Does Charbonnet Deserve Credit?

[D-train]

How did the official(s) that blew their whistles see that and say yep in is DEFINITELY a forward pass so I am going to blow my whistle. No chance it can be a backwards pass. If in doubt Swallow your whistle. Same on regular fumbles. Zach's Mom raised an honest boy:

https://12thmanrising.com/zach-charbonn ... conversion

[trharder]

How did the official(s) that blew their whistles see that and say yep in is DEFINITELY a forward pass so I am going to blow my whistle. No chance it can be a backwards pass. If in doubt Swallow your whistle. Same on regular fumbles. Zach's Mom raised an honest boy:
https://12thmanrising.com/zach-charbonn ... conversion

Seattle Seahawks running back Zach Charbonnet drops the truth about pivotal 2-point play in Week 16
Did he know fully what he was doing? Absolutely not, but he was doing something fundamentally that players are taught from a young age.

Charbonnet told the Seattle Times, "I had no idea, but I’m always taught to pick up the ball."

Exactly. Literally any player on either side could have done what Charbonnet did. The Rams were just as close, but didn't do what they had been taught for most of their lives. While Los Angeles coaches, players (and one wife of a player) have complained about the call, the fault for the Seahawks tying the game is ultimately completely on LA.

[trharder]

This seems to either be a chicken or the egg type discussion, or a blinded by homerism argument.
Rams player #3 Curl did try to catch and or control ball after it hit the helmet and failed. Charb picked it up
right after that. All the players except Charb were working on the thought it was an incomplete pass, but it
wasn't. The whistle probably blew, but they have a fucked up rule that carves out an exception to the whistle
in situations like this when the action is "continued". which it was by Charb. Whether Charb knew for sure he
was about to complete the 2 doesn't make a shit.

[D-train]

This seems to either be a chicken or the egg type discussion, or a blinded by homerism argument.
Rams player #3 Curl did try to catch and or control ball after it hit the helmet and failed. Charb picked it up
right after that. All the players except Charb were working on the thought it was an incomplete pass, but it
wasn't. The whistle probably blew, but they have a fucked up rule that carves out an exception to the whistle
in situations like this when the action is "continued". which it was by Charb. Whether Charb knew for sure he
was about to complete the 2 doesn't make a shit.

A unique phrase for a very unique play. lol

[auroraave]

This seems to either be a chicken or the egg type discussion, or a blinded by homerism argument.
Rams player #3 Curl did try to catch and or control ball after it hit the helmet and failed. Charb picked it up
right after that. All the players except Charb were working on the thought it was an incomplete pass, but it
wasn't. The whistle probably blew, but they have a fucked up rule that carves out an exception to the whistle
in situations like this when the action is "continued". which it was by Charb. Whether Charb knew for sure he
was about to complete the 2 doesn't make a shit.

A unique phrase for a very unique play. lol

This message has been approved by Turd Ferguson.

[douche]

This seems to either be a chicken or the egg type discussion, or a blinded by homerism argument.
Rams player #3 Curl did try to catch and or control ball after it hit the helmet and failed. Charb picked it up
right after that. All the players except Charb were working on the thought it was an incomplete pass, but it
wasn't. The whistle probably blew, but they have a fucked up rule that carves out an exception to the whistle
in situations like this when the action is "continued". which it was by Charb. Whether Charb knew for sure he
was about to complete the 2 doesn't make a shit.

A unique phrase for a very unique play. lol

This message has been approved by Turd Ferguson.

afmjvx.jpg (67.39 KiB) Viewed 180 times

[Bil522]

The part that I don't understand is that you can clearly hear a whistle. Then Charbonnet trots over and picks up the ball. Pretty murky.

I agree with the whistle thing, but there are apparently exceptions to the blowing of the whistle being the
never-breakable trust that people think it is, or should be. I've seen it happen before. Not in that exact situation,
but I've seen it on weird catch-fumble situations for example.

The ball is still moving when Charb picks it up so it is obviously a continuing part of the play. As for the whistle, what happens when there is an obvious fumble and the ball is laying on the ground and a whistle blows? The players don't stop and the play continues until there is a recovery.... exactly what happened on the 2. Suck it Lambs!!

[trharder]

The ball is still moving when Charb picks it up so it is obviously a continuing part of the play. As for the whistle, what happens when there is an obvious fumble and the ball is laying on the ground and a whistle blows? The players don't stop and the play continues until there is a recovery.... exactly what happened on the 2. Suck it Lambs!!

Brock Huard this morning said there is no whistle on a extra point attempt. The rule book calls it the "Try".
It's an untimed down.

Section 3 - Try (abridged)
Article 1. General Rules
The Try begins when the Referee sounds the whistle for play to start. The team that scored the touchdown shall put the ball in play:

Article 2. Results Of A Try
The Try ends when either team scores or the ball is dead by rule.