Refs blow call by overturning White's reception.

[upstater1]

You make it sound like they blew a completely obvious call but it was as close as it gets:



Even in motion I have to say that I didn't see any conclusive evidence either way. Which is the reason why I wouldn't have overturned the call. But I have no idea what kind of picture quality the refs/NY has in their review system because the zoom you see on the broadcast pictures makes everything pretty grainy.

The Amendola catch was similarly close:



and actually might have been correctly overturned. I know his hand was also around the ball but in that shot it looks to me like the ball hits part of the ground at the same time.


There are many reasons to complain about ref decisions this year but those two were the least offensive if you ask me.

I wrote the ball hit the ground on the Amendola play

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

The officiating sucked and I have to admit that at one point in the game I felt like the refs were trying to keep the Texans in the game. Still, after reading some comments here, I agree that there were a couple of bad calls that hurt the Texans as well. I still think overall that the Pats are getting the shaft, but it may just be ineptitude rather than something more insidious

 

[DaBruinz]

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.

If you are talking about Hoyer's incomplete pass late where the ball ended up hitting an O-lineman, then you're wrong. It was an incomplete pass and called correctly.. Ball came out as his arm was moving forward..

 

[DaBruinz]

Both Texans challenges should have lost. The rule is indisputable/conclusive proof the on field call was wrong, that wasn't the case last night.

Sorry, but they got the first call correct. The nose of the ball clearly hit the ground at the same time as it got to Amendola..

 

[varjao]

If you are talking about Hoyer's incomplete pass late where the ball ended up hitting an O-lineman, then you're wrong. It was an incomplete pass and called correctly.. Ball came out as his arm was moving forward..

I'm talking about a completed pass by Hoyer, his receiver caught the ball, made 2 football moves and fumbled.

 

[Joey007]

I suppose though we should keep in mind we did get lucky on the Gronk TD though.

 

[Saint Pat]

He mossed it.

 

[DaBruinz]

The really bad call on the Texans was the JJ Watt late hit on Brady. I thought it was ticky-tack and could have been huge if that were an incompletion. It didn't hurt the Texans though because it was assessed on kickoff. Still, I don't think it was roughing.

How could you think it wasn't roughing the passer when the ball had been gone for nearly a complete second before Watt hit Brady from the backside? That was one of the correct calls made last night. In fact, the ball is gone before Watt launches himself at Brady..

 

[DaBruinz]

I'm talking about a completed pass by Hoyer, his receiver caught the ball, made 2 football moves and fumbled.

Be more specific.. When did the play occur exactly? I want to go pull it up on my DVR.

 

[Big-T]

The Watt RTP call was as legit as they get. He took 4 steps after the ball was passed and used the crown of his helmet in Brady's back.

 

[Angelpats]

Here's the play...


Collins got stiff armed and grabbed the shirt to make the tackle. Nothing dirty about it.

And if Collins didn't do that the player would have had a first down. Don't know how someone can say that is dirty, it's just physical. If the player didn't want to get hit he could have run out of bounds or go down by himself. There were plays this year where we thought the player was going out so we gave up and the guy cut back in and gained 10 or more yards. Play until the whistle.

Sorry, but they got the first call correct. The nose of the ball clearly hit the ground at the same time as it got to Amendola..

There was one image that showed his finger was under the ball. Every other image didn't show that but since it was ruled a catch you only need one image to justify it. Now, if it was ruled an incomplete and it was challenged I wouldn't expect it to be overturned either. Just not conclusive either way.

 

[Angelpats]

Be more specific.. When did the play occur exactly? I want to go pull it up on my DVR.

I don't have dvr but I think he is referring to the griffin(sp?) catch where he caught it, took two steps then fell down without anyone touching him and the ball came loose near the end zone. They had to kick a field goal.

 

[DaBruinz]

There was one image that showed his finger was under the ball. Every other image didn't show that but since it was ruled a catch you only need one image to justify it. Now, if it was ruled an incomplete and it was challenged I wouldn't expect it to be overturned either. Just not conclusive either way.

Actually, there wasn't an image that showed it under the ball. The image showed that his hand may have gotten under the ball, but it wasn't definitive..Further, the ball hit about a inch in front of his hand..

 

[BradyFTW!]

It looked to me like his heel probably did come down out of bounds, but not conclusively enough to overrule the call on the field. So ultimately it was probably the right call, but as they so often do they clearly misused the replay process, by rule.

All in all I thought this game was the best we could've hoped for from Triplette. He has a tendency to crush the away team with a ton of penalties, and he didn't quite so that to us.. We got screwed by some iffy reviews, but going into the game if you'd told me that would be the worst of it, I'd have taken that.

 

[luuked]

Please, show me where his heel touched.

Come on!

Just read my post instead of pointlessly repeating yourself.

 

[DaBruinz]

I don't have dvr but I think he is referring to the griffin(sp?) catch where he caught it, took two steps then fell down without anyone touching him and the ball came loose near the end zone. They had to kick a field goal.

I'm going through the Play-by-Play and I don't see that scenario at all.. According to the play-by-play, Griffin had 1 reception. And that got the Texans to the New England 34. That was followed by a run play by Grimes for 2 yards, then the reviewed play where Hoyer lost the ball as his arm was moving forward, then the awesome strip sack by Sheard.. They ended up punting because it was 4th and 31..

 

[varjao]

Be more specific.. When did the play occur exactly? I want to go pull it up on my DVR.

I don't recall if it was in the 3rd or 4th quarter, I'll have to check tonight on the game pass since the gamecasts I'm checking right now won't have this information because it wasn't reversed, it was ruled as an incomplete pass right after the Pats player recovered the ball.

That was the time it happened in the game thread

OFFICIAL: Patriots at Texans Game Thread | Page 71 | New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard

 

[Angelpats]

I'm going through the Play-by-Play and I don't see that scenario at all.. According to the play-by-play, Griffin had 1 reception. And that got the Texans to the New England 34. That was followed by a run play by Grimes for 2 yards, then the reviewed play where Hoyer lost the ball as his arm was moving forward, then the awesome strip sack by Sheard.. They ended up punting because it was 4th and 31..

They ruled it incomplete because the ball came out. I wish I had a dvr to find out where it was. I thought it was a catch because he took two steps and our player even went after the loose ball but the ref called it incomplete.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

Here's some good discussion of the whole "heel vs toe" issue - basically dragging a toe has been deemed a way to demonstrate possession in-bounds:

In the NFL, a toe is a foot but a heel isn’t

 

[upstater1]

Just read my post instead of pointlessly repeating yourself.

One word stands out in your post: pointless