The first down that wasnt a first down

Post by **dead_poet** » Mon Sep 21, 2015 3:44 pm

Zimmer addresses this in his presser: http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/vide ... 2512351599

Question comes at 12:47

PurpleKoolaid · Post by **PurpleKoolaid** » Mon Sep 21, 2015 3:56 pm

Thanks DP. I guess thats why you save your challenges. That was a huge 1st down, and he couldnt see the play? Anyways, ive never seen anything like that happen before. It looked over a yard short. Those are ALWAYS measured near the end of the game. Unless its the Vikings.

PurpleMustReign · Post by **PurpleMustReign** » Mon Sep 21, 2015 5:13 pm

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Thanks DP. I guess thats why you save your challenges. That was a huge 1st down, and he couldnt see the play? Anyways, ive never seen anything like that happen before. It looked over a yard short. Those are ALWAYS measured near the end of the game. Unless its the Vikings.

I can't believe it wasn't automatically measured. You're right, it wasn't even close!! It was half a yard, at least, short. That whole sequence was just messed up. I wonder if the league will issue a statement?

PurpleKoolaid · Post by **PurpleKoolaid** » Mon Sep 21, 2015 5:41 pm

PurpleMustReign wrote: I can't believe it wasn't automatically measured. You're right, it wasn't even close!! It was half a yard, at least, short. That whole sequence was just messed up. I wonder if the league will issue a statement?

Thats what I am hoping as well. And I hope Zimmer sent a letter to the NFL officiating staff. Stuff like that, could effect a games outcome.

Norv Zimmer · Post by **Norv Zimmer** » Mon Sep 21, 2015 7:10 pm

Well the lions scored after that right? I wonder if it messed up any of the over/under bets. I know it didn't affect the line because it was at 3.5 pts vikings favorite. I won 180$!!!!

Post by **dead_poet** » Mon Sep 21, 2015 8:58 pm

Here you go: https://twitter.com/luke_spinman/status ... 2980137985

PacificNorseWest · Post by **PacificNorseWest** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 1:43 am

Maybe my eyes played tricks on me, but I felt like the refs also let play go on through the 2-minute warning. Completely disregarding it. I swear I saw the clock flicker around 2:00 minutes as the operator stopped it, but started it again as he realized the refs let the Lions run a play despite the ball not having been snapped when the clock hit 2:00. I could be imagining it, but if someone can check that out, to confirm I'm crazy, that'd be cool.

DK Sweets · Post by **DK Sweets** » Tue Sep 22, 2015 2:37 am

Video of the play

Forgive the poopoo quality, I took it with my phone and it got compressed when sent to my computer.

1) The clock definitely did not reach 2;00. It was close, but it didn't.

2) If you look closely, the chains are in front of where the marker is. The play DEFINITELY should have been measured, but it's closer than it appears at first glance.

3) The chains still should have been moved.

soflavike · Post by **soflavike** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 1:55 pm

League admits they blew a call... but not the one you think...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -stafford/

Just Me · Post by **Just Me** » Thu Sep 24, 2015 5:16 pm

soflavike wrote:League admits they blew a call... but not the one you think...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -stafford/

Hah! You're right! (I wasn't aware that the QBs don't get protection if they are slowing. I would have guessed that fell under "surrendering" but I guess he could have slid to fulfill that criteria...)

Interesting...

Vikings Message Board.Com

The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down

Re: The first down that wasnt a first down