BillsFanNC Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 I just cant get worked up about any of this stuff anymore. If you're going to be a fan then you have to simply accept that ***** like this is going to continue happening. It will never go away. Therefore as a fan you have to hope that your team can assemble a roster and coaching staff that is so dominant that it renders anything the refs may do to hinder your chances of winning irrelevant. The Bills aren't good enough yet to render the refereeing irrelevant, but they do have a chance to get there with some additional tweaking of the roster and staff. 1
4merper4mer Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 4 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: It’s ambiguous, but a rule-of-reason interpretation would find that that amounted to a touchback. Kneeling isn’t required, as far as I can tell. If a ball gets to the end zone and touches the ground, it’s an automatic touchback. There’s no need for a player to pick it up and kneel, or even catch a ball if it’s headed for the end zone and they don’t intend to return it. This is a small time saver, but the goal is to blow a play dead earlier so that unnecessary collisions don’t happen. Under the previous rules, a player could take their time gathering a ball and kneeling while the coverage team and return team blockers still careened toward each other for no reason. He caught the ball in the air so all that blah blah blah you typed is completely irrelevant. 1
plenzmd1 Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Ya, I don’t know @dave mcbride I agree we know his intent, But the language above is specific to ball hitting the ground, which it did not in this case. let me ask you this, if returner took the two steps he did, saw a huge hole in the Bills coverage , and took off so you believe they would have said he gave himself up with the safe signal? I don’t. I just thinks it’s freaking dangerous territory when NY gets involved in a non reviewable play and “ interprets intention”. rules are rules, procedures are procedures, and neither were followed on this play. 1 1 1
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, plenzmd1 said: Ya, I don’t know @dave mcbride I agree we know his intent, But the language above is specific to ball hitting the ground, which it did not in this case. let me ask you this, if returner took the two steps he did, saw a huge hole in the Bills coverage , and took off so you believe they would have said he gave himself up with the safe signal? I don’t. I just thinks it’s freaking dangerous territory when NY gets involved in a non reviewable play and “ interprets intention”. rules are rules, procedures are procedures, and neither were followed on this play. It was deep in the end zone, he hadn’t returned it all game, and it was clear that he wasn’t going to return it on this one. It was just a dumb call by the ref, who sadly created moon landing material for Bills fans that’ll likely plague this board for the next decade. 1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said: He caught the ball in the air so all that blah blah blah you typed is completely irrelevant. Advice — this is a very bad hill to die on. 1
Mr. WEO Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 26 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: It actually happens all of the time. That is the new way to signal “I’m not returning”, and I’ve seen it numerous times throughout the league. More to the point, this is a disaster of a thread and basically moon landing stuff for the nuttiest of Bills fans. This.
plenzmd1 Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, dave mcbride said: It was deep in the end zone, he hadn’t returned it all game, and it was clear that he wasn’t going to return it on this one. It was just a dumb call by the ref, who sadly created moon landing material for Bills fans that’ll likely plague this board for the next decade. We will disagree on this one. What he did previously does not matter , and if the refs start interpreting intent instead of actions, that is whacked. 2
Cheektowaga Chad Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 1 hour ago, Southern Bills Fan said: Tim Hasslebeck just said on espn that it should have been an illegal forward pass in the end zone. Safety for the Bills and Houston should have then been kicking off to the Bills. This actually sounds like what should have been called. Kind of like texans you screwed up you will be punished but we can't give the other team 6 points on this bs. Lol By the way what show was it said on? I may try to watch it on demand later
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, plenzmd1 said: We will disagree on this one. What he did previously does not matter , and if the refs start interpreting intent instead of actions, that is whacked. I have seriously seen this happen multiple times in other games. It is common. Trust me.
4merper4mer Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 13 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: I am telling you - I have seen this multiple times throughout the league, and gene steratore said this too. It’s always treated as a touch back. The Texans guy too kind a knee earlier in the game. Cite a specific time you saw this. What happens on most/all of the non returns is the returner simply lets the ball land which is a completely different thing. Up thread the exact rule was quoted. It was not followed during the play.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said: We will disagree on this one. What he did previously does not matter , and if the refs start interpreting intent instead of actions, that is whacked. Plus, he flipped the ball to the ref! That is both intent and a clear action.
pennstate10 Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 So, clearly, the official who signaled TD on the play was applying the rules to the letter. Can we all agree on that? then, he wusses out a let himself be overruled. To compund the problem, McD didn't challenge the ruling. This is critical. You can bet that over coaches-Bellicheck for instance- who know the rules back and forwards would have run on the field, complained long and loudly. by the way, I thought I saw a flag on the field after this play, and thought maybe OBrien was going to get an unsportsmanlike or something. Did they just pick this up?
wagon127 Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Im not sure why bills fans are so upset about this. Its not like we forced a fumble or did anything to deserve a touchdown there. Im more upset about the actual football plays that took effort and skill to move the ball and the refs took it away. Like 15 yards for the cody ford "blindside block" or not calling delay of game, where i think our defense gave up the 3rd and 18, cause they thought the play was not going to count.
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said: The Texans guy too kind a knee earlier in the game. Cite a specific time you saw this. What happens on most/all of the non returns is the returner simply lets the ball land which is a completely different thing. Up thread the exact rule was quoted. It was not followed during the play. I can’t recall when and where, but I watch a lot of games and a I guess you’ll have to take it on faith. Gene Steratore said essentially the same. Again, this is about the stupidest hill to die on I could ever imagine. Edited January 5, 2020 by dave mcbride
4merper4mer Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Advice — this is a very bad hill to die on. Then don't. The stuff you typed about the ball landing in the end zone is as irrelevant as citing the rule about bunting foul with two strikes resulting in a strikeout. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what happened. 1
plenzmd1 Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, dave mcbride said: I have seriously seen this happen multiple times in other games. It is common. Trust me. Does not make it the rule. Again, there is no place on the rule book that says “ safe signal means player is giving himself up”. There is no place in rule book that says “ red can make decisions based on common sense. there is no place in the rule book that says NY can get involved in a non reviewable play. if they can, where was the delay of game call on 3rd and 18? Why involved in one non reviewable play but okay on the other? 1
4merper4mer Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Plus, he flipped the ball to the ref! That is both intent and a clear action. The rule states he must show intent AND take a knee or go to the ground. That's the rule. The ref knew the rule and changed his mind on its application. 1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said: Does not make it the rule. Again, there is no place on the rule book that says “ safe signal means player is giving himself up”. There is no place in rule book that says “ red can make decisions based on common sense. there is no place in the rule book that says NY can get involved in a non reviewable play. if they can, where was the delay of game call on 3rd and 18? Why involved in one non reviewable play but okay on the other? It was reviewable because it was a scoring play so we disagree there. I agree with the rest and think Dave is probably imagining having seen this multiple times. I don't recall having seen it. I do recall guys who aren't going to return simply letting the ball bounce in the EZ. That happens multiple times every game. 2
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said: Does not make it the rule. Again, there is no place on the rule book that says “ safe signal means player is giving himself up”. There is no place in rule book that says “ red can make decisions based on common sense. there is no place in the rule book that says NY can get involved in a non reviewable play. if they can, where was the delay of game call on 3rd and 18? Why involved in one non reviewable play but okay on the other? Hey, I am the one who started the thread about the suspicious officiating (no in-play penalties called on Houston in a five-quarter game), and I fully agree about the 3rd and 18 play. This call was just dumb, though. It’s clear as day that the league views that sort of situation as a touch back, and they don’t want returns anyway given how dangerous they are. That was touch back, plain and simple, and the ref screwed up. I mean christ, steratore, who is actually smart and knows the rules better than any of us clowns here, said that this sort of thing happens and that it should never been ruled a td for the bills.
Sandhill Mike Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 I'll bet we see the rule get updated this offseason. They just didn't want it to determine the game, which looking back, it would have. I feel like Walter... "Am I the only one who cares about the rules?!? Mark it zero!" I wish they had felt that lax with the rules when calling Ford for the "blindside" block.
4merper4mer Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 7 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: I can’t recall when and where, but I watch a lot of games and a I guess you’ll have to take it on faith. Gene Steratore said essentially the same. Again, this is about the stupidest hill to die on I could ever imagine. It's not a hill, no one is dying and nothing is going to change. 99.99999999% the guy's intent was a touchback but he simply did not follow the rule. What happened is akin to him simply dropping the catch. If he did that he can't just say he was going to take a knee anyway. It's also similar to a QB not kneeling in victory formation, turning and tossing the ball to the ref. How would that call be made if the other team picked up the ball and ran it in. The rule is written specifically and it wasn't followed. IYHO what other rules should be flexible? 8 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Hey, I am the one who started the thread about the suspicious officiating (no in-play penalties called on Houston in a five-quarter game), and I fully agree about the 3rd and 18 play. This call was just dumb, though. It’s clear as day that the league views that sort of situation as a touch back, and they don’t want returns anyway given how dangerous they are. That was touch back, plain and simple, and the ref screwed up. I mean christ, steratore, who is actually smart and knows the rules better than any of us clowns here, said that this sort of thing happens and that it should never been ruled a td for the bills. Steratore is human. The rule book has words in it. The ref on the field knew the rule. 1
dave mcbride Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: It's not a hill, no one is dying and nothing is going to change. 99.99999999% the guy's intent was a touchback but he simply did not follow the rule. What happened is akin to him simply dropping the catch. If he did that he can't just say he was going to take a knee anyway. It's also similar to a QB not kneeling in victory formation, turning and tossing the ball to the ref. How would that call be made if the other team picked up the ball and ran it in. The rule is written specifically and it wasn't followed. IYHO what other rules should be flexible? That is a good question. I think the hands to the face rule called against Ford was terrible because it happens all of the time in the o-line/d-line scrum. It has to be a clear grab, head slap, or neck push. He did none of that. It cost the Bills a possession. PI rules are INCREDIBLY flexible. i just think the intent on this was so completely clear, and given the league’s stated intent to reduce kick returns given that they are by far and away the most dangerous plays in the game, you use your freaking brain and call that a touchback. Edited January 5, 2020 by dave mcbride
Recommended Posts