Refs blow call by overturning White's reception.

[JJDChE]

Dunno what's transpired since, but years ago the rule was that there had to be incontrovertible visual evidence in the replay to overturn a call on the field. That heel catch or whatever had no such evidence meeting that requirement.

Nice play & props to White.

I agree. Based on what was shown there was no way you could be certain his heel touched the line.

 

[RobertWeathers]

@DaBruinz may wish to note that Belichick is part of the apparently misinformed crowd who believes that the pass was incomplete if the heel comes down OOB:

I'm not sure what the rule is/isn't but the simple issue is that the NFL replay Nazis did not have enough visual evidence to overturn the call.

That is what got my Speedo in a bunch

 

[bbobbo]

That is a great gif: is there any chance you can get the clip from the controversial toe-in/heel-out call we are arguing about in this thread? E.g., there must be 1-3 angles that would help us evaluate whether his heel indeed touched down after his toe, thereby rending it an incompletion.

here are the three replays that NBC showed:




i agree, inconclusive so the original call should stand.

 

[rochrist]

and Dean "Luca Brazzi" Blandino will categorically deny this shot even exists and/or their cameras never had THAT angle. This clown is an organized crime figure. He's never refereed a game in his putrid life.

He /was/ King of All Video though!

 

[rochrist]

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.

No. He hasn't. It isn't a secret. He comes out of the NFL video department. Never officiated a game on any level ever in his life.

 

[rochrist]

i went through all of the incomplete passes thrown by the texans (you can a list of every play here: Watch New England Patriots vs. Houston Texans [12/13/2015] - NFL.com). none of the other ones really fits your description.

here's the griffin catch that everyone else is referring to:

That isn't the one I was thinking of.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I'm not sure what the rule is/isn't but the simple issue is that the NFL replay Nazis did not have enough visual evidence to overturn the call.

That is what got my Speedo in a bunch

Totally agree with you on lack of conclusiveness. However, DaBruinz was claiming that (a) the heel was definitely down OOB, and (b) that it didn't matter and should have been a catch because the toe hit in-bounds first. Which is incorrect.

 

[The Gr8est]

here are the three replays that NBC showed:




i agree, inconclusive so the original call should stand.

Watching this again I think it more conclusive than I originally thought.

If White's left foot had flexed enough to touch the line it could have resulted in an injury, and in any event would have flexed further than would be comfortable.

I don't think his heel touched.

 

[Angelpats]

Those gifs were great and there was not enough evidence to overturn and to do so suggests blandino is just playing to the audience and not the in integrity of the game.

 

[neuronet]

@bbobbo thanks a lot those are perfect!

It was so close, and they need conclusive evidence to overturn. At worst they should have said the call on the field stands (rather than was confirmed). The second video, in particular, seems the best angle, and it seems inconclusive.

 

[Ivan]

I think it's time the NFL got someone other than an official to review these calls........


Hey, how about one of the guys on Jerry Jones Party Bus?

 

[DaBruinz]

@DaBruinz may wish to note that Belichick is part of the apparently misinformed crowd who believes that the pass was incomplete if the heel comes down OOB:

Belichick was referencing the way that the call was made.. But yeah.. Why bother with the facts..

 

[DaBruinz]

Totally agree with you on lack of conclusiveness. However, DaBruinz was claiming that (a) the heel was definitely down OOB, and (b) that it didn't matter and should have been a catch because the toe hit in-bounds first. Which is incorrect.

Quantum - You need to stop claiming people said things when they didn't. I NEVER said that White's heel was DEFINITELY OOBs. The only case I mentioned where the heel was definitely OOBs was the Sidney Rice reception. Nice job not knowing what you are talking about.

And secondly, the heel/toe still has yet to be conclusively shown since it is NOT in the rules and Rule 15 has absolutely nothing to do with possession of the ball and whether a player is inbounds, but everything to do with what each official's duties and responsibilities are.

 

[varjao]

i went through all of the incomplete passes thrown by the texans (you can a list of every play here: Watch New England Patriots vs. Houston Texans [12/13/2015] - NFL.com). none of the other ones really fits your description.

here's the griffin catch that everyone else is referring to:

Definitely not this one.

Well I'll have to review the 3rd and 4th quarter later when I get some free time and if I found the play I'll let you know, maybe it's the previous one you posted and I was mistaken about a pats player recovering the ball.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Here's a link to the 2015 Rulebook with all the A.R.s in an appendix:

Dropbox - 2015 NFL Rule Book with ARs.pdf

It's a public link -- you don't actually need a dropbox account to download it, though you might need to close a dialog asking you to log in/sign up. But you definitely don't need to log in or sign up to download it.

 

[JJDChE]

Watching this again I think it more conclusive than I originally thought.

If White's left foot had flexed enough to touch the line it could have resulted in an injury, and in any event would have flexed further than would be comfortable.

I don't think his heel touched.

After watching it a few more times, I have to agree. I lean towards not touching. It looks like the defender is actually forcing White's momentum downfield, thereby pulling his body away from his left foot and causing the heel to pick up before he planted it.

I just do not understand how you can overturn that call. I could *maybe* see the argument that you 'can't see green' between his foot and the sideline on the second GIF, but the bottom of his shoe is green! There's no way to tell if there is some grass in there.

It used to be way more common for them to defer to the call on the field, now it seems like they are trying to make a call every time they go under the hood. It's really hurting the replay system.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I just do not understand how you can overturn that call. I could *maybe* see the argument that you 'can't see green' between his foot and the sideline on the second GIF, but the bottom of his shoe is green! There's no way to tell if there is some grass in there.

Bingo! That's the real problem with what happened on that play.

 

[neuronet]

And secondly, the heel/toe still has yet to be conclusively shown since it is NOT in the rules and Rule 15 has absolutely nothing to do with possession of the ball and whether a player is inbounds, but everything to do with what each official's duties and responsibilities are.

Maybe you should read the rulez dude:

A.R. 15.100 Heel/toe
Third-and-10 on A30. A2 controls a pass and gets his left foot down in bounds at the 50. As his right foot comes down, the heel hits in bounds and in the normal motion of taking a step, his toes hit out of bounds. Officials rule complete.

Ruling: Reviewable. A’s ball fourth-and-10 on A30. Incomplete. Adjust clock if wound prior to review. If any part of the foot hits out of bounds during the normal process of taking a step (no drag or delay), then the foot is out of bounds.

Now will you believe what everyone already knew? Legalistic pedant.

Some of these ARs are usually not publicly available, or so I had thought (incorrectly?). Great find by Quantum Mechanic.

 

[neuronet]

Here's a link to the 2015 Rulebook with all the A.R.s in an appendix:

Dropbox - 2015 NFL Rule Book with ARs.pdf

It's a public link -- you don't actually need a dropbox account to download it, though you might need to close a dialog asking you to log in/sign up. But you definitely don't need to log in or sign up to download it.

You nailed it, don't know how you found this, I thought the full casebook was top secret.

 

[DaBruinz]

Maybe you should read the rulez dude:


Now will you believe what everyone already knew? Legalistic pedant.

Some of these ARs are usually not publicly available, or so I had thought (incorrectly?). Great find by Quantum Mechanic.

Yeah.. I can understand how a TOE / HEEL scenario fits with that rule.. OH WAIT.. that ruling is the exact opposite..

Not to mention that there wasn't clear evidence that his left foot was OOB or that he was "in the normal process of taking a step" (which he wasn't). But, yeah, I see the ridiculous "approved ruling" that contradicts the NFL's own rule book on what constitutes a catch.. And you wonder why they are putting together a Committee of players to determine what is really a catch..