Jump to content

MAROTH4MVP

Chiefs @ Lions

Recommended Posts


2 hours ago, John_Brian_K said:

To me it is not about being a Lions fan and what cost us the game.  It is just about the rules, replay and how it is taking away enjoyment of the game for me.  I think others are thinking the same thing.

There were a couple other plays that were what I would call controversial in that game, but I am used to the refs STARTING to keep a keen eye on a certain type of play in a game where it happens to the Lions and screws them out of a win.  It is what it is.

Confounding really.  It is almost as if Martha and the NFL meet up and she says "yeah go ahead and make a controversial call in our games, to bring attention to a new rule...no big deal."

I ALMOST can see that being a reality.

No more reviews within the last 2 minutes. Each team gets one review, win or lose. Put the excitement back into the game with spontaneous, exciting, big plays. No fan wants to watch officials standing around a 13 inch monitor watching a replay frame by frame. Especially when fans is the stands have already watched multiple angles of the play. And fans at home have seen every possible replay and listened to the "experts" discussing a players tippy toe along the sidelines.  Missed calls were always part of the game, now they still are but they make us stand around holding our breath with our dicks in our hands. Sorry for the vulgarity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or get reviews right, quickly.  It was never exciting to see a wrong call decide the game.  Let's not pretend it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sagnam said:

Or get reviews right, quickly.  It was never exciting to see a wrong call decide the game.  Let's not pretend it was.

Exactly.  I would like to see a time limit on reviews, but would much rather have the right call be made than a poor call that everyone can see was wrong "Especially when fans is the stands have already watched multiple angles of the play".

If it takes longer than 90 seconds or whatever time limit there is to be conclusive, the play on the field stands.  But obvious mistakes should be corrected.  I'd rather have more replays of obvious mistakes rather than have them decide a game.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watching rugby makes me wish the nfl did reviews like rugby does it.

all the refs are mic'd up.  the review booth is mic'd, and everyone discusses exactly what theyre looking at and why they came to the decision.

they still **** it up, but at least you know how amd why instead of just getting dean blandino's sorry *** up there making **** up just to **** the lions.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, 4hzglory said:

Exactly.  I would like to see a time limit on reviews, but would much rather have the right call be made than a poor call that everyone can see was wrong "Especially when fans is the stands have already watched multiple angles of the play".

If it takes longer than 90 seconds or whatever time limit there is to be conclusive, the play on the field stands.  But obvious mistakes should be corrected.  I'd rather have more replays of obvious mistakes rather than have them decide a game.

And have professional referees. No more of them having full time jobs and doing football games on the side. And here's the best idea...hold these officials accountable for their mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2019 at 11:04 PM, sagnam said:

They are both TDs or neither are TDs

 

 

 

new-td.gif

no-golladay.gif

This, I can get behind. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2019 at 12:44 PM, sagnam said:

Or get reviews right, quickly.  It was never exciting to see a wrong call decide the game.  Let's not pretend it was.

I can get behind this, too. Booth official gets sixty seconds. If it is obvious, that should be enough time. If it takes them longer than that, let the call on the field stand. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2019 at 9:36 AM, John_Brian_K said:

To me it is not about being a Lions fan and what cost us the game.  It is just about the rules, replay and how it is taking away enjoyment of the game for me.  I think others are thinking the same thing.

There were a couple other plays that were what I would call controversial in that game, but I am used to the refs STARTING to keep a keen eye on a certain type of play in a game where it happens to the Lions and screws them out of a win.  It is what it is.

Confounding really.  It is almost as if Martha and the NFL meet up and she says "yeah go ahead and make a controversial call in our games, to bring attention to a new rule...no big deal."

I ALMOST can see that being a reality.

I think the issue is that when there is a tough call, the parties naturally want to shy away from responsibility. 

If that means letting someone else blow the whistle on a play where forward progress is stopped - or not blowing the whistle at all and letting New York be in charge of whistles - they’ll do it. 

If that means letting a close call go in the favor of a hot team, or against a perennial doormat, they’ll do it.

If that means they “fix” the rule book every time there is a disputed call to quell controversy, but only making the rule book harder to follow, they’ll do it. 

Ultimately, you can’t fix problems that can’t be fixed. Strong leaders take the heat. Roger Goodell caves. 

Competitors like Sean Payton, Bill Belichick, Jerry Jones, all have ways of working the system.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

This, I can get behind. 

The thing for me is I don't care which way the rules go as long as they are applied consistently.  Then it's for me to accept the outcome either way.  For the most part I think they are applied consistently, with the occasional WTF (Larry Fitzgerald "catch" vs the Packers in the playoff a few years ago that should have been ruled incomplete with the rules of the day, or the 2 Eagles TDs in the Super Bowl that were incompletions that entire season)

image.png.9849ce0fc50a1150d4539dc34dde9294.png

larry-not-catch.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2019 at 11:04 PM, sagnam said:

They are both TDs or neither are TDs

 

 

 

new-td.gif

no-golladay.gif

And I do care which rule they choose.

Everybody who has ever played catch would say of the first clip, "He caught the ball, and then it was knocked out."

Everybody who has ever played catch would say of the second clip, "He caught the ball, and then fell out of bounds." 

Under a rule that defined a catch as possession of the football with two feet touching the ground in bounds, both of those would easily be called touchdowns. They would be close plays, but it would be a simple rule that everybody in the stadium and at home could understand. 

"But it was knocked out!" "But he bobbled it!" "Yes, after he had possession of it with two feet in bounds, which is a catch."

Once you have a rule book that requires lawyerly explication and equivocation by a guy who sneaks into Jerry Jones's party bus, you're on a very rapid ride to a total loss of integrity in your officiating and a total loss of credibility of the competitive results of your contests.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jason_R said:

And I do care which rule they choose.

Everybody who has ever played catch would say of the first clip, "He caught the ball, and then it was knocked out."

Everybody who has ever played catch would say of the second clip, "He caught the ball, and then fell out of bounds." 

Under a rule that defined a catch as possession of the football with two feet touching the ground in bounds, both of those would easily be called touchdowns. They would be close plays, but it would be a simple rule that everybody in the stadium and at home could understand. 

"But it was knocked out!" "But he bobbled it!" "Yes, after he had possession of it with two feet in bounds, which is a catch."

Once you have a rule book that requires lawyerly explication and equivocation by a guy who sneaks into Jerry Jones's party bus, you're on a very rapid ride to a total loss of integrity in your officiating and a total loss of credibility of the competitive results of your contests.

That’s fine, but that first one happening at midfield would be a fumble.  Are you OK with that too?  I am but there will be a lot more fumbles and I think that’s why they are hesitant to make that play a catch.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, sagnam said:

That’s fine, but that first one happening at midfield would be a fumble.  Are you OK with that too?  I am but there will be a lot more fumbles and I think that’s why they are hesitant to make that play a catch.  

You're right, the first one would be a fumble, and that's fine.

(Of course, if it happened against the Lions I'd probably get online and complain that it wasn't ruled incomplete!)

The game happens very fast, and not every call can be made decisively -- even with instant replay!

You cannot have a rule about what is a catch that is literally so complicated to apply that it REQUIRES instant replay to allow officials to work through a flow chart as they decide whether every item in the process of the catch has been completed.

A good commissioner would realize this, and not promise the impossible.

Simplify the catch rule to control + two feet inbounds/football move, make each team's timeouts usable as challenges (not charged if the call is overturned), ONLY use replay on a challenge (no automatic replay of scores), and limit each replay review to sixty seconds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

 

The game happens very fast, and not every call can be made decisively -- even with instant replay!

You cannot have a rule about what is a catch that is literally so complicated to apply that it REQUIRES instant replay to allow officials to work through a flow chart as they decide whether every item in the process of the catch has been completed.

A good commissioner would realize this, and not promise the impossible.

Simplify the catch rule to control + two feet inbounds/football move, make each team's timeouts usable as challenges (not charged if the call is overturned), ONLY use replay on a challenge (no automatic replay of scores), and limit each replay review to sixty seconds. 

I agree with all of this and still don't get the argument on KG's play in the endzone.  To me it seemed clear they got the call right and I definitely didn't need a flow chart to figure it out, but Oh well, we won't agree on that one.  

I definitely think replay needs to be limited to the 60 second range or the call on the field stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, 4hzglory said:

I agree with all of this and still don't get the argument on KG's play in the endzone.  To me it seemed clear they got the call right and I definitely didn't need a flow chart to figure it out, but Oh well, we won't agree on that one.  

I definitely think replay needs to be limited to the 60 second range or the call on the field stands.

This is the NFL’s catch rule:

A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) in the field of play, at the sideline, or in the end zone if a player, who is inbounds:

a. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward, take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. 

Notes:

  1. Movement of the ball does not automatically result in loss of control.
  2. If a player, who satisfied (a) and (b), but has not satisfied (c), contacts the ground and loses control of the ball, it is an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground before he regains control, or if he regains control out of bounds
  3. A receiver is considered a player in a defenseless posture (See 12-2-7) throughout the entire process of the catch and until the player is capable of avoiding or warding off the impending contact of an opponent.
  4. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
  5. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass. It is not necessary for the player to maintain control of the ball when he lands out of bounds.

 

To apply the rule you literally must apply a checklist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

This is the NFL’s catch rule:

 

 

Again, on KG's play in the endzone, it was pretty clear to me it wasn't a catch when watching on replay.  IMO the movement of the ball clearly indicated he didn't have securementl until he was on his backside which was out of bounds.  I know we disagree on that and that is ok.  To me that play is very straight-forward based when he had secured the ball - which has been the rule for as long as I can remember.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, 4hzglory said:

Again, on KG's play in the endzone, it was pretty clear to me it wasn't a catch when watching on replay.  IMO the movement of the ball clearly indicated he didn't have securementl until he was on his backside which was out of bounds.  I know we disagree on that and that is ok.  To me that play is very straight-forward based when he had secured the ball - which has been the rule for as long as I can remember.  

I'm not talking about the play, I'm talking about the rule. The rule is, literally, a checklist for the "process of the catch."

If you were mentally quick enough to process that process correctly and confidently in real time, that is more than can be said of the officials who get paid to do it. They literally cannot process it in real time, which is why they have to send so many plays to the booth in NY where they can watch the play slowly and repeatedly as they work through the checklist.

And the rule has been the rule for as long as you remember, if you can remember back to 2018, when it was put in place. It has also been changed multiple times going back to 1982.

Quote

From the early days of the NFL until 1982, the catch rule was much simpler than it is now. The original rule, which first appeared in the rulebook in 1938, stated the receiver had to possess the ball and “perform an act common to the game.” It remained unchanged for more than four decades.

...

When the [revised] rule [which stated the receiver must possess the ball "to the ground"] was originally put into the rulebook in 1982 it was done because NFL owners didn’t like so-called cheap fumbles that rewarded defenses when offensive players lost the ball when they hit the ground.

The rule has taken those fumbles out of the game, but it has opened up a whole new can of worms. One retired NFL official who wished to remain anonymous said the league can make things much simpler by ruling a player is down and the play is over once the ball comes loose.

https://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2017/12/22/nfl-catch-rule-jesse-james-overturned-touchdown-dez-bryant-green-bacy-calvin-johnson/stories/201712240051

What's better: a rule that lasted for four decades, or a rule that has been changed several times in the last decade? A rule that can be applied quickly in real time by officials in the stadium, or a rule that in a substantial number of cases requires the application of a checklist while viewing the play in slow motion by officials in a studio?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

I'm not talking about the play, I'm talking about the rule. The rule is, literally, a checklist for the "process of the catch."

If you were mentally quick enough to process that process correctly and confidently in real time, that is more than can be said of the officials who get paid to do it. They literally cannot process it in real time, which is why they have to send so many plays to the booth in NY where they can watch the play slowly and repeatedly as they work through the checklist.

 

I wasn't able to see the bobble in real time, that needed review, but seeing the review, I definitely think they made the right call.  Again, I do think they should have a time limit to make their decision, and if they can't see it within the 60 seconds, the play on the field should stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

 

And the rule has been the rule for as long as you remember, if you can remember back to 2018, when it was put in place. It has also been changed multiple times going back to 1982.

 

On this I was only talking about the rule pertaining to the KG play.  I wasn't talking about the rule altogether.  I'm only talking about KG's play.  KG's wouldn't have been a catch after 1982 when I was 8.  I didn't know the rules before 1982.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I believe the flying wedge was a legal play up until 1981, so

And while I’m at it, bring back the wedge!?! 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...