The pick 6 that wasn’t

[onceacat]

Not sure it could be reviewed for the TD because the whistle blew as an incomplete pass causing action to stop and the ball to be dead. Maybe they can award possession?

You mean like in the Rams-Seahawks game Thursday night? Apparently, a whistle does not stop the action. Yes, I'm a bitter Rams fan;-)

If you are a Rams fan, then you think the Cats should have been awarded the TD for breaking the plane of the 2 yard line!

[tetoncat]

Didn’t they review the Woods fumble? Seems like if they reviewed that, they could review this.

I don't think they reviewed either one. Called one a fumble and one not. Sure seemed similar and worthy of review. Nor sure either call is changed as they likely keep it as called on field.

[BOBCATBORN]

It just shocks me that there isn’t someone watching these plays and going - that should be reviewed. It’s really not that hard to watch and see plays that are close and that should be reviewed. Not sure if this is someone on the staff for the cats or what. I mean they can hire me for real cheap (just letting me in to the games with some booth access to watch the game) and I’ll make sure they get the signal

[thefrank1]

At all of our games, a review team assesses all plays to determine whether or not they should be reviewed. If in their judgements a trview is appropriate they will notify the referee who will join them for a review. It is a judgements that is c their sole discretion. Reasonable people can disagree.

[BOBCATBORN]

At all of our games, a review team assesses all plays to determine whether or not they should be reviewed. If in their judgements a trview is appropriate they will notify the referee who will join them for a review. It is a judgements that is c their sole discretion. Reasonable people can disagree.

Yeah, I have a hard time with this review team then. I mean both fumbles likely should have been reviewed and neither was. There were also multiple other calls throughout the year that clearly warranted reviews that didn’t get one. But that’s how it goes!

[lutecat]

Watched this on the replay last night. The commentators say, as the play is happening, that the whistle was NOT blown. But they never question it being anything other than incomplete. In fact say yes definitely it wasn't a catch. But then I'm of the opinion that Kalispell Brock Osweiller is more of a gris fan.

If it was reviewed I think there could be an argument made that the ball was moving a tad and you could make the call of incomplete.

At the end of the day, at that point we dont need the points. We know we're going to win. The only thing gained is getting our defense credit for the scoop and score. So maybe that's why it was never challenged? Or can you even challenge and incomplete pass?

[catscat]

Or can you even challenge and incomplete pass?

Passes are often reviewed to determine if they are complete or incomplete.

[4KornerKat]

Got around to watching that one last night. It seems the current interpretation of catch rule is 3 steps with posession. It was pretty clear that the ball came out before his foot hit the ground for the third step. I agree that I'd like to see them slow down and take a look at it, but maybe the replay official saw the right angle right away and "cleared" the play.

[Bobcat Sig]

It was a catch. It was a recovered fumble, and it should've been another TD.

[HelenaCat]

It was a catch. It was a recovered fumble, and it should've been another TD.

I agree, especially if Jabez's play was a catch and fumble. This play was more obvious to me that a clean catch was made prior to the fumble.

[cats2506]

It was a catch. It was a recovered fumble, and it should've been another TD.

I agree, especially if Jabez's play was a catch and fumble. This play was more obvious to me that a clean catch was made prior to the fumble.

should have at least been reviewed.