Well, Dungy doesn't exactly say that, but the implication of what he has to say is that the Bucs were robbed in their loss to the Colts--robbed by a bad call that they couldn't even have challenged.
ESPN has this story about Tony Dungy's reasons for why he thinks it's time to reconsider whether instant replay is doing what it's supposed to do. His one example is an interception that the Colts had against the Panthers that was overturned on the challenge, without clear and convincing evidence that the call on the field was wrong. Not having seen that game, I don't know whether or not that was a good decision by the ref that reviewed the play, but Dungy isn't usually one to complain unless there really was an egregious error.
The other example that Dungy used was a bad call that went in his own team's favor. The Colt's huge comeback against the Bucs on Monday night two weeks ago couldn't have happened if it wasn't for Mike "that idiot kicker" Vanderjagt's onside kick that was recovered by the Colts. The kick was a pop-up kick that did not even touch the ground before the Colt's caught it. Apparently, the rules state that the ball much touch the ground, and that the recieving team must have the opportunity to catch the ball, for it to be a legal kick. Vanderjagt kicked it directly to his own guy, so that the Bucs had no opportunity to catch the ball. The ruling should have been a 15 yard penalty against the Colts, with possession going to the Bucs. If the correct ruling had been made, the Bucs would have had a short field with plenty of time to run down the clock. Instead, the Colts got great field position, and marched down the field for a touchdown, making it a one touchdown ball game. The problem is, there is nothing in the instant replay rules dealing with this situation. Dungy says, "Now that's as big a play as you can have, and if the official doesn't think it hit the ground, you can't go back and replay it."
Posted by kathryn at Octubre 16, 2003 03:01 PM | TrackBackyou're right. the bucs were robbed because of that ONE call, and not because their "vaunted" defense gave up 21 points in 3:30:)
Posted by: Uncle Josh at Octubre 16, 2003 03:25 PMFirst, it's a lot easier to give up that many points when your opponent recovers an onside kick. Second, there is this little thing called momentum, and after having all the momemtum for the whole game, a situation like that is akin to running into a brick wall at full speed--it's going to kill your momentum. Third, the defense never would have a chance to blow it (and it wasn't even the whole defense, it was one backup who blew it), if it wasn't for that bad call, because there would never have been enough time for that many scores. After Ronde Barber returned the interception for a touchdown, Peyton Manning had the losing-against-Florida-for-the-fourth-time look in his eyes, but recovering that kick revitalized him and the rest of the Colts.
Hence, that one bad call was the turning point of the entire game.
Posted by: kathryn at Octubre 16, 2003 03:43 PMi guess i just made the mistake of thinking the momentum had started to shift AFTER peyton drove them right down the field to score AFTER he threw ronde's interception. the onside kick was just a means to an end. the bucs defense gave up/discovered they were weak to the long pass when thrown to wide open receivers. nice to have someone to blame though.
Posted by: Uncle Josh at Octubre 16, 2003 03:55 PMAllowing one touchdown late in the game wouldn't have been a problem--in most cases, it's too little too late. It was the onside kick setting up the second touchdown that really hurt. Sure, if Wansley hadn't played so crappily, it wouldn't have mattered, but it was that one bad call that gave his poor play a chance to matter.
Posted by: kathryn at Octubre 16, 2003 07:24 PM