Controversial Redskins ruling

The controversial ruling of a critical pass as incomplete during the Redksins' victory over the Patriots last Sunday highlighted the pitfalls of instant review technology and obtuse rules that many fans don't understand.

Late in the fourth quarter, with less than two minutes to go on the clock, the entire game rested in the hands of a referee. The Patriots were only down by three points, and the Redskins were backed so far up into their own territory that punting could cost them the game. Then, a miracle happened. Patrick Ramsey completed a beautiful sideline pass to wide receiver Laveranues Coles, getting the Redskins the first down.

However, in front of millions of disbelieving fans at home and at the field, the pass was ruled incomplete. How could this be? Coles caught the pass inbounds, took two steps to the sideline, and dropped the ball as he was tackled out of bounds. The pass wasn't bobbled, and Coles seemed to have control of it. Redskins coach Steve Spurrier angrily challenged the ruling, and it went to a lengthy official review while fans waited in agony.

Minutes later, the head official upheld the ruling on the field, and the Patriots ended up getting the ball back inside the Redskins 50 yard line. The decision basically handed the Patriots the perfect chance to win the game, even though they failed to seize it. Only sheer luck combined with a stiff defensive effort prevented the Patriots from scoring a field goal and pushing the game into an overtime defeat like the Redskins suffered last week against the Giants.

The critical question of course is was this simply a terrible call or did it actually have a firm basis in NFL rules? Millions of fans are saying the referees all need their eyes checked, while officials and many sports commentators are sticking with the ruling.

Well, the official NFL rulebook (http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/) say that, "a forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball."

Judging by that criteria, Coles seemed to clearly have a good catch. A replay showed that he did not bobble the ball once he had it in his hands and took two to three steps inbounds. However, the football did pop out of Coles' hands awfully quickly when he hit the turf out of bounds. Did he clearly possess the ball, or did he just put his hands on it before it hit the ground?

The answer seems clear - Coles must have had full possession of the pass to be able to grab it, hold it as he was tackled, and thrust it forward over the first down marker. The official's ruling was based on an interperetation of the "clearly possesses" rule, and not on a hard-and fast NFL rule.

We could debate forever about what the exact meaning of "clearly possesses" is and whether or not Coles' grip of the ball fulfilled that requirement. And the important thing is that the Redskins did end up triumphing over the Patriots despite the ruling.

However, it still seems problematic that the fate of the entire game rested on such shaky ground. The NFL could make their rulebook more specific to cover precise definitions for terms and thus eliminate some confusion, but in such ambiguous situations, some people will always clearly see a catch and some an incomplete pass.

Additional reporting by Erik Kojola.