What I wish would happen is that those that benefitted from the play, or those who support their side of it, would admit that they got away with it. I have done so with the Majkowski pass that beat the Bears in '89.

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 

That wasn't an illegal play.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

It was because a) he was entirely over the line of scrimmage b) the ball was over the line of scrimmage and c) he had stepped over the line of scrimmage. Under all interpretations of the rule, he got away with it. To add fuel to the fire, the replay rules did not have the time limit on them that they do today, but the rule was still clear evidence that the call should be reversed (it was ruled illegal on the field) and it took 8 minutes to decide to reverse it. As much as I would glad to win the game and see Mike Ditka turn purple over it, there is little doubt to unbiased observers that the Packers won on a bad call in that game.

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 

Sorry guys, in the video, the narrator says he's "clearly behind the line of scrimmage at the 15" but if you freeze it, his feet, his body and the ball are all past it. On top of which, the ruling on the field was that it was an illegal pass, and there is NO WAY that is clearly something that should be overturned. The only thing that can even marginally justify the amount of time it took to make the reversal is that they were debating how the rule defined what constituted being over the line, but again, if it is that close, it shouldn't have been overturned, and by any of the possible definitions, he was past the 15.

Now how is THAT for beating a dead horse?

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 

Sorry guys, in the video, the narrator says he's "clearly behind the line of scrimmage at the 15" but if you freeze it, his feet, his body and the ball are all past it. On top of which, the ruling on the field was that it was an illegal pass, and there is NO WAY that is clearly something that should be overturned. The only thing that can even marginally justify the amount of time it took to make the reversal is that they were debating how the rule defined what constituted being over the line, but again, if it is that close, it shouldn't have been overturned, and by any of the possible definitions, he was past the 15.

Now how is THAT for beating a dead horse?

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 

Seeing how the line of scrimmage was the 14 yd line, I'd say he had at least a 1/2 yard cushion. Legal play. Ref's got it right on the review.

Originally Posted by: SINCITYCHEEZE 

Edit2, an article on Majik and Instant Replay game
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/57784427.html 

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

"Mike Singletary walked up to me and whispered, 'Sorry, kid. Too bad it won't count,' " Majkowski said.

Yeah, you beat me to it. The official with the 4th down marker is (or should be) at the line of scrimmage - the 14, not the 15, which makes it clearly legal.

BTW, I thought THE Instant Reply game was 20 some years earlier when Jerry Kramer bulldozed the Dallas line and Bart sneaked into the frozen end zone.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker