Gavin in Va Beach Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Got a little dusty here in the office watching that...not to mention getting the heart rate jacked up too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 (edited) Just to get back on topic... Gotta love Chris Berman - Edited September 27, 2011 by The Senator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvanvol Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 So Nelson was going to stop, run around a defensive back, and get back 5 yards to where the ball was intercepted all while the ball was in the air? And I'm not changing the application of the rules. For it to be pass interference in the NFL, the ball has to be catchable. The fact that the ball was intercepted 5 YARDS before the ball could have even gotten to the spot where the receiver was supposedly interfered with, that makes the application of the rule moot. Saying anything else is nothing more than homerism and 99.999% of BILLS' fans would be losing their friggin' minds if the same call had gone against the team and cost us yet another game against the Patriots. Friggin' homers. It was pass interference and was called correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kickedface Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 that made me smile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 So Nelson was going to stop, run around a defensive back, and get back 5 yards to where the ball was intercepted all while the ball was in the air? And I'm not changing the application of the rules. For it to be pass interference in the NFL, the ball has to be catchable. The fact that the ball was intercepted 5 YARDS before the ball could have even gotten to the spot where the receiver was supposedly interfered with, that makes the application of the rule moot. Saying anything else is nothing more than homerism and 99.999% of BILLS' fans would be losing their friggin' minds if the same call had gone against the team and cost us yet another game against the Patriots. Friggin' homers. WRONG! Despite many posters trying to gently inform you of your erroneous view, you remain steadfastly clueless. I've bolded your own words in another attempt to knock you off your incorrect high horse. The ball was caught by a Pat* 2 yrds. deep in the endzone, leaping 1' off the ground with his arms extended as high as he could reach, for the rainbow bomb. Nelson was no more than 5 yrds. further back in the endzone, being strangled by the INTERFERER trying to come back for the ball. Even eskimo children understand that without being held up, Nelson would be able to make a play on the ball -ie catchable. I won't ask if you get it now, because I know you don't.. Friggin' trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmsmystic Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Thank you Boomer for the good press - he is awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I'm sure you'd be making the same contention if George Wilson was the interceptor, McLovin' was the guy getting called for the PI, and the Patriots had won the game on a last second FG, right? RIGHT? Wrong. Don't presume to tell me how I would react to a hypothetical call. And making up statistics and using them as evidence is a wonderful way to make any argument. How about you try putting the shoe on the other foot for a second. That kind of straw man bull **** is exactly what you spend most of your days on this board calling people idiots for. Now it's okay? Hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 So Nelson was going to stop, run around a defensive back, and get back 5 yards to where the ball was intercepted all while the ball was in the air? <img src='http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /><br /><br />And I'm not changing the application of the rules. For it to be pass interference in the NFL, the ball has to be catchable. The fact that the ball was intercepted 5 YARDS before the ball could have even gotten to the spot where the receiver was supposedly interfered with, that makes the application of the rule moot. Saying anything else is nothing more than homerism and 99.999% of BILLS' fans would be losing their friggin' minds if the same call had gone against the team and cost us yet another game against the Patriots. He was 5 yards away and it "appeared" uncatchable because he was interfered with and not allowed to make a play on the ball. Uncatchable balls are called, typically, when it's 5yds over a guys head or 5 yds out of bounds... not when the WR is trying to stop and come back to the ball and clearly and blatantly held up. There were plenty of questionable calls in this game... on both sides. But this was not one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taglientep Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Love the fact that we are now in the drivers seat and not playing on our heels now. Feels awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bladiebla Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 For all the doubters click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebUidLNoR-E#t=03m46 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitz's Beard Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 For all the doubters click here: youtube.com/watch?v=ebUidLNoR-E#t=03m46 1) I thought it was a pretty clear cut call due to reasons listed by SEVERAL people...how you can see otherwise just baffles me 2) I absolutely, positively LOVE Chris Berman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Guy on the Bench Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 1) I thought it was a pretty clear cut call due to reasons listed by SEVERAL people...how you can see otherwise just baffles me 2) I absolutely, positively LOVE Chris Berman! I think Bladiebla posted that vid in support of the idea that Nelson could have got back to the ball in time to at least knock it down, so he agrees with you. It's hard to tell in slow-motion, but Nelson does seem to locate the ball with his eyes and start working back toward it a bit before it actually comes down to the DB, suggesting the ball was not "uncatchable" for him and that the call was correct. On the other hand, he would have to go around his man to get to the ball - the guy is under no obligation to move, and that might have taken too long. I can see how the call could reasonably go either way. Don't think it's as obvious one way or the other as most people are making it out to be. And I think I would say the same thing if the team jerseys were reversed. Either way, like everyone else, I surely don't feel bad about it against the just-give-it-to-em Patriots. (Also known as the bull ****-Henry-Jones-pass-interference-on-a-cluster-!@#$-hail-mary Patriots.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 (edited) More Berman-Bills love here. This one will bring back memories - some good, some not-so-good - and should put a big smile on the faces of 'older' fans... (special surprise at the very end) Edited September 27, 2011 by The Senator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 The ball was caught by a Pat* 2 yrds. deep in the endzone, leaping 1' off the ground with his arms extended as high as he could reach, for the rainbow bomb. Uh, no. Watch the video again - for the first time and realize the ball hit him in the chest, just below his chin and there was virtually no "leap", or at least one wasn't required. Nelson was no more than 5 yrds. further back in the endzone, being strangled by the INTERFERER trying to come back for the ball. Even eskimo children understand that without being held up, Nelson would be able to make a play on the ball -ie catchable. I won't ask if you get it now, because I know you don't.. Strangled? Exaggerate much, Sally Jesse Raphael? There's no way in hell Nelson was going to stop, pivot, get around his defender, and run back 5 yards to even break up that play, much less attempt to catch it. It was a horrible call that was an absolute gift to the BILLS. If you think otherwise, you should apply to be an NFL official. I'm glad it happened, lord knows we've lost enough games to this team because they get these kind of breaks but that doesn't mean it was a good or accurate call. It wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 He was 5 yards away and it "appeared" uncatchable because he was interfered with and not allowed to make a play on the ball. Uncatchable balls are called, typically, when it's 5yds over a guys head or 5 yds out of bounds... not when the WR is trying to stop and come back to the ball and clearly and blatantly held up. That's because this particular situation NEVER happens. The ball is almost never under thrown so badly that it's intercepted 5 yards before it gets to the intended receiver when the receiver is covered by another defender entirely. There were plenty of questionable calls in this game... on both sides. But this was not one of them. That's your opinion and this board probably would have crashed if the situation was reversed or if the PI wasn't called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitz's Beard Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 I think Bladiebla posted that vid in support of the idea that Nelson could have got back to the ball in time to at least knock it down, so he agrees with you. Yeah, I was more or less backing that up Uh, no. Watch the video again - for the first time and realize the ball hit him in the chest, just below his chin and there was virtually no "leap", or at least one wasn't required. Strangled? Exaggerate much, Sally Jesse Raphael? There's no way in hell Nelson was going to stop, pivot, get around his defender, and run back 5 yards to even break up that play, much less attempt to catch it. It was a horrible call that was an absolute gift to the BILLS. If you think otherwise, you should apply to be an NFL official. I'm glad it happened, lord knows we've lost enough games to this team because they get these kind of breaks but that doesn't mean it was a good or accurate call. It wasn't. ok, There is plenty of reason to believe that any NFL receiver could turn while the ball is the air, unimpeded (that's the important part) and run 5 yards (other important part) and at the very least break the pass up, knock it loose, etc. 5 yards = 15 feet...if an NFL receiver cannot cover 15 or less feet in the time that the ball was coming down, there is a problem (hint: a normal sized person cover 3+ feet in 1 walking stride...and an athlete covers anywhere between 6' and 7' in a running stride). whether the DB jumped or not, the ball was high...er-go it was going deeper, and Nelson was impeded. I would argue the same way if the roles were reversed. This was by and large the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Hey Darin, you ever get nose bleeds from sitting on that high horse? Just asking. His nose only bleeds when he's wrong. On this he is 100% correct IMO. I gave my thoughts right after the game so I'm not going to go into them in detail again, but...I am glad that the Bills were the beneficiaries of that flag. I don't think that we'll see a call like that again. The defender was between the receiver and the ball. He does not have to move out of the receivers way. He's got his turf staked out. If you think the receiver could have run around the defender and gotten back to the ball then you are IMO mistaken. We were the recipients of a gracious call. Take it. Keep it. Remember it. Don't expect one like it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 ok, There is plenty of reason to believe that any NFL receiver could turn while the ball is the air, unimpeded (that's the important part) and run 5 yards (other important part) and at the very least break the pass up, knock it loose, etc. 5 yards = 15 feet...if an NFL receiver cannot cover 15 or less feet in the time that the ball was coming down, there is a problem (hint: a normal sized person cover 3+ feet in 1 walking stride...and an athlete covers anywhere between 6' and 7' in a running stride). whether the DB jumped or not, the ball was high...er-go it was going deeper, and Nelson was impeded. I would argue the same way if the roles were reversed. Sure, if he could completely reverse his momentum by stopping on a dime, run full speed in the other direction, while getting around the defender between him and the other defender. Now try living in reality This was by and large the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Uh, no. Watch the video again - for the first time and realize the ball hit him in the chest, just below his chin and there was virtually no "leap", or at least one wasn't required. Strangled? Exaggerate much, Sally Jesse Raphael? There's no way in hell Nelson was going to stop, pivot, get around his defender, and run back 5 yards to even break up that play, much less attempt to catch it. It was a horrible call that was an absolute gift to the BILLS. If you think otherwise, you should apply to be an NFL official. I'm glad it happened, lord knows we've lost enough games to this team because they get these kind of breaks but that doesn't mean it was a good or accurate call. It wasn't. The thing was, it's a penalty. I just watched it about ten times in slow motion. It was highly unlikely for Nelson to come back for the ball and reach it, but it was not impossible. He only needed two steps and a jump. I don't personally think he would have but it was not impossible. Under no circumstances IMO could a ref determine that was an uncatchable ball, and the rule is not remotely in place for passes like that. It has to be 100% out of the world uncatchable, that was not. It was less than 5 yards. He's 6'5". Also, if the Patriot was not facing Nelson and tried to make a look for the ball, it would not have been called. He clearly blocked the path of the WR without trying to make a play on the ball. That's textbook interference. For what it's worth, I don't think that Nelson would have made any kind of play on it. I also think it was a terrible decision by Fitzpatrick. And I think Nelson partly drew the penalty by exaggerated action. It was the right call by the official though. He is looking at the WR and the CB first and the ball second. He sees the impeding of the pattern, contact, and the DB not making any play to look for the ball until that, let alone make a play for the ball. It's clearly interference IMO even if Nelson probably doesn't get to the ball without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 The thing was, it's a penalty. I just watched it about ten times in slow motion. It was highly unlikely for Nelson to come back for the ball and reach it, but it was not impossible. He only needed two steps and a jump. I don't personally think he would have but it was not impossible. Under no circumstances IMO could a ref determine that was an uncatchable ball, and the rule is not remotely in place for passes like that. It has to be 100% out of the world uncatchable, that was not. It was less than 5 yards. He's 6'5". Also, if the Patriot was not facing Nelson and tried to make a look for the ball, it would not have been called. He clearly blocked the path of the WR without trying to make a play on the ball. That's textbook interference. For what it's worth, I don't think that Nelson would have made any kind of play on it. I also think it was a terrible decision by Fitzpatrick. And I think Nelson partly drew the penalty by exaggerated action. It was the right call by the official though. He is looking at the WR and the CB first and the ball second. He sees the impeding of the pattern, contact, and the DB not making any play to look for the ball until that, let alone make a play for the ball. It's clearly interference IMO even if Nelson probably doesn't get to the ball without it. So, if I'm a defender and you are behind me I have to make a play on an underthrown ball or it's interference? Sorry, don't see it. This isn't 'face guarding', this is a ball that was underthrown by 5 yards or so. agree to disagree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts