No doubt in my mind 49ers would have won super bowl

[Crimsoncrew]

Just rewatched both plays. Someone please tell me what the difference is.

0:45 second mark here:
NFL Videos: Super Bowl XLVI highlights

And 8:30 here:
*MUST SEE* 2012 NFC Championship: Giants vs. 49ers Highlights [HD] - YouTube

The only difference I can see is that the first guy there stripped the ball for the Pats, whereas Bowman was the second guy there. But the dynamic was the same. The receiver was running in the open field, was hit, and as he fell backward the ball was ripped out. REALLY shitty they would call that two different ways in the space of a week, though if not for the penalty the play in question here might have been challenged.

 

[CalamityX11]

The Giants did exactly what the Niners would have done. Play suffocating defense, run the ball, win time of possession, commit no turnovers, and play well on special teams. The big difference is that the Giants have Eli and he has three wide receivers who can make plays. The Niners on the other hand have only Davis and Gore. The Manningham catch in the 4th quarter was tremendous. There is no way that Crabtree makes that catch or Alex Smith even attempts that throw. We can all blame Kyle about the loss, but converting only ONE third down was pathetic and only ONE catch by a WR.

But they didn't... none of those guys made plays against us and only showed up in the 4th in the SB.... The giants got a big string of luck and won it.

One third down was pathetic, that i agree, but it didn't give the giants the ball inside our 40 like KW did 2x!

Win as a team, lose as a team... but takes one player to fuck it up... still want KW on the team, but if Ginn/X returner falls down, i don't want KW anywhere near return duty.

 

[CalamityX11]

Just rewatched both plays. Someone please tell me what the difference is.

0:45 second mark here:
NFL Videos: Super Bowl XLVI highlights

And 8:30 here:
*MUST SEE* 2012 NFC Championship: Giants vs. 49ers Highlights [HD] - YouTube

The only difference I can see is that the first guy there stripped the ball for the Pats, whereas Bowman was the second guy there. But the dynamic was the same. The receiver was running in the open field, was hit, and as he fell backward the ball was ripped out. REALLY shitty they would call that two different ways in the space of a week, though if not for the penalty the play in question here might have been challenged.

I'm sure the refs had a meeting/game film before, i mean they(NFC title crew) knew they fuck the call up so the SB officials wanted to avoid something like that... besides, they did the right thing....

I think that side ref is a douche.

 

[MW49ers5]

This was a tough one, as I also think the Niners would have won it.

Not going to dwell on it, but I will say that if there hadn't been 12 men on the field for that first half fumble, and they had ruled it as such, I would have completely lost my shit. That play was virtually identical to the "forward progress" call in the Niners-Giants game, where a defender ripped the ball out as the ballcarrier was falling backward.

The two are actually different - In our game, Bradshaw was already in the grasp of a tackler (Brock) and falling backward when Bowman ripped the ball out. In the SB, Cruz was engaged with only one tackler and fighting to maintain possession of the ball.

 

[Kinzu]

The two are actually different - In our game, Bradshaw was already in the grasp of a tackler (Brock) and falling backward when Bowman ripped the ball out. In the SB, Cruz was engaged with only one tackler and fighting to maintain possession of the ball.

I see it differently.
In our game Bradshaw was in the process of going to the ground when the ball was stripped away from him.

Cruz was being stood up and pushed back by his tackler though. It was clear the guy was going for the ball and not even trying to take him to the ground. That's a big difference because our tackler was trying to actually make the tackle when a 2nd player ran up and ripped the ball away.

Anyway just about everytime I saw a player fumble in this game I got even more upset about the non-fumble in our game. After all according to our officials if the runner is in the grasp of a tackler and going down he can't fumble because technically he's given up on the play. I can remember 3 times in the Super Bowl a runner going down that fumbled the ball, and I never remember a single one of them being blown dead for forward progress.

 

[AU_Fever]

But they didn't... none of those guys made plays against us and only showed up in the 4th in the SB.... The giants got a big string of luck and won it.

One third down was pathetic, that i agree, but it didn't give the giants the ball inside our 40 like KW did 2x!

Win as a team, lose as a team... but takes one player to fuck it up... still want KW on the team, but if Ginn/X returner falls down, i don't want KW anywhere near return duty.

Kyle Williams mistakes were magnified and it lead to 10 points for the Giants. The Giants' wide receivers did show up for the SB. Nicks had 10 catches, Cruz caught an TD, and Manningham made a spectacular catch on the winning drive. The Niners' receivers (except for Davis) did not show up for the NFC championship game. Niners would have had a good chance to win the Super Bowl, but do you think they would win it if the receivers caught only one pass again? I know the defense would have played well, but can you count on the offense?

 

[MW49ers5]

I see it differently.
In our game Bradshaw was in the process of going to the ground when the ball was stripped away from him.

Cruz was being stood up and pushed back by his tackler though. It was clear the guy was going for the ball and not even trying to take him to the ground. That's a big difference because our tackler was trying to actually make the tackle when a 2nd player ran up and ripped the ball away.

Anyway just about everytime I saw a player fumble in this game I got even more upset about the non-fumble in our game. After all according to our officials if the runner is in the grasp of a tackler and going down he can't fumble because technically he's given up on the play. I can remember 3 times in the Super Bowl a runner going down that fumbled the ball, and I never remember a single one of them being blown dead for forward progress.

Yeah, there will always be grey area with the forward progress rule. IMO, the whistle says when a play is dead not forward progress - but then you get the "He blew the whistle too soon" argument. So you can see, this will not be the last time this issue becomes a topic of discussion...

 

[Kinzu]

You know had an issue with the Manningham catch. He got both feet in bounds for sure, but I think he may have lost control the ball when he landed out of bounds. You could see it in the replay they showed over and over during the challenge. The arm he had the ball in hit first and when it did the ball moved. He then rolled over it so you couldn't tell just how badly it moved, but normally if the ball moves you lose control of it.

Then if I was a Patriots fan I'd be really upset they did not review that Branch catch right before the final play. They replay on that one made it look like a catch. He got up on both tip toes and caught the ball. They only showed the replay once so I can't be sure it was a catch, but I think it deserved for play to stopped so they could review it.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

The determining factor for me is that the player's backward movement was continuous. In neither case was the guy held up to allow other defenders to swarm. That's the purpose of the forward progress rule. Where a guy is knocked back and, during the continuous motion of going to the ground, loses the ball, it should be ruled a fumble. I can't recall another forward progress call quite like this one.

Especially considering that Brock let go of Bradshaw short of taking him to the ground, and that Bradshaw landed on Brock and was not technically down until well after he had lost the ball (and could feasibly have regained his feet if he hadn't been reaching for the ball), I have to question that call. Technically correct, but well outside the purpose and meaning of the rule.

 

[BINGO]

Kyle Williams mistakes were magnified and it lead to 10 points for the Giants. The Giants' wide receivers did show up for the SB. Nicks had 10 catches, Cruz caught an TD, and Manningham made a spectacular catch on the winning drive. The Niners' receivers (except for Davis) did not show up for the NFC championship game. Niners would have had a good chance to win the Super Bowl, but do you think they would win it if the receivers caught only one pass again? I know the defense would have played well, but can you count on the offense?

Look man, we lost because of KW. You can spin it all you want...but the NFC Championship game should never have gone to OVERTIME! The first fumble by KW sealed our fate. Had he field the punt like he should have done with a fair catch call, we would have had great field position. Worse case scenario at that time is we come out with a fg in that drive. Game would never have gone to overtime...!

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Ted Ginn and Gronk, any of those two guys plays healthy and the Giants aren't Super Bowl victors.

 

[BINGO]

You know had an issue with the Manningham catch. He got both feet in bounds for sure, but I think he may have lost control the ball when he landed out of bounds. You could see it in the replay they showed over and over during the challenge. The arm he had the ball in hit first and when it did the ball moved. He then rolled over it so you couldn't tell just how badly it moved, but normally if the ball moves you lose control of it.

.

You Were Wrong! Sound Clip and Quote

 

[Ray_Dogg]

You Were Wrong! Sound Clip and Quote

It moved but it never touched the ground. He kept control all the way through. I want to know if that was lucky placement by Eli on the throw. It was a perfect pass but it looked like he just chucked it and got lucky. Donno.

 

[MW49ers5]

More interesting than the non-fumble call was not resetting the clock on the 12-men on the field call on the second to last play...I have to think the competition committee will review that in the off-season. I read, where it would have made perfect sense to just put 15+ guys on the field for the final play...

 

[MW49ers5]

It moved but it never touched the ground. He kept control all the way through. I want to know if that was lucky placement by Eli on the throw. It was a perfect pass but it looked like he just chucked it and got lucky. Donno.

That is precisely how I saw it as well...on both the throw and the catch

 

[Hangman]

You can tell it moved because when he stood up at the end, the laces were moved. That means it was a non catch.

 

[MW49ers5]

You can tell it moved because when he stood up at the end, the laces were moved. That means it was a non catch.

I believe control and movement can be two different things...in this case the ball may have moved but not because control of the ball was lost...

 

[Ray_Dogg]

You can tell it moved because when he stood up at the end, the laces were moved. That means it was a non catch.

The ball never touched the ground and his arm was always on top of it anyway.

 

[MW49ers5]

The ball never touched the ground and his arm was always on top of it anyway.

+1

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Video: Mario Manningham makes crucial sideline catch for Giants? Super Bowl win | Shutdown Corner - Yahoo! Sports

Go to :28 seconds. His ARM hits the ground, the ball moves, but there is space between the ball and the ground.