Jauronimo

If NYC was in their earpieces during that process and helped them determine their ultimate ruling then we have a major problem.

I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind. However, I am surprised that more people simply do not care that an officiating team overturned a scoring play on the field without going to video review and their justification is that the letter of the rule does not need to be observed in this one solitary instance. Their position is that the returner does not need to down the ball as described in the rules as long as "common sense" suggests he meant to down the ball, as judged by the official. First, I fail to see it as common sense that the returner doesn't need to observe 3 rules and take a knee or call fair catch. Seems like a reasonable request to me. If a punt returner doesn't call fair catch and tosses it to the ref, he gets lit up, the ball is live, and everyone talks about what a bonehead play he made. Second, if common sense is going to be the new rule I demand it be applied consistently. Instead we got letter of the law on the blind side block. Looks like I am one of the few who thinks its a slippery slope to circumvent the rule book because "common sense". I'll wrap it up by asking which other rules people are comfortable with the officials ignoring if they determine the effect on the game is too great?

Thats my main issue with it. What transpired between the initial ruling on the field and the call being overturned was inexplicable. I have never seen that before in all my years of watching football.

If by whining you mean comparing like population to like population. You claimed that black coaches are fairly or perhaps over-represented in the NFL while failing to acknowledge the demographic among players. Are black coaches not closer in percentage to the player demographic due to lack of interest in the sport? Lack of interest in coaching? You tell me, in your typically level headed and well reasoned fashion. SJW. weepy fem spot. And I'm the one hot and bothered??? You're melting down, not unlike a unit of snow.

There are literally riots in the street whenever whitey gets hired. I have a dream, that one day a white man can get a fair shake in America!! Until then, we shall overcome!!!

So much irony. I addressed your terrible point regarding representation. You went full FleaMoulds (you should never go full FleaMoulds), dodged my points completely, and moved the goal posts to another continent. I guess if I'm a boomer its time to change your diapers.

100% correct. The rule was all about giving opportunity. Its a bridge measure to help get the league to a point where the notion that minorities not being given a fair crack at coaching, front office, and ownership positions will be looked upon as silly as separate drinking fountains and bathrooms.

Show me another profession in the United States where the workforce is overwhelmingly (75%) black/minority and the management and ownership is overwhelmingly white. Fruit picking in California? 18th and early 19th century agriculture? You CAN'T tell me that some NFL owners do NOT think that black coaches are inherently less capable when these are the same guys who thought black QB's were categorically less capable than their counterparts. Racism and prejudice are not logical. Common sense arguments do not apply.

I would like to know why after all the s@$^ we have witnessed these past few years with calls being made to the letter of the law, no matter how absurdly removed from the original intent of the rule, the officials determined that this one call needed "common sense"? The league's policy has been too effin bad for years, but for 5 minutes on Saturday there was suddenly room to contemplate the spirit of the rule. All those catches overturned to the letter of the rule no matter how common sense they were and the NFL told them tough luck, the competition committee will look at it in the offseason. Belichick has made a living on poorly written rules. Did anyone shut down his sheisty substitutions vs Baltimore in the playoffs? No, the league addressed it AFTER the season. Did the league do anything about all the pick plays he was running? That one kickoff was the exception. Why?

They're required to submit pictures and DNA samples to confirm the level of melanin. The NFL does NOT need another Soul Man, tanning pills fiasco.

McDaniels has a deal in place with Belichick to inherit the HC spot in New England after Bill moves on. Much like the deal Belichick had with Parcells. I don't see McDaniels going anywhere. Especially not after the way he did the Colts. Chargers talk is crazy. QB is not LAC's problem and Brady is hardly an upgrade over Rivers right now. Chicago or maybe Denver makes sense to me.

Then man up and tell her that unless shes a client she needs to find some place else to socialize or Fergy is going to have to shiv a mofo. Option B, walk into the lobby with your pants around your ankles and shout "cut the S@#$! Are we gonna f@#$ or not?!?!"

Instruct your admins to tell this woman that they were recently chastised by the boss for spending too much time with personal conversations at the expense of work and she will get them both in hot water.

Nah, man. Ricky is a rogue. An outsider. Why else would he be making these outrageous jokes?!?! https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2020/01/golden-globes-ricky-gervais-doublethink-hollywood/604486/

Because he doesn't know the rules and completely f@#$ed up. Kinda like throwing a live ball to the referee in the end zone after a kickoff. I have no idea why anybody would do that.

I don't think you're a bad fan. In fact, very far from it. Like the complete opposite. Until the officials can actually enforce the rules we have accuracy then I am not not comfortable with the spirit of the rule subject to adjudication a la minute when the NFL has made painfully literal interpretations a hallmark of the fan experience for at least the last decade. If the spirit of a rule is going to be observed then any fair person would like the spirit of all rules to be enforced with common sense consistently and that did not happen on Saturday. No such allowance was given on Ford's block. The blind side rule was meant to take vicious hits on unsuspecting players out of the game. Instead of spirit we got by the book, 15 yards, and moved out of field goal range. I would say consideration of spirit of the rule and intent is an anomaly. The video review process was meant to overturn bad calls on a standard of "any guy in a bar" could tell that was a bad call. The norm has been making rulings based on fractions of an inch, blades of grass, and nano-seconds of control. But now on a one off call the refs want to talk about common sense and I am supposed to just buy it no questions asked?????

This power was only used for the first time. First as in precedent. So next time the rules get tossed out in favor of "common sense" I hope to see your fervent support. Why do we even have rules if they aren't reflective of common sense?

Pass interference requires significant judgement. A waving of the arms, a kneel, or a ball hitting the turf do not. So I ask for the 20th time what part of giving himself up was open to interpretation or should be?? Does a missed field goal require judgement or do we call it based on what happened regardless of intent? Hate to break it to you but NO ONE intends to F@#% UP in the grandest of fashions YET they still manage and its not the role of the officials to protect them from it. Milano clearly intended to sack Watson. Didn't seem to matter. Roberts clearly called a fair catch. Worked like a mother*****ing charm, no interpretation of intent required. You can twist and turn some more. You can hide behind the fact that no one cares because EVERY bad call is publicly acknowledged by the league (ESPN's commentators had a lot to say about it, btw). You can repeat the same stuff while avoiding any of the pertinent rules. You can be "done" with this thread for the umpteenth time and still demand the last word. You can put on a bold face and dismiss my points again with a haughty laugh in place of any argument but we both know.

There are always 65 other plays. No one play determines a game but that doesnt mean we get to toss out the rules. 2 minutes, 20 minutes, 5 seconds. Introducing common sense which contradicts the rules as defined has no bounds. If we can disregard what is written in favor of common sense which is previously undocumented then where does it end? Why would this power be limited to kickoffs with outcomes that make some people uncomfortable?

Its common sense to know the rules of your profession especially when they are few and cut and dry. Its common sense to understand failure to do so often results in undesirable outcomes. Ignorance is rarely a viable defense. No one ever asked for a perfect rule book but I do expect the one we got to be observed. Especially when it 100% covers the events that transpired. I'm still going to need one of you to show how often returners have committed the same offense as I have seen ZERO proof. This idea is rather important to your point.

You sure about that, Clark?

I do not care at all how you would prefer to score or how comfortable you are winning by a TD scored by a correct interpretation of the rules. I don't care if we play the 16 games against the 2019 Bengals if we win the super bowl. I swear most of you won't be happy unless we go 19-0 winning by 30 every game and decline every penalty called in our favor.

You should go back to making racist comments in the comments section of the Buffalo News. You're not ready to troll these boards, kid.

I thought you let it go 4 pages ago and you really should have (begin your post with "dog14787 was right!" if you read past the "and"). I don't know how, aside from stubbornly willful ignorance, you still do not see that this scenario was 100% covered by rules which are as simple as can be. Many rules are open to judgement but where you see room for interpretation in this rule I can only imagine. I have asked about 5 times already and you've dodged, but I will try once more: Where and when did Carter give himself up according to the rules? What article and section are you "interpreting" to suggest he met one of the criteria? The league rarely has an interest in PUBLICLY addressing the egregious missteps of their officials unless the outcry from fans demands it. Protect the shield at all costs.

Roberts didn't do it because he knows the 3 effing rules which he needs to know.