TheBostonStraggler
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- May 21, 2006
- Messages
- 6,318
- Reaction score
- 5,687
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Blandino will review the Patriot's submission then decide if he was correct in overruling it in the first place.
Hmmm, huh, ummm, yea this one could go either way......
This will be one that the Pats send in, for sure..
Yeah. I cannot believe that they overturned the call on the field. There was just not enough evidence to support their decision (and they were just flat out wrong). I was okay with overturn on the catch when the ball hit the ground (though it was close), but the overturn of the White catch was just inexcusable.i was listening on the radio but Zolak immediately said it was 100% a catch so i was surprised it was overturned.
Take it easy guys. Blandino himself has said you can't replace experience... wait what?
His feet looked in to me by the slimmest of margins, and the replay wasn't conclusive enough to over turn the ruling on the field. So i was surprised that the call on the field was over ruled. But its gotten to the point that ive become use to the officiating, which shows just how bad its become.James White clearly had control of the ball and was in bounds with toes and a whole foot.
No way this should have been over-turned..
another big 3rd down conversion thats got called back.
Jeff Triplette - say no more.Yeah I didn't get why that was overturned either. I've seen many times a receiver catch a ball with both toes in bounds then when he falls over the heels are out of bounds and its considered a catch. How was this any different?
That was an obvious incomplete if the one they overturned is the one I'm thinking of.His ankle didn't even touch the field, he stood in his fingers during the catch. That was a blatant mistake, still not so bad as the fumble they ruled incomplete pass, that was flat out manipulating the game.
A Defiant Goose likes this postWhy? I'll take a shot at this. Is it because the goose that laid the golden egg is being guarded by a gaggle of galloping ***holes?
That's the main problem I have with instant replay. It started whenever, X number of years ago, with the thought of, "hey, if we can all see this obvious mistake on tv, why not let the refs see it?" Sounds reasonable.Yeah, that seems the right question. If they didn't have clear toe-->heel evidence, it should not have been overturned...
That pic isn't sufficient to establish it: if he lands toe-then-hell, then it is incomplete. If it is just toe, and he slides out of bounds *on his toes* then it is complete. This is not actually in the rule book, but part of their case studies the refs go through. It comes up every few years.
In the NFL, a toe is a foot but a heel isn’t
As Michaels and Collinsworth said, if he landed toe-then-heel, it is incomplete. So we'd need to see if his heel touched out of bounds after that toe.
I agree though it is a very strange interpretation of the rules, but they have been consistent on this for a while.
Jeff Triplette - say no more.
We need a good gif starting w bruinz frame and going frame by frame. Unfortunately I already deleted game...anyone ? The angle al/Chris thought was conclusive we should find.But there was no shot of the heel touching the line anywhere. In fact, one of the shots (in motion, not stopped) in the game thread showed pretty clearly that his heel did not touch.
The review guys this year are back at the NFL offices. Which is a policy that reeks.
Triplette's crew did get the call on the field right, it was Blandino who overturned it.
However, that was a clear pass interference penalty.
And lastly, on the muffed punt fumble, one of the sideline judges from the backside of the play ran in just as the players fell on the ball and ruled it for Houston. There was no way he could have known who recovered the ball. It was absurd.
Yeah that was outrageous.
I think they're trying to claim he didn't have full possession at that point - and by the time he did, the rest of his foot touched out of bounds. But you couldn't tell at all from the replay. Call on the field should stand.