Thats a BAD FUCKIN CALL

Come on cappy I think better of you that to post that crap. ESPN and all the networks suck up to the NFL,,,being too critical of anything is not good.

They mearly relayed the company line as dictated by the NFL...and smoothed it all over.

well i am not blind...i know what i saw and it was a catch....i don't care what the rules say......or what you say they say..it was a catch,...if we were together watching the game and you said...nope..thats not a catch the rules say....errrrrr, i would tell you right in your face that you are an idiot, i watched it 10 times, its cool though , i will live, sorry to offend anyone here on this sports gambling site,..raiders should of won and thats it, have a wonderful week (idiots) hahahahaha

And here's a transcript of pool reporter Steve Corkran's discussion with referee Carl Cheffer, whose crew overturned the TD.

Cheffers: OK, so what's the question?
Corkran: We just want the ruling on why you decided to look at the play at the end of half on when you called touchdown for Louis Murphy, then you said that you wanted to review it, and then it got overturned. What was the ruling on that?

Cheffers: OK, great, let me just grab the (rule) book here, and I'm going to read you what the book says. We had a situation where the receiver caught the pass in the air and as he is coming down to the ground, he is actually going to the ground. That's a defined term in our rule book, a player, a receiver who is going to the ground. The rule book says, if a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, with or without contact by opponent - so that can be on his own; In this case, he got hit by an opponent - he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete. That wasn't the case. What we ruled, what we saw in replay, was that he was going to the ground, as he came down the ball came loose, he lost control of the ball, the ball skidded along the ground, he eventually completely lost control of the ball. So, by rule, by what we saw in review, it's an incomplete pass.

Corkran: So, this has nothing to do with him having to - he got both feet down - it has nothing to do with that, it has nothing to do with making a football move? It's just what you said there?
Cheffers: Yeah, he was up, I think if I remember, (on) one foot, he was getting contacted prior to his second foot coming down. By definition in our rule book, he's going to the ground and has to maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire act of the catch. And in this case, he lost possession and the ball hit the ground. Therefore, it's incomplete.

Corkran: It was pretty clear-cut?
Cheffers: Pretty clear-cut.

Corkran: Carl, thank you for your time.
Cheffers: My pleasure.

+++++++++

Give me a break!

What a fucking explaination. He basically said that Murphy did not have complete possession of the ball after catching the ball. He avoid saying that the receiver got both feet down before get tackle into the ground.

Cheffers: Yeah, he was up, I think if I remember, (on) one foot, he was getting contacted prior to his second foot coming down. By definition in our rule book, he's going to the ground and has to maintain possession of the ball throughout the entire act of the catch. And in this case, he lost possession and the ball hit the ground. Therefore, it's incomplete.