Refs blow call by overturning White's reception.

[TheBostonStraggler]

It's clear it would be a legal catch if he got his camel toe down first.

Hopefully Blandino sees this and apologizes for the error

 

[smg93]

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......

At least there is consistency with how they hear appeals...

 

[IllegalContact]

This will be one that the Pats send in, for sure..

Blandinos just going to say 'looks out to me'

 

[heavyde050]

i was listening on the radio but Zolak immediately said it was 100% a catch so i was surprised it was overturned.

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.

Also, I do not know how many more games I can listen to Chris Collinsworth. He is usually wrong and his contempt for the Patriots is insufferable.

 

[varjao]

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.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

another big 3rd down conversion thats got called back.

 

[mosi]

Not to mention the PI that actually happened on that play.

 

[AQPE]

Take it easy guys. Blandino himself has said you can't replace experience... wait what?

I am wondering whether Blandino has ever actually officiated a football game at any level. I actually have seen the answer in an article but do not care to share the link because I hate to advocate clicks to the particular media outlet ("four letters"). One would think that an experienced journalist may have the same question and take some interest in the answer. Nevertheless, it is another example in a sadly long list of the intellectual dishonesty that permeates the clown car known as the NFL front office.

 

[Kontradiction]

This is the trend in the NFL now. Triplette especially. His games have become borderline unwatchable. Instead of football, we get to watch a game where middle aged men stand around at different points on the field and throw yellow handkerchiefs.

 

[reflexblue]

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..

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.

 

[RobertWeathers]

another big 3rd down conversion thats got called back.

Shocked that they didn't call OPI on Gronk's TD

 

[PatsDeb]

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?

Jeff Triplette - say no more.

 

[Froob]

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.

That was an obvious incomplete if the one they overturned is the one I'm thinking of.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Why? 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?

A Defiant Goose likes this post

 

[aluminum seats]

Yeah, that seems the right question. If they didn't have clear toe-->heel evidence, it should not have been overturned...

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.

The problem, of course, is that it's morphed into this intense study of countless angles, frame by frame, and instead of saying we'll only overturn what's obvious, we'll just do our officiating on video. That was an awful play to overturn, which I thought the moment it happened. Whatever.

 

[upstater1]

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.

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.

 

[upstater1]

Jeff Triplette - say no more.

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.

 

[neuronet]

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.

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.

Brother can you spare a gif?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Triplette's crew did get the call on the field right, it was Blandino who overturned it.

That was my issue as well. From the various camera angles we had available, it was inconclusive but Blandino's men overturned it. My understanding was that it needs to be conclusive.

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.

Just brutal.

 

[The Gr8est]

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.

Agreed.

It is supposed to take "indisputable evidence" to overturn a call on the field, and I dispute their "indisputable evidence".