I Don't Think I Can Do This Again

[upstater1]

I forgot how much this drove me crazy during deflategate... This is the most salty/irrational I've seen NFL fans towards the Pats in a couple years.
Unfounded takes, group-thought, media enhancing it, no one engaging in an actual discussion, no one applying the same standards to any other team.

This MUST get under your guys' skin too... I don't have the strength to laugh it off and say "haters gonna hate"

I really don't get it, either. Today was the first call I think they messed up. It was very close, but I could see how people would be upset. The ASJ play, the James play... not even close. They ruled correctly. Let's not forget none of this would have been a controversy if the refs ruled in our favor on the original plays...

Huh, I thought today's call was much more clear cut than last week's.

You have to remember that the refs in NY are stitching together 2 angles. Something they never do on TV. Freakin Pereira is commenting after watching Diamondvision at the Dallas game!!

By stitching the play together you see a version from the side (endzone) and a version from behind the endzone (which tells you when he possesses the ball).

If you do this, the toe drags and kicks up pebbles before he controls the ball. Then he lifts his foot up. Jim Nantz kept seeing another toe touch and he said, "How do you know his toe didn't touch again?" And the reason you know the answer to this is simple: on the side view, it shows his foot lift in air, and when it hits something, he clipped the back of his other foot, but it was clearly inches off the ground when it did this. There is no way he touched in bounds again. I am 99.9% certain of this.

A plausible argument could be made that Jesse James made a football move, which would make him a runner. So Pitt fans can contest that. I don't agree, but it is certainly debatable compared to the call we saw today.

The ASJ thing was similar to today's call. ASJ landed out of bounds AFTER fumbling the ball in the air. He was out of bounds.

 

[gitgronked82]

This always annoys me the original ruling only matters when there is no video evidence. You could clearly see the feet and the ball so I give the ref tons of credit for making a really tough call.

I have no problem if Bills fans want to argue his toe was down but don't just cop out on the original call that's not right when again you can see all the evidence it's just a razor thin margin but no reason to think he can't more accurately decide using replay than in real time.

that's a good point that when there's sufficient video, it's less relevant.

Maybe I need to check the rulebook, but I had always interpreted the rule as there being a need for DEFINITIVE evidence. Based on what I saw today, it was still a pretty tough ruling for them. A little tough to tell when he gained control, etc

 

[upstater1]

Once the calls started being made in NY, it was inevitable that they would start looking at the plays de novo, regardless of claims to the contrary. This wasn't the first call that could have been said to stand, but was instead overruled, and it won't be the last. The same thing's happening with hockey, with their replay rulings coming from Toronto.

It's a bad idea to centralize review, but that's the playing field now.

I want to know what the people want NY to do when they are convinced 100% that the call was incorrect? Ignore the facts because the video shows their ruling is too technical? How would they even explain that to the coaches in such a situation?

You can't go back and say "It's inconclusive" if you are certain the player didn't get his foot down. If you do it because you're being too technical or nitpicky and it certainly looks like a TD live in fast motion, then it defeats the purpose of instant replay.

 

[Soliel]

I forgot how much this drove me crazy during deflategate... This is the most salty/irrational I've seen NFL fans towards the Pats in a couple years.
Unfounded takes, group-thought, media enhancing it, no one engaging in an actual discussion, no one applying the same standards to any other team.

This MUST get under your guys' skin too... I don't have the strength to laugh it off and say "haters gonna hate"

I really don't get it, either. Today was the first call I think they messed up. It was very close, but I could see how people would be upset. The ASJ play, the James play... not even close. They ruled correctly. Let's not forget none of this would have been a controversy if the refs ruled in our favor on the original plays...

Yes, it does drive me crazy especially when I read pro football talk and all the wittle cwy babies are just sooo mad and have a load in their diaper. Poor mongrells. I’ve told them how to solve all their woes. Just dump the loser team, buy a pats hat and roll on out

 

[gitgronked82]

Huh, I thought today's call was much more clear cut than last week's.

You have to remember that the refs in NY are stitching together 2 angles. Something they never do on TV. Freakin Pereira is commenting after watching Diamondvision at the Dallas game!!

By stitching the play together you see a version from the side (endzone) and a version from behind the endzone (which tells you when he possesses the ball).

If you do this, the toe drags and kicks up pebbles before he controls the ball. Then he lifts his foot up.

is there good slow mo video showing this? again, haven't seen it all

 

[upstater1]

A little tough to tell when he gained control, etc

I don't understand why you wrote this. They had a clear cut camera view of the ball being in the air until it came into his body. That's when his hands corralled it and he got control. Why is this not clear cut?

 

[upstater1]

is there good slow mo video showing this? again, haven't seen it all

It's in the replays they are showing on NFL.com and ESPN.

 

[bormio]

The call was close, but people acting like there was no possible basis for an overturn are being purposely misleading. It is clear that his toe lost contact early and likely before he got control. It was close, and the official on the field did not have the best of angles to see it. I think Riveron got it right, but should calls that close be overturned? It is very hard on the field to focus on 2 things at once - probably why they are using replay to make extremely close calls.

 

[gitgronked82]

I don't understand why you wrote this. They had a clear cut camera view of the ball being in the air until it came into his body. That's when his hands corralled it and he got control. Why is this not clear cut?

can you go to 1:05? looks a little iffy there. maybe i'm missing something

 

[WhoaDirty]

The call was close, but people acting like there was no possible basis for an overturn are being purposely misleading. It is clear that his toe lost contact early and likely before he got control. It was close, and the official on the field did not have the best of angles to see it. I think Riveron got it right, but should calls that close be overturned? It is very hard on the field to focus on 2 things at once - probably why they are using replay to make extremely close calls.

One of the broadcasters brought this up, it's seems like the NFL office isn't using the "beyond a reasonable doubt" with these rulings. I think the calls are all correct when viewed in a vacuum, but some seem like they aren't meeting that standard.

 

[XLIX]

This reminds me of that Ravens game from 2007 (the false start, Rex Ryan TO game):

A lot of people complain that the Patriots get all the calls and they’re lucky and the refs are in the bag.... so I reply “ok, which call was a bad one that NE should not have gotten?” At that point they either shut up or simply demonstrate they don’t understand the rules of the game.

 

[50-yard-line]

Refs pick up a flag for illegal blocking downfield on the Steelers...guy was four-five yards past the line.

The Jaguars got screwed twice today on fumbles.

It happens. Period.

ps. Anyone arguing that James' non-td was a catch doesn't understand the rule. It wasn't close. You can't make a "football move" falling when you catch the ball. It doesn't matter if the ball crosses the plane for a receiver who hasn't yet established control (to the point where the ground can't cause a fumble).

Let 'em whine. I watched Kuechly mug Gronk and cost the Pats an important game. I watched KC run a defensive strategy of grabbing on every play and daring 'em to call it in the first game this year.

 

[upstater1]

can you go to 1:05? looks a little iffy there. maybe i'm missing something

1:05 the foot is out of camera.

 

[captain insano]

I can't believe I saw this on BSPN but there is at least one dude there that agrees it wasn't a catch. For the record I don't think Benjamin had his left toe down when he began control of the ball.

-http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=21868542

people still watch espn?

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

Maybe one day catches out of bounds will count.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

I want to know what the people want NY to do when they are convinced 100% that the call was incorrect? Ignore the facts because the video shows their ruling is too technical? How would they even explain that to the coaches in such a situation?

You can't go back and say "It's inconclusive" if you are certain the player didn't get his foot down. If you do it because you're being too technical or nitpicky and it certainly looks like a TD live in fast motion, then it defeats the purpose of instant replay.

I appreciate that they got it right...Irving Fryar made a big catch in Denver in '87 down the sideline which was clearly confirmed by replay, but even after viewing it the moron ref refused to call it a reception...Pats lost the game, and missed the playoffs.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

I forgot how much this drove me crazy during deflategate... This is the most salty/irrational I've seen NFL fans towards the Pats in a couple years.
Unfounded takes, group-thought, media enhancing it, no one engaging in an actual discussion, no one applying the same standards to any other team.

This MUST get under your guys' skin too... I don't have the strength to laugh it off and say "haters gonna hate"

I really don't get it, either. Today was the first call I think they messed up. It was very close, but I could see how people would be upset. The ASJ play, the James play... not even close. They ruled correctly. Let's not forget none of this would have been a controversy if the refs ruled in our favor on the original plays...

Bills got a fake first down on last drive of half with a generous spot out of bounds.

Anti-Patriots prejudice has been the unbridled reality since the merger in 1970.

Opponents and fans and media were sobbing that we cheated in '02 AFCCG, and it continued right up through 2007 when Satan Goodell decided to make it official and lynch BB and the team to satisfy the losers across the country.

But, typically of crybaby losers, that wasn't enough, and they adopted the diatribe that the Patriots weren't punished enough, when of course in reality they shouldn't have been punished at all. Did not help that Kraft totally conceded and blubberingly apologized instead of doing the opposite.

Which set up the deflation BS in '15.

And Kraft still backs Goodell, saying he was just following orders...

...like at Nuremberg, right?

 

[archstanton543]

A plausible argument could be made that Jesse James made a football move, which would make him a runner. So Pitt fans can contest that. I don't agree, but it is certainly debatable compared to the call we saw today.

That part of the catch rule doesn't exist anymore. They changed it when Mike Tomlin was on the Committee to "survive the ground".

 

[luuked]

A plausible argument could be made that Jesse James made a football move, which would make him a runner. So Pitt fans can contest that. I don't agree, but it is certainly debatable compared to the call we saw today.

Not part of the rule anymore. Removed since the Dez Bryant non-catch to remove another judgement call. The player now has to survive the ground which is far more black and white than arguing what a football move is.

I don't understand why you wrote this. They had a clear cut camera view of the ball being in the air until it came into his body. That's when his hands corralled it and he got control. Why is this not clear cut?

I think the issue some people -- including Nantz and Romo -- yesterday have is the definition of control. Did Benjamin have control when the ball looked to not move anymore in one hand ? Or a few fractions of a second late when he put the second hand on the ball ? Or only after he pulled it into his body with both his hands ?

Quite honestly I would remove the entire toe drag part from the rules and make receivers actually tip toe inside at the very least but then again the league loves its fantasy football and many points being scored.

 

[archstanton543]

You know what. Give the dude the TD and they still lose going away. See you next year Bills.