rules were in 1988.
But the kick returner didn’t first contact the ball in the end zone, but in the field of play. SHOULD that be a safety, since he knocked the ball back into the end zone, and obtained control there, but was also touched down?
@@johncronin9540 He didn't actually knock the ball into the end zone. The ball was already going in that direction, and he did not apply new impetus, so responsibility for putting the ball past the goal line was still on the kicker.
@@goodmaro he didn't have to knock it into the endzone. He touched it in the field of play and it went into the endzone after said touching. In today's NFL that's a safety all day every day.
@@huntjl88 No, it's not. They haven't changed that rule. The touching of the ball does not change its status as a kick by the attacking team, and so does not change responsibility for putting the ball in the end zone.
The only difference with today's rule is that an untouched ball in the end zone is a touch back. Back then the onside kick rule was in effect. Any ball traveling past 10 yards is a live ball for either team. You had to catch every ball in the field including the end zone and either return it or take a knee if it's in the end zone.
When you said the worst-case scenario, I thought you were going to tell me that Buffalo won by ONE point.
Armon Terzian sounds like the Simpsons episode where Skinner is revealed to be an imposter named Armon Tanzerian. Maybe that’s where they got the name.
SKINNNNNER!!!!!!
It’s amazing how the rule was clearly and thoroughly explained, yet there are pathetic infants in the comments section making up their own rules.
smh and 🙄
The best example of lack of job safety came on, ironically, a safety.
The Fail Mary play was worst call of all time. Instead of the first play of the game it was the very last play. Replacement refs stole a win from GB and I'll never forget it.
That was certainly up there, but this one was just as bad
Wasn't that a pre-season game though?
@@walterozan1620 No. it was the 3rd game of the regular season, last one with the replacement refs
I remember hearing the day after the Cowboys beat the Vikings 17-14 that Fran Tarkenton's father died from a heart attack. I seem to also remember that Tarkenton's father's first name was Dallas, though I need to check this detail.
So that bottle that hit him was still affecting him...ouch.
Concussion protocols had not been implemented yet.
It's just interesting how old and out of shape the referees looked then...
I remember this well--Bizarre sequence of events and ending, for sure....and yes, using instant replay at every possible opportunity when things are unclear/uncertain should be done. That's the whole point of instant replay.
Do one on “the play that got a ref fired” Browns v Chargers 2018.
Interesting. I thought there was a difference between taking a knee or being tackled in the end zone.
ACTUALLY HE WAS IN THE FIELD OF PLAY WHEN HE TOUCHED THE BALL ... FUMBLED IT TO THE ENDZONE AND RECOVERED IT THAT IS A SAFETY... ONE EXAMPLE.. HE CAUGHT THE BALL AND WENT TO THE ENDZONE AND WAS TACKLED ... SAFETY....
@@surrealkiller7828 he never had possession of the ball. If he had caught it in the field and fumbled into the endzone ot would be a safety. But a muff doesnt constitute possession. So he never fielded the ball until it was in the endzone. Therefore it's a touchback. This happens quite a bit in the nfl now.
Yes...to the runner of the football, it's either you get hit or untouched
@@surrealkiller7828 Dumbass, did you even watch the video? It was clearly and thoroughly explained what the rule was.
smh and 🙄
@@benjaminpeters6729 but on a kickoff all you have to do is touch it and it's a fumble....you don't have to catch it. That's a safety
That's a excuse the cowboys had the entire game to win. It happened in the first second
The sun used to pour in real bad at the old Texas stadium.
He started to make a football move
0:39 - that would be Ed Hoculi 😂
Have you done a story on the “Bottle-Gate” game? AKA: The fantastic job the referees did in the Cleveland-Jacksonville game?
To an extent, yes. Talked a lot about it in this video, which was then followed by another Bottlegate incident 24 hours later on Monday Night Football: ua-cam.com/video/_FuFGuI6dlQ/v-deo.html
@@OfficialJaguarGator9 I found it and watched it. Nicely done.
As a Cowboys fan, I would gladly take that loss in hindsight knowing that it changed the course of NFL replays, as well as got us the first overall pick in the next draft, where we picked Troy Aikman. 2 points in exchange for the greater good and the start to a dynasty? I'll take that every time
Reffing a game between those two teams is enough to make you quit.
I remember this play, shocked that the refs got it wrong. This could not be reviewed because the ref knew it was muffed and made the wrong call. If there was a question of if it was muffed or fumbled then it could be reviewed.
There was no reviewing plays back then
@@walterozan1620 Yes there was, but there were no challenges then. Watch the video, its explained and explained correctly.
Not only did the Giants get 2 points they shouldn't have, but they got the first offensive possession too, which should have gone to Dallas.
wait.... he touched the ball on the half yard line
meaning its a live ball... and sorry... it look like the right call
He muffed it ...he didn't fumble it therefore he never had possession until he picked it up in the endzone therefore if he's tackled in the endzone it's a touchback
@@walterozan1620 Of course he muffed it! If a lf a live ball touches the receiving team on any kick the play is live! He doesn't need control. Why do you think an onside kick works the way it does
This man must be a cowboy fan
@@wepetti9602 Even if no player touches it, the ball is live. It's live until it's dead.
@@wepetti9602 yeah...doesnt make it a safety. The giants couldve recovered for a td true. But a safety requires possession in the field of play not a muffed catch.
i love how the narrator is trying to make out that this was a huge game for both teams, in the "ultra competitive" nfc east division. the cowpies would win 3 games, all season. 3-13. yes the giants were a contender, and every game was important in an otherwise tough division. but the cowboys were pansies in 1988.
Well, that loss helped ensure the Cowboys would get the No 1 pick in the draft which they used on Troy Aikman. So there really were huge implications with that call.
Gosh that kid that threw that could play for the Cubs
The biggest mistake they made was not talking about it and re-pregaming possibilities we always pregame possibilities so that we can get the call right no referee ever wants to blow a call
George Suzuki down below: I said the same thing he does sound like Bryant Gumbel doesnt he?
Well this isnt as bad as the officials not being able to tell a Jets helmet from a football
It's a long time ago now, but I believe the rules were changed to state that a player could not catch the ball and step back into the endzone for a touchback, which was quite common.
Instead that action would result in a safety.
Whichever way you look at it, he brought the ball in the end zone and was tackled. Safety.
Nope. Touching doesn't matter. Possession matters. The ball could have bounced off of ten players, a ref, and a line judge, and it still wouldn't have mattered. All that matters is who had final POSSESSION of the ball and WHERE.
Geezus. You sure dragged this out.
Ok, but why do people expect refs to somehow be 100% correct, yet celebrate guys in the NBA who literalliy miss half their shots, make outs 70% of the time in baseball, etc.
Poor guy. He probably had to go on food stamps after quitting.
It looks like Clack muffed the ball on the 1 yard line. I don’t get it.
He muffed it. He did not fumble it. Muffing the ball does nothing but start the game clock.
Yeah I don't get it either.... How many times has a ball touched someone's foot and that's considered a fumble? And yet this isn't??? That's a fumble and that's a safety.
@@alexfnsmith11
"Touched someone's foot and considered a fumble."
it's a live ball, not a fumble. In this video it was also not a fumble but a muffed catch, big difference. Possession was gained in the end zone, therefore it's a touchback.
Learn the difference between a muff and a fumble.
A fumble is when you lose a ball that you had possession of. A muff is when you mishandle a live ball (e.g.: fail to catch a kickoff--like this one--or a safety free kick, fail to catch a punt return, or fail to catch a lateral pass--although lateral pass muffs ARE statistically marked down as "fumbles" even though they're technically muffs).
Touching the ball doesn't matter. POSSESSING matters. He never had possession of the ball until it got to the end zone.
The ball could have bounced off of 10 players, a ref, and a line judge, and it still wouldn't matter. Nobody possessed the ball until it is cleanly in the hands of a player.
Well the return guy was trying to run it out. What if he broke the tackle and went all the way for a TD?
Then it would be a touchdown.
@@sludge4125 so he was in control of the ball in his own end zone and was tackled. Safety. Shenton.
@@vulture3874 Still a touchback. If the ball was kicked into the endzone, the returner recovers it, tries to run it out only to get tackled before making it out of the end zone, it would be a touchback, even though like you said, he was in control of the ball in his own end zone and was tackled.
The only way it would be a safety is if the ball was CLEANLY RECOVERED in the field of play (not in the end zone), the returner runs backwards with the ball, and either:
A) Runs into the end zone with possession of the ball and gets tackled there,
B) Runs into the end zone with the ball and then fumbles it out of bounds in the back or either side of the end zone,
C) (while just outside of the end zone) Fumbles the ball backwards into the end zone and out of bounds (back or either side), or
D) (again, while just outside of the end zone) Fumbles the ball backwards into the end zone, he (or someone else on his team) recovers it, and gets tackled/downs the ball while in the end zone.
While this situation looks like D), the returner MUFFED the ball, not FUMBLED. A fumble is when you lose a ball that you had possession of. A muff is when you mishandle a live ball (e.g.: fail to catch a kickoff--like this one--or a safety free kick, fail to catch a punt return, or fail to catch a lateral pass--although lateral pass muffs ARE statistically marked down as "fumbles" even though they're technically muffs).
@@killerb255 @HardManbow Thank you. That was very comprehensive.
@@vulture3874 And thanks for your immature response to my comment, champ.
I don't know about this one. The would-be returner touched the ball at the 1 yard line, then takes control in the endzone, and gets tackled. Sounds like a safety to me. He didn't muff it in the endzone, he muffed it at the 1. Very important distinction. He'd have been better off avoiding the ball and letting it bounce for the obvious TB instead of trying to field it. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that once an offensive player touches the ball it's live - and thus the only possible results are a touchdown for the defense if they recover, a safety if they tackle the ball carrier in the endzone (as they did) or bad field position for the offense if they recover and manage to actually get out of the endzone. Had he muffed it IN the endzone... then it's just a touchback, but that isn't what happened.
OP frames this in the worst way possible. Unfortunate.
NFL officiating is the worst in sports. They should be required to stand in front of press after game like coaches and players to explain their foul ups
It is impossible to referee at lightning speed and see everything that happens. Same with basketball everything is way too fast it’s impossible to see everything that happens at all times. Let’s not also forget, it’s just a game
Refs call the plays as they see it. So what are they gonna say at the press? "That is what we saw, that is how we called it."
never know, winning that match could have made their morale boosted more and coulda played better XD anything is possible lol
@slayingdemon are you joking? i seriously hope you are joking. you really think the entire 2-12 (after that play) season hinged on that one play? if that one play stopped the cowboys from winning throughout the rest of the season, then they didn't have the character to win. of course, they didn't have the talent either, but if they went 2-12 because of one call, their lack of character is a huge factor to them sucking.
your comment is utterly ridiculous.
@@steveswangler6373 lol love how you seem so defensive about it, i never said if they won that match they would have 100% won the season i said could have, it's like hypothetical, getting upset over it doesnt make sense. also i dont have any idea of the scores or w/l of each of the teams, i just watched a video and commented on it. chill out XD
It should be a safety. The ball became live once he touched it on the 1 yard line.
The ball was always live. It was a kickoff not a punt.
A little known fact is that NFL officials were pissed off at Tex Schramm and Dallas over the instant replay system that Tex more or less forced upon them. (Tex was forever upset over the awful Fred Swearingen SB13 call against Benny Barnes). Throughout the '88 season, the Cowboys were victim of several crucial/questionable calls. A particular one was a phantom "tripping" call against Randy White on a late tying field against Cleveland. The team felt it and it pulled them together. They were spirited and played well despite the 3-13 record.
Not a Giants fan, but miss those helmets.
You are a Giants fan. Look to your inner football self. You know you love and respect the Giants. The Yankees also.
@@partybusexperiance3289 He's a Devil's fan
33 Years Ago
Crazy....and I remember watching that game too...clear as DAY.
As a Viking fan, I’m glad that bottle connected with him. This ref clearly SUCKED!
I really can't get with endorsing violence against referees for a game. Heckle them all you want, but no matter how shit they are it's way over the line to throw a bottle at them.
He clearly sucked ass and the league probably improved with him quitting, but violence isn't ok
@@SuperNuclearUnicorn I don't either, those bottles ain't cheap
Armen Terzian? So, he took the identity vacated by Principal Skinner?
This is THE game where I started hating the Cowboys ( vs Vikings). Never have liked them, never will.
Man you sound like Bryant Gumbel
The official time on the safety was 0:09.
This would be Landrys last year and I think they won three games that year. Had the cowboys won the game that stat you mentioned would have ended there.
More referees need to be fired for their mistakes which appear to be more on purpose or because they are just ignorant of the rules!!! Fire a Ref today!!
The refs not wanting to do there job never happens lol
Vegas runs football and the refs do what they're told.
You are a wise and observant person. The fix is in and always has been. I would never bet on an NFL game. People who do are crazy. It's like playing poker where 4 other players are conspiring with each other. Good luck!!
@@partybusexperiance3289 It's much worse now than it ever was, to the point where it's pretty much done openly because the people in charge know that nobody can actually do a thing about it. Kinda like corruption in society.
@@DolFan316 All we can do is stop watching. But it is entertainment so we won't
@@partybusexperiance3289 Actually I have. I only watch NFL history clips and old games on UA-cam now.
Our man Tarzan
"i'm not sure how many people would be talking about it" NOBODY IS TALKING ABOUT THIS GAME. IT WAS 33 YEARS AGO-hell, according most young fans, the NFL didn't even exist before around 2010
I was there. The replay official was watching some porn and wasn't paying attention.
Now we don't even need refs to make calls, we just need refs to be puppets. There are more than enough hi res cameras around the field in all angles in every televised game to see what refs don't see and "don't" see.
Never mind the call, Cowboys blocking themselves on the play lol.
Everybody loves self reporting. But the caveat for those that do it faithfully is that the response actually matters. You punish severe? Judgement.
You should punish mild and appreciate the honesty. It's the right thing to do and gets repeat performances. You don't, why tell you the truth ... ever?
I thought you had to take a knee for a touch back trying to advance out of end zone would result in a safety the made the right call
That was my thought process as well. If you muff it in the field of play and attempt to return it and don’t get out of the end zone I have no idea how that is not a safety?
@@anthonylemanski9032 The only way it would be a safety is if the ball was CLEANLY RECOVERED in the field of play (not in the end zone), the returner runs backwards with the ball, and either:
A) Runs into the end zone with possession of the ball and gets tackled there,
B) Runs into the end zone with the ball and then fumbles it out of bounds in the back or either side of the end zone,
C) (while just outside of the end zone) Fumbles the ball backwards into the end zone and out of bounds (back or either side), or
D) (again, while just outside of the end zone) Fumbles the ball backwards into the end zone, he (or someone else on his team) recovers it, and gets tackled/downs the ball while in the end zone.
While this situation looks like D), the returner MUFFED the ball, not FUMBLED. A fumble is when you lose a ball that you had possession of. A muff is when you mishandle a live ball (e.g.: fail to catch a kickoff--like this one--or a safety free kick, fail to catch a punt return, or fail to catch a lateral pass--although lateral pass muffs ARE statistically marked down as "fumbles" even though they're technically muffs).
@Lee Heishman Taking a knee doesn't matter. If the possession (or change of possession) starts in the end zone and the player or the ball doesn't make it out of the end zone or into the hands of an opponent REGARDLESS OF WHY (taking a knee, getting tackled, fumbling the ball out of bounds behind or to either side of the end zone), then it's a touchback 100% of the time.
If the ball makes it out of the end zone and downed, then the ball gets spotted there for a scrimmage play with whoever last possessed the ball on offense. If the ball gets recovered by the other team in the end zone, then it's a touchdown for that team.
Not to completely change the subject, but why do referees and other officials have to be in their 70s?
Another reason why Laundry needed to go