Did N'Keal Harry really muff the punt?

[Rob0729]

The point isn't whether wind can make the ball change direction.

It is rather that a gust of wind makes a change like this:

And a deflection makes a change of direction like this:

The latter is what happened here. the former is what happened on all of those missed FGs.

Maybe they aren't supposed to rely on seeing a change of direction or not, but CLEARLY sometimes they do. Edelman's Super Bowl punt return where they first ruled that he touched it, and then overruled the call, was based on the clear fact that the ball did not change direction at all.

It was the AFCCG vs. the Chiefs. But replay showed that the ball clearly didn't touch Edelman's thumbs. There was clear proof that there was space between Edelman and the ball. The video clearly showed that although the ball came close to his hands, they never touched. Had nothing to do with the trajectory of the ball. You need to see multiple angles to show that.

Gene Skelletor said on the broadcast that the trajectory of the ball was why he didnt think it was touched, but he was working for CBS at the time and not the NFL.

Call overturned: Ref determines ball did not touch Julian Edelman

Chaos ensues after a wild New England Patriots' punt return almost turns into a turnover for the Kansas City Chiefs.

www.nfl.com

 

[PatsDeb]

I've said it before, but I really can't blame N'Keal too much for that one. They weren't even really trusting Gunner to return punts in that wind, most of the time he was just waving everyone off. To me it would be like if they had called a trick play so Kendrick Bourne could throw a pass on a night when they didn't even want Mac to throw more than 3. There's just no good reason for him to have been put in that position in those conditions when he hasn't returned a punt all year. They set him up to fail (unintentionally).

If he could have just let it go by him on the first miss he would have been okay. Instead he clumsily, half-heartedly chases the ball (instead of moving away like he should have been trained to do) and it glances off his face mask. He just can't seem to do anything right (although I agree his blocking has been good - but he was drafted as a first-round WR and is a complete bust in that regard). It's maddening.

 

[Rob0729]

I think we have different types of eyes, because I can't see any distinct sign of separation there at all.

But that is why I don't think it is clear evidence. Because two people can look at it and see two different things. I will say you cannot tell from that video whether or not it touched other than the trajectory of the ball. But I think that has to do with the angle of the video. I can see how two people can look at it and see two different things though.

 

[DropKickFlutie]

It hit his helmet. I get moving Gunner up but they should had a guy like Meyers back there instead of Harry. It’s like when they made Gronk the last line of defense against Miami, expecting a Hail Mary, instead they pulled a hook and ladder with Bolden and Gronk was lost when it came to having to tackle him. Bad coaching decision.

Meyers is not a punt returner

 

[Kontradiction]

Unless Harry is a ghost, the wind isn’t blowing THROUGH his head in a way that would change the direction of that ball. His head, as a solid object, would part the wind. The ball hits the top of his face mask and changes direction on the way down in a way that didn’t happen before it hit his helmet. He muffed it. The Patriots still won. What a stupid ****ing debate.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Yes, the ball clearly changed direction in the vicinity of Harry's helmet/facemask. But, no, there is no visual proof in the replays that it actually struck his helmet/facemask.
Therefore, it's "likely" that it hit his helmet, but, as far as I understand the rule, you don't overturn a call on the field based on what "likely" happened but only based on conclusive visual evidence.

 

[Ivan]

Meyers is not a punt returner

Harry wasn’t put back there as a punt returner, he was put back there as a deep hands guy, Gunner was moved up to field the punt. Meyers is a better hands guy and a smarter player than Harry is, he should have been deep, or Bourne, or any number of guys who have better hands than Harry does.

 

[borg]

Because the trajectory angles pre and post face mask interaction were so obviously dissimilar, clearly, the football was intercepted by a translucent magic bildo, invisible to both the camera and human eye.


Seinfeld: The Magic Loogie (Clip) | TBS - YouTube

 

[203Pat]

Yes, you are right. It isn't enough. The VP of officiating said as as much in 2015:

The ball definitely moved. However, a similar situation happened in 2015, during a game between the Bears and the Seahawks. During a punt, replay review explored whether the ball struck the leg of a Seattle player. In a weekly video, then-V.P. of officiating Dean Blandino explained that, to overturn the ruling on the field, there must be clear and obvious evidence that the ball actually touched the player.

“Does this ball really jump that far to the right where we think the ball clearly hit his leg?” Blandino said at the time. “It’s reasonable to assume that it hit his leg. But, again, we cannot make a decision based on the ball changing direction. We have to see clear evidence that the ball absolutely touched his leg.”

I do love how the guy you responded to is making a fool of himself trying to mock me for his ignorance though.

By the letter of the rules, its not.

So basically any idiotic rule wording that benefits us we should break down into granular detail so we can argue about it on the internet? The NFL is full of idiotic rules and poorly worded/phrased explanations. The ex-referee that works for each network routinely gets a call "wrong" before the actual referee crew announces the call on the broadcasts. These guys are a bunch of yahoos and completely inconsistent from one referee to the next and it shows now more than ever with all these former refs working in the media.

 

[burtgummer]

It went off his helmet,he shouldn't have even been in the vicinity

 

[Rob0729]

So basically any idiotic rule wording that benefits us we should break down into granular detail so we can argue about it on the internet? The NFL is full of idiotic rules and poorly worded/phrased explanations. The ex-referee that works for each network routinely gets a call "wrong" before the actual referee crew announces the call on the broadcasts. These guys are a bunch of yahoos and completely inconsistent from one referee to the next and it shows now more than ever with all these former refs working in the media.

I am arguing according to the NFL rules, that call shouldn't overturned. The actually head of officiating in 2015 said as much. Who care what former refs working for the networks say? I didn't quote one of them. I quoted the person giving the official NFL position on the rule.

And the rules on not giving the refs the ability to make judgement calls is stupid. I have said as much in this thread. Doesn't change the fact that they can't make judgement calls and according to the official they much have actual visual evidence that the ball made contact with the player to overturn a call and the trajectory of the ball is irrelevant.

If you want to blast the rules. I am with you. Doesn't change the fact that according to the current rules, there wasn't visual evidence that Harry muffed the punt and it shouldn't have been overturned.

 

[fourhour]

If I didn't know who won the game, I'd come from this thread thinking it was a Pats loss FFS!

 

[NovaScotiaPatsFan]

Yes, I absolutely believe he did. It's really hard to see on the slow motion, but at full speed it seems as clear as day to me.

That said, I don't blame him. I blame whoever put him in that situation when we had Gunner perfectly fine and ready to be out there. Belichick took the blame as of course a leader does, but who knows if that's the truth or not?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

There is indisputable evidence. The ball changes direction when it hits his facemask.

It wasn't the wind or a ghost or a miniature black hole that changed gravity at that exact spot in the universe at that exact time that made the ball change direction.

Exactly. The only thing I might take issue with is that, as others have alluded to, there’s no consistency when it comes to the sky judge. So while it was the right call in the end, Buffalo already had a means of challenging it with their challenge flag. Bad calls happen…challenging is part of risk/reward decisions.

These calls actually bother me less than the 15 yard “procedural“ penalties like late hit, roughing the passer, etc., where the call is totally irrelevant to the outcome of the play but often changes the game. Those are the calls where the sky judge should be able to overrule.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I think you're a little confused here. The rules don't mention or care about what tv audiences see or feel happened. It's only what the booth officials located in the NY offices see that matters. They use technology not available to tv viewers. Our opinions don't matter. Again, this is a subjective matter, but one that only counts by 2 people in NY. To them, there was evidence of the ball hitting his helmet using the Hawkeye technology. But more to my point, they could literally make any call they want regardless of visual evidence and there would be nothing anyone can do about it. It's that simple. They're setting this up to be able to alter the outcome of games w/o question.

The linked article above talks more on the Hawkeye technology that syncs all the video angles.

“Conclusive evidence” can also be reached via process of elimination. That overturned Edelman muff in the AFCCG at KC is a great example. By looking at each individual angle, you could prove the ball didn’t touch him, even though on any given angle, it was almost impossible to tell. Ruling on the field was a turnover, and it was reversed.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I searched for photo evidence of the muffed punt, but found nothing.

I did, however, find photo evidence of a punted muff.
View attachment 38512

Jesus, dude…that is some next level humor. Thank you.

 

[captain stone]

Exactly. The only thing I might take issue with is that, as others have alluded to, there’s no consistency when it comes to the sky judge. So while it was the right call in the end, Buffalo already had a means of challenging it with their challenge flag. Bad calls happen…challenging is part of risk/reward decisions.

These calls actually bother me less than the 15 yard “procedural“ penalties like late hit, roughing the passer, etc., where the call is totally irrelevant to the outcome of the play but often changes the game. Those are the calls where the sky judge should be able to overrule.

Yep, there should be a 7-page thread about that grotesquely effeminate and evil Late Hit penalty against Miles Bryant during the 4th quarter... Prevented the Billdos from having to make a choice between going for the 4th-down conversion or using another challenge flag...

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Yep, there should be a 7-page thread about that grotesquely effeminate and evil Late Hit penalty against Miles Bryant during the 4th quarter... Prevented the Billdos from having to make a choice between going for the 4th-down conversion or using another challenge flag...

This has been a league wide issue. I think the league needs a big overhaul. For one, they should consider awarding the field yards but not down/distance yards.

I could live with a botched call if they gave Buffalo 10-15 yards but it’s still 3rd and 4. These automatic first downs for irrelevant, stupid, pointless penalties, which have nothing to do with the game, are ruining the experience. It’s bad enough that refs get so many calls wrong, but I can accept that type of imperfection.

 

[Snooky97]

I blame Bill and the coaching staff for putting Nkeal in that position. He shouldn’t of been on the field for that play. Was ridiculous he was in that position for a guy who hasn’t been a punt return guy since his college days.

 

[venecol]

If you want to blast the rules. I am with you. Doesn't change the fact that according to the current rules, there wasn't visual evidence that Harry muffed the punt and it shouldn't have been overturned.

Using this picture as a "fact" that there is no "visual evidence" that the ball hit his helmet is the ultimate irony. The theory being postulated by boy wonder is that there's a micron gap between the ball and the helmet and that right before the ball travels the distance of a micron, the wind takes it and propels it in the opposite direction, basically sucking it away from N'Keal's face. Keep these theories coming dude, it's very entertaining.



I know you're probably going or coming from work so don't worry about your reply. BTW, nice outfit.