PostGame Thread Official Post Game Thread- Pats beat the Texans

[sb1]

I'm not even sure that's the football in the still frame above.

Remember this photo of James White in the Super Bowl? The right circle wasn't the football after all.


Call on the field was Harris TD and that's how it should have stood with lack of conclusive evidence either way. If call was fumble then that's how it should have stood too.

 

[captain stone]

I'm not even sure that's the football in the still frame above.

Remember this photo of James White in the Super Bowl? The right circle wasn't the football after all.
View attachment 36643

Call on the field was TD and that's how it should have stood with lack of conclusive evidence either way. If call was fumble then that's how it should have stood too.

Yeah that's definitely not the football in the circle... White's carrying it much higher at that point...

 

[bresna]

Here is the video where you get this viewing angle. Again, IMO, if you freeze it, it does appear to be out before he gets in but seeing it now and freezing it frame by frame, it is very hard to understand how this video allowed someone in NY to overturn a TD call on the field in the limited time that they used there. I've scrutinized it for 5 minutes and I can barely see that, yeah, it looks out. But when I first watched it? No way.

 

[Pats2000]

View attachment 36611
The ball is out here. The ball has not crossed the line here. Maybe his helmet did, but that is not where the ball is as Harris is leaning forward, as is the defender. Here we see Harris's helmet maybe crossing the line.

Having seen this and -to me- agreeing with the call, there is no $#@$ way that those bozos in New York saw this in the 30 seconds it took for them to overturn it. So while it hindsight, it looks - again, to me - like they got it right, I don't think they got it right live. I still think the TD should have stood.

Trying to rely on that camera angle is a fools errand. You have no real idea where the ball is in relationship to the goal line because angles lie about position of things on a plane. The only angle that they would have had to conclusively overturn was straight down the goal line and that was blocked.

 

[50-yard-line]

Here is the video where you get this viewing angle. Again, IMO, if you freeze it, it does appear to be out before he gets in but seeing it now and freezing it frame by frame, it is very hard to understand how this video allowed someone in NY to overturn a TD call on the field in the limited time that they used there. I've scrutinized it for 5 minutes and I can barely see that, yeah, it looks out. But when I first watched it? No way.

Looks out before the line from that angle - but that's from that angle, which isn't reliable.

I think the call on the field should have stood. It's just too close without a goal line angle.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I thought there needed to be clear, conclusive evidence of a defender recovering the ball. The replay I saw was him diving for it with others also diving for it. It looked like he had a good chance, and anyone with common sense would conclude the Texans recovered it, but I thought the rule was that it must be conclusively demonstrated by the video replay itself that he gained possession of the recovery.

I know it all happens in a split second, but I do think refs, if they're not sure and going by "best guess" should rule it is a fumble. That way, you don't rule the play dead so players are all going after the ball instead of stopping, you don't need to also see clear video evidence of the recovery, and a turnover is automatically reviewed anyway (in this case, it was reviewed because it was a scoring play, but most of the time if a guy fumbles but is ruled down, the other team would need to spend a challenge.)

 

[PScottman]

Parallax error is the fancy term for it.

Hal Jordan and Kyle Raynor both have experience with that type error.

 

[venecol]

NG's a troll. I just don't know whether he's a giants fan who's still trolling pats fans, or if he thinks he's a pats fan. Either way, he's not. If anything, he liked one Patriot, evah. Hint: he's very handsome.*

*edit: meaning the one Patriot he lived evah is very handsome.

Jimmy G?

 

[venecol]

ROFLMAO. Seriously. Could you change what you ACTUALLY SAID any more than this crap? Nice pathetic attempt at spin there.

You stated:



You said we won't be able to fix ANYTHING via the draft. Do you understand the word "Anything"?

I fully expect the Patriots to draft 3-4 players who will end up playing significant amounts of time during their rookie season. Player who will end up stepping in and replacing the players that leave/retire.

Maybe you should pay attention to your ridiculously exaggerated posts and what you actually say instead of trying to pin things on others that weren't remotely said or implied.

So you think Pats will be drafting in the top 10 then.

 

[venecol]

Here is the video where you get this viewing angle. Again, IMO, if you freeze it, it does appear to be out before he gets in but seeing it now and freezing it frame by frame, it is very hard to understand how this video allowed someone in NY to overturn a TD call on the field in the limited time that they used there. I've scrutinized it for 5 minutes and I can barely see that, yeah, it looks out. But when I first watched it? No way.

Not sure why this is so difficult. Ball comes loose because of the punch. You can see the punch happened before the goal line. Therefore, ball was loose (no possession) before the goal line.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I'm not even sure that's the football in the still frame above.

Remember this photo of James White in the Super Bowl? The right circle wasn't the football after all.
View attachment 36643

Call on the field was Harris TD and that's how it should have stood with lack of conclusive evidence either way. If call was fumble then that's how it should have stood too.

It's interesting how "conclusive" people are calling the MUCH less head-on angle of the shot on the Houston play I saw on the previous page.

To say, "There is no WAY they saw this shot!!!!," paired with a shot where the angle makes a definitive case really difficult to make, is basically like saying "No WAY they saw this picture in New York, it's definitely a picture of a vase, not two faces!!!"

And about the above shot... the circle on the right wasn't the football???? That's it, get the lime green ball into play.

 

[Vindicate]

Interesting that Harris fumbles come in the 25, is he getting too antsy and looking to stretch the ball/losing form when he sees the goal line? That seems like it'd be a fixable issue.