Field Goal Posts

[Kjmass1]

Why not making them taller like in rugby? Kickers have obviously gotten stronger, it would make sense to extend them a little bit so we don't have these controversies.

Where was the camera angle on the post last night? They should stick a GoPro inside each post so we could actually have a decent angle.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

Just put RFID's in the balls and in the posts. Ball goes over, whole stadium turns a nice shade of chartreuse.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

It's the 2nd decade of the 21st century and the NFL refuses to use inexpensive easily available technology to ensure accurate game calls. Laser monitoring and positioning is not rocket science. This is on the owners. And partly on us fans for consuming the product unquestioningly.

 

[Patradomous]

Put lights shining and extending upward on top of the G Post.

 

[PrairiePat]

I keep reading in AP stories this AM that replays clearly showed the kick was good.

Did I miss some new video angle being shown overnight or something?

 

[ausbacker]

How about making a defensive stop not giving the opponents an opportunity to kick a game winning Field Goal?

 

[reflexblue]

They should put freaking lazers in the top of the goal posts that shoot straight up, if the ball passes over the top it explodes.

 

[Froob]

How about making a defensive stop not giving the opponents an opportunity to kick a game winning Field Goal?

They tried that already, the refs called them for holding

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

How about making a defensive stop not giving the opponents an opportunity to kick a game winning Field Goal?

They tried that already, the refs called them for holding

Was gonna post that same thing.

Once the crowd went to chanting BS, it got into the ref's head....... The calls (which were *****ty all day) decidedly went to the Ravens O. You can't overcome that.

That said....... I was thinking that that thing about "digitally" extending the uprights. As has been mentioned, I don't think technically it would be that hard of thing. Then make it reviewable, like every other scoring play. It doesn't seem all that hard.

 

[tuckeverlasting]

the nfl is becoming a joke. that's two weeks in a row that bad calls have cost us.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

I keep reading in AP stories this AM that replays clearly showed the kick was good.

Did I miss some new video angle being shown overnight or something?

It looked to me like it would have hit the goal post if it was extended, then it would of been up to the bounce, since the goal posts are'nt extended I guess if it goes right over the post its good. Someone correct me if Im wrong.

 

[Kjmass1]

It looked to me like it would have hit the goal post if it was extended, then it would of been up to the bounce, since the goal posts are'nt extended I guess if it goes right over the post its good. Someone correct me if Im wrong.

I think I read that the ball has to be completely within the outermost part of the goal post. So if it passes over and half of the ball is in and the other half is out, it is no good.

Add to that it can only be reviewed to determine if it is within the goalposts, not if it goes over the post like last night...and that would have had to been a both review.

I'm still dumbfounded as to why we didn't see the remote camera on the post. They ALWAYS go to that angle.

 

[brdmaverick]

I keep reading in AP stories this AM that replays clearly showed the kick was good.

Did I miss some new video angle being shown overnight or something?

By rule I would say the kick is good (the rule that if any part of the ball is over the goal post. Yes, if it was at goal post level it would have clanked off and been no good, but the rule states that it just has to be over the goal post.


Think Adam Vinateiri against the Dolphins (Bruschi snow game) in 2003. Same situation. Of course, that was a first quarter field goal so it got less interest.

 

[Section103]

It looked to me like it would have hit the goal post if it was extended, then it would of been up to the bounce, since the goal posts are'nt extended I guess if it goes right over the post its good. Someone correct me if Im wrong.

That's more or less correct. The entire ball must be within the OUTSIDE edge of the goalpost. If that is the case, they could extend the posts OR, starting even next week, they could affix a thinner rod to the outside edge of the post that extends another 10ft or so above the post. If the ball hits it then there is no way the entire ball is inside the outside edge. Therefore, if the ball hits it, then it is NO good. Low tech, still requires the refs to make the call, could make the play reviewable, and it assists in these very rare cases where the ball is over the post.

With that said, I still think it was good. The Pats inability to get 1st downs late and the D's inability to make a clutch stop, regardless of the refs, is the reason they lost. Refs certainly affected the quality of the game for both sides, but the outcome is on the players and coaches. Need to play well enough so that the refs don't matter.

 

[brdmaverick]

I think I read that the ball has to be completely within the outermost part of the goal post. So if it passes over and half of the ball is in and the other half is out, it is no good.

No, that is not the rule. Think of the goalpost extending into the sky. If the ball were to touch that line (even just barely, just like a ball barely touching the goal line) it's good.

 

[Nehalem]

Was gonna post that same thing.

Once the crowd went to chanting BS, it got into the ref's head....... The calls (which were *****ty all day) decidedly went to the Ravens O. You can't overcome that.

That said....... I was thinking that that thing about "digitally" extending the uprights. As has been mentioned, I don't think technically it would be that hard of thing. Then make it reviewable, like every other scoring play. It doesn't seem all that hard.

I think the problem with reviewing the "over the post field goals" is that the only way you could really get conclusive evidence to overrule is is to have cameras straight up from the goal post.

 

[NSPF]

No, that is not the rule. Think of the goalpost extending into the sky. If the ball were to touch that line (even just barely, just like a ball barely touching the goal line) it's good.

Don't correct someone if you don't actually know the rule, ffs.

Just got back. Here is the rule on FGs. The entire ball must pass inside the outside edge of the upright.

 

[DaBruinz]

By rule I would say the kick is good (the rule that if any part of the ball is over the goal post. Yes, if it was at goal post level it would have clanked off and been no good, but the rule states that it just has to be over the goal post.


Think Adam Vinateiri against the Dolphins (Bruschi snow game) in 2003. Same situation. Of course, that was a first quarter field goal so it got less interest.

That isn't the rule. The rule says that the ball must pass through the plane of the Goal Post. The plane is defined by the the area from the crossbar up and the outside of one upright to the outside of the other.

They have disallowed kicks that have hit the inside of an upright and bounced back out, even though it was clear that the ball broke the plane.

IMHO, if the ball wasn't completely inside the upright, then it shouldn't have been called a FG based on the way the rule is written..

Also, the rules need to change regarding replay of a field goal that passes "over" the upright. They could easily put a laser light field up and tell if the ball passes completely through the area. If it doesn't, then no FG. None of this breaking the plane crap since that's not how it's written currently.

 

[Bill B.]

What made me mad was that they wouldn't review it. For the last couple of years it has been "ALL scoring plays are reviewable." They can't say All are reviewable except .....

Rule changes need to be made. Use new technology if you have to.

 

[DarrylS]

If they wanted to could use the same technology for 1st downs, touchdowns and out of bounds calls...

But they prefer human error, and gives us fodder for something to bytch about..