2025 Season | Week 16 | Thursday Night Gameday Chatter Thread | Los Angeles Rams @ Seattle Seahawks | 12/18/2025

[data]

I still trust the Rams more……except when the game comes down to a FG

• vs Eagles two blocked
• tonight missed with 2:07 remaining

 

[data]

Interesting how that scenario of the new overtime rules played out.

 

[NoDak]

Yea it only took until the 10th drive (maybe 12th, who knows) to look like an NFL QB.

Call me when he carries his team to a playoff win against a decent opponent.

You sound like an eagle fan talking about Dak.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Fuck. Really?

Sam Darnold is gonna be our hope

Nah, that was an anomaly.

I think the Seahawks are a decent team but I think the Rams or 49ers are going to win that division. The Rams blew it last night and are certainly flawed but they look better than Seattle.

The Rams play nobody left on their schedule. Seattle still has to play the 49ers, which I'm guessing they lose. I don't know how the tiebreakers work out but it seems to be in the Rams favor.

I don't mind if Seattle wins that division but I don't believe in them deep in the playoffs.

 

[Genghis Khan]

He looked pretty good on that winning drive.

Yeah I think people are too harsh on Darnold at this point. He's not elite or anything but he's turned himself into a pretty good QB.

 

[boozeman]

I missed all the fun, but it looks like the NFL cannot deny the referee issue anymore.

 

[bbgun]

 

[Genghis Khan]

I missed all the fun, but it looks like the NFL cannot deny the referee issue anymore.

Bad call, definitely. I think the whistle blew, and on top of that I don't even think it was backwards.

 

[Genghis Khan]

The Rams had no business losing that.

I think they out gained them though, so it's almost like a win. /Wade

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Bad call, definitely. I think the whistle blew, and on top of that I don't even think it was backwards.

It's weird also because I thought you couldn't fumble the ball into the endzone and score? Or does that not matter on a two point conversion? Such a crazy play.

 

[Genghis Khan]

It's weird also because I thought you couldn't fumble the ball into the endzone and score? Or does that not matter on a two point conversion? Such a crazy play.

Good question. I thought so too.

 

[Stars]

I was confused as well, about the ability to recover for points. Here's what I found on a reddit thread in the nfl sub:

When the on-field ruling results in a dead ball (e.g., score, down by contact, incomplete pass, etc.), and following replay review, it is determined that possession was lost before the ball should have been ruled dead, possession may be awarded to a player who clearly recovers a loose ball in the immediate continuing action. A loose ball that touches out of bounds is deemed a clear recovery by the player who last possessed the ball."

The specific situation observed on the 2-point conversion is covered in Rule 15, Section 3, Article 11, Item 1. Direction of a Pass. Whether a pass was forward or backward.

"When an on-field ruling is incomplete, and the pass was clearly backward, the ruling of incomplete will stand if there is no clear recovery in the immediate continuing action. If there is no clear recovery, the ball will be awarded to the team last in possession at the spot where possession was lost."

In this situation, the play was blown dead when the officials ruled initially that the pass was incomplete. However, the ball should have been considered a loose ball due to it being a backwards pass, with Charbonnet picking up the ball in the immediate action. Even though the play was initially called dead, it was still considered a recovery that review would be able to grant to Charbonnet, which resulted in the ruling of recovery of the ball in the endzone resulting in a successful try.

However, some people have pointed to Rule 8, Section 7, Article 6. Fumble After Two-Minute Warning

"If a fumble by either team occurs after the two- minute warning or during a Try:

1. The ball may be advanced by any opponent.
2. The player who fumbled is the only player of his team who is permitted to recover and advance the ball.
3. If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble."

However, this rule applies specifically to fumbles, which as defined by the rulebook is "any act, other than a pass or kick, which results in a loss of player possession."

The rulebook makes a clear distinction between backwards passes and fumbles throughout its text, and even though both can result in loose balls that can be recovered and advanced by either team, they are treated differently in the application of this rule. This distinction is why you can get miracles at the end of games as players lateral the ball to each other, since if this rule also applied to laterals then there could be no advancement of the ball on those plays.

The ball was considered a loose ball that resulted from a backwards pass, not a fumble, and as such it could be recovered and advanced in the endzone resulting in a touchdown.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

I was confused as well, about the ability to recover for points. Here's what I found on a reddit thread in the nfl sub:

When the on-field ruling results in a dead ball (e.g., score, down by contact, incomplete pass, etc.), and following replay review, it is determined that possession was lost before the ball should have been ruled dead, possession may be awarded to a player who clearly recovers a loose ball in the immediate continuing action. A loose ball that touches out of bounds is deemed a clear recovery by the player who last possessed the ball."

The specific situation observed on the 2-point conversion is covered in Rule 15, Section 3, Article 11, Item 1. Direction of a Pass. Whether a pass was forward or backward.

"When an on-field ruling is incomplete, and the pass was clearly backward, the ruling of incomplete will stand if there is no clear recovery in the immediate continuing action. If there is no clear recovery, the ball will be awarded to the team last in possession at the spot where possession was lost."

In this situation, the play was blown dead when the officials ruled initially that the pass was incomplete. However, the ball should have been considered a loose ball due to it being a backwards pass, with Charbonnet picking up the ball in the immediate action. Even though the play was initially called dead, it was still considered a recovery that review would be able to grant to Charbonnet, which resulted in the ruling of recovery of the ball in the endzone resulting in a successful try.

However, some people have pointed to Rule 8, Section 7, Article 6. Fumble After Two-Minute Warning

"If a fumble by either team occurs after the two- minute warning or during a Try:

1. The ball may be advanced by any opponent.
2. The player who fumbled is the only player of his team who is permitted to recover and advance the ball.
3. If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble."

However, this rule applies specifically to fumbles, which as defined by the rulebook is "any act, other than a pass or kick, which results in a loss of player possession."

The rulebook makes a clear distinction between backwards passes and fumbles throughout its text, and even though both can result in loose balls that can be recovered and advanced by either team, they are treated differently in the application of this rule. This distinction is why you can get miracles at the end of games as players lateral the ball to each other, since if this rule also applied to laterals then there could be no advancement of the ball on those plays.

The ball was considered a loose ball that resulted from a backwards pass, not a fumble, and as such it could be recovered and advanced in the endzone resulting in a touchdown.

Interesting, I always thought of a backwards pass that hits the ground as a fumble. I've never considered it distinctively different.

 

[Stars]

Interesting, I always thought of a backwards pass that hits the ground as a fumble. I've never considered it distinctively different.

I thought the same thing. The point about it mirroring a last ditch effort on laterals with a kickoff did make me see how it is written slightly different though.

 

[Simpleton]

Bad call, definitely. I think the whistle blew, and on top of that I don't even think it was backwards.

A whistle definitely blew, if it wasn't a ref then it was in the stands, but my guess is it was a ref.

NFL officiating becomes more of a farce every year and it's almost like they're looking to create viral moments with controversial calls.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Just watching the replay now, and I can't believe that call. I do think the pass was backwards, but to me the biggest factor is that the whistle had to have blown. You can see the side judge in the background of one shot waving incomplete well before it was recovered. So you can't tell me there was no whistle. When do officials call the ball incomplete and not blow their whistle? And how can you expect the defense to keep playing after the whistle? Isn't that a penalty?

And this part of what Stars posted above

In this situation, the play was blown dead when the officials ruled initially that the pass was incomplete. However, the ball should have been considered a loose ball due to it being a backwards pass, with Charbonnet picking up the ball in the immediate action. Even though the play was initially called dead, it was still considered a recovery that review would be able to grant to Charbonnet, which resulted in the ruling of recovery of the ball in the endzone resulting in a successful try.

Is absurd for what I said above.

 

[Genghis Khan]

I was confused as well, about the ability to recover for points. Here's what I found on a reddit thread in the nfl sub:

When the on-field ruling results in a dead ball (e.g., score, down by contact, incomplete pass, etc.), and following replay review, it is determined that possession was lost before the ball should have been ruled dead, possession may be awarded to a player who clearly recovers a loose ball in the immediate continuing action. A loose ball that touches out of bounds is deemed a clear recovery by the player who last possessed the ball."

The specific situation observed on the 2-point conversion is covered in Rule 15, Section 3, Article 11, Item 1. Direction of a Pass. Whether a pass was forward or backward.

"When an on-field ruling is incomplete, and the pass was clearly backward, the ruling of incomplete will stand if there is no clear recovery in the immediate continuing action. If there is no clear recovery, the ball will be awarded to the team last in possession at the spot where possession was lost."

In this situation, the play was blown dead when the officials ruled initially that the pass was incomplete. However, the ball should have been considered a loose ball due to it being a backwards pass, with Charbonnet picking up the ball in the immediate action. Even though the play was initially called dead, it was still considered a recovery that review would be able to grant to Charbonnet, which resulted in the ruling of recovery of the ball in the endzone resulting in a successful try.

However, some people have pointed to Rule 8, Section 7, Article 6. Fumble After Two-Minute Warning

"If a fumble by either team occurs after the two- minute warning or during a Try:

1. The ball may be advanced by any opponent.
2. The player who fumbled is the only player of his team who is permitted to recover and advance the ball.
3. If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble."

However, this rule applies specifically to fumbles, which as defined by the rulebook is "any act, other than a pass or kick, which results in a loss of player possession."

The rulebook makes a clear distinction between backwards passes and fumbles throughout its text, and even though both can result in loose balls that can be recovered and advanced by either team, they are treated differently in the application of this rule. This distinction is why you can get miracles at the end of games as players lateral the ball to each other, since if this rule also applied to laterals then there could be no advancement of the ball on those plays.

The ball was considered a loose ball that resulted from a backwards pass, not a fumble, and as such it could be recovered and advanced in the endzone resulting in a touchdown.

Interesting on the advancing the ball part.

I'll push back on two other points though.

One, I still think it was a forward pass though admittedly I didn't closely scrutinize it so I could be wrong.

Two, if the whistle blew, guys are going to stop, and by rule it's a signal for the players to stop. You can't then punish the players for not recovering the ball because you literally told them to stop.

It would suck for Seattle if it truly was a backwards pass, but we've seen it a million times where they blew the whistle and by rule the play is dead at that point and nothing happens after that. It should be at best no recovery at the time of the whistle and no conversion.

 

[Genghis Khan]

Just watching the replay now, and I can't believe that call. I do think the pass was backwards, but to me the biggest factor is that the whistle had to have blown. You can see the side judge in the background of one shot waving incomplete well before it was recovered. So you can't tell me there was no whistle. When do officials call the ball incomplete and not blow their whistle? And how can you expect the defense to keep playing after the whistle? Isn't that a penalty?

And this part of what Stars posted above

In this situation, the play was blown dead when the officials ruled initially that the pass was incomplete. However, the ball should have been considered a loose ball due to it being a backwards pass, with Charbonnet picking up the ball in the immediate action. Even though the play was initially called dead, it was still considered a recovery that review would be able to grant to Charbonnet, which resulted in the ruling of recovery of the ball in the endzone resulting in a successful try.

Is absurd for what I said above.

Exactly. The whistle supercedes everything.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Exactly. The whistle supercedes everything.

The problem is, they claimed the whistle was not blown. At least that's what Michaels said. But how do they know that?

The truth is, there's no way it wasn't blown.

 

[Genghis Khan]

The problem is, they claimed the whistle was not blown. At least that's what Michaels said. But how do they know that?

The truth is, there's no way it wasn't blown.

I think it's pretty clear it blew.