Pbomb Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 8 minutes ago, Captain Caveman said: One thing I don’t understand - shouldn’t it have been an illegal forward pass out of the end zone (and thus a safety?) He made a throwing motion, right, he definitely didn’t fumble it. Think that’s why the ref threw his flag but then the nfl super secret refs came in and made him change his call
TigerJ Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, Rocbillsfan1 said: There doesn’t need to be a rule change, the rules make perfect sense. The guy was a knucklehead and made a mistake and the league covered it up to protect their ratings. ***** bull####. Nfl is rigged and has been for a long time. Tired of the bull####. I didn't say there needs to be a change. The rule is clear and easy to understand, but if the league wants to avoid a situation where a score happens because a player is careless about that particular rule, I could see them changing it for their own peace of mind, necessary or not.
Giuseppe Tognarelli Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 The refs shouldn't have been thinking about the consequences of awarding us a TD; the Texans player is the one who gave us the TD by rule. The ref just needed to explain that by saying, "By rule..." like they do so often when they announce calls they know might not go over well. I don't see anything about this on PFT, which means it's just going to quietly go away. I'm very frustrated. This needs to be addressed with a rule change. 2
GaryPinC Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 30 minutes ago, Hebert19 said: 2 point for us. No TD. Illegal forward pass from endzone is the right call. Is it? This is an interesting question to me. The endzone has no yardage marks like the field of play and what is important is the goalline, sidelines, and endline. In other words, it's a unique area of the field, where the ball is either in or out of the endzone. So, is it considered a forward pass/lateral? Also, as much as I think soccer has it right with intent being part of rule interpretation, this is football that supposedly sticks to rules. It should have been a turnover with TD/safety
Giuseppe Tognarelli Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 32 minutes ago, Michael1962 said: This needs to be everywhere on Twitter. People need to be talking about this. 1
familykwi Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 35 minutes ago, Michael1962 said: A couple of important distinctions between this play and yesterday's: 1) the college rule book does not mirror the pro book, so this may not exactly be apple to apples esp. with regards to "giving himself up" I'm not digging into the college playbook to confirm 2) This pitch went backwards, so it's a lateral. Yesterday's went forward, so it's a forward pass. In this case a TD is appropriate. Yesterday would not result in a TD if administered correctly.
Sherlock Holmes Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 3 hours ago, stevewin said: This was actually an excellent discussion. Didn't realize rule was written "AND". I was fine with the call at the time, but this doesn't make me feel better. Hasselbeck has perfect analogy with victory formation - you can't just hand the ball over when the rule says you must be down. They try to play devil's advocate and say Bills still lost the game, but there is zero percent chance they lose if that is called a TD. The shame really is the ref got it right to begin, then caved to everyone saying "Oh my God everyone knows what he meant to do" As they mention - it's real dicey territory when officials don't follow the rule as written and decide to alter calls based on what they consider intent. In this case it may have been obvious, but what about other situations that may not be so clear cut. That's why the rules are there. The ref was even motioning to him like no don't do that... he still did and we got robbed mutiple times 1 hour ago, Livinginthepast said: After further review...… The Bills get screwed.....AGAIN. No we are stupid to expect the rules to matter no matter how petty... We shouldn't ever want fair calls we just need to go so far above and beyond or else we are just a bunch of whiny ***** 1
Michael1962 Posted January 5, 2020 Author Posted January 5, 2020 8 minutes ago, familykwi said: A couple of important distinctions between this play and yesterday's: 1) the college rule book does not mirror the pro book, so this may not exactly be apple to apples esp. with regards to "giving himself up" I'm not digging into the college playbook to confirm 2) This pitch went backwards, so it's a lateral. Yesterday's went forward, so it's a forward pass. In this case a TD is appropriate. Yesterday would not result in a TD if administered correctly. If yesterday's play "would not have resulted in a TD" what would have been the outcome?
Mikie2times Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 I agree it probably should stand, if nothing else to enforce the way the rule was written. At a younger age we get taught this thing in sports by refs called fundamentals. As an example, you can’t inbound a basketball after a basket with one foot inbounds and one foot out. Yet we see this in nearly every basketball game. Why? They stop enforcing a lot of things to the letter of the rule as you advance into college and pro. It allows for sloppiness and confusion and exactly the sort of thing we saw yesterday.
Sig1Hunter Posted January 5, 2020 Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, Michael1962 said: If yesterday's play "would not have resulted in a TD" what would have been the outcome? Penalty (illegal forward pass in the end zone) which results in a safety, with a free kick to the Bills. Quoted from the rule book for emphasis (NFL Rule 7.2.1.d.1): 1. An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: d. when a runner declares himself down by: falling to the ground, or kneeling, AND clearly making no immediate effort to advance *capitalization added for emphasis 1
Buffalo Bills Fan Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 13 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said: Penalty (illegal forward pass in the end zone) which results in a safety, with a free kick to the Bills. Quoted from the rule book for emphasis (NFL Rule 7.2.1.d.1): 1. An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: d. when a runner declares himself down by: falling to the ground, or kneeling, AND clearly making no immediate effort to advance *capitalization added for emphasis Yup safety at lease worst case. Refs f up big time.
frostbitmic Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 How to give yourself up is in the rule book. In this case the return man didn't follow the rules. Too bad for him ? nooooooooo, too bad for us. Thanks NFL for selective enforcement of your rules. 1
Sig1Hunter Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 Applying the “common sense” approach to rules, when the rule is spelled out in black and white, is a terribly slippery slope. That’s why dingbat John Parry’s asinine comments during the telecast bugged me so much. As more has come out about the wording from the rule book, I’ve gotten downright pissed off! 1
PromoTheRobot Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 Could McDermott throw the challenge flag there?
Michael1962 Posted January 6, 2020 Author Posted January 6, 2020 9 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Could McDermott throw the challenge flag there? IMO I think he could have, if he was paying attention/cognizant of the rules.
familykwi Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 1 hour ago, Michael1962 said: If yesterday's play "would not have resulted in a TD" what would have been the outcome? Safety. Illegal forward pass from the endzone results in a safety. 15 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Could McDermott throw the challenge flag there? Can't throw flag to argue illegal forward pass. Since it was a touchdown, it was in fact a scoring play, so it should have been reviewed and administered correctly. It wasn't, so it wasn't.
Livinginthepast Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 4 minutes ago, familykwi said: Safety. Illegal forward pass from the endzone results in a safety. Can't throw flag to argue illegal forward pass. Since it was a touchdown, it was in fact a scoring play, so it should have been reviewed and administered correctly. It wasn't, so it wasn't. Was there any explanation as to why the play wasn't reviewed? or any explanation on those secret agent officials who barged onto the field?
Markaf431 Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 2 minutes ago, Livinginthepast said: Was there any explanation as to why the play wasn't reviewed? or any explanation on those secret agent officials who barged onto the field? this. This is what I want to know. Do the men in black overrule or change calls frequently.? Is that allowed in the rule book somewhere?
Returntoglory Posted January 6, 2020 Posted January 6, 2020 4 hours ago, matter2003 said: My question? Why did he even catch the ball to begin with? Players just move away a lot of times now and let it bounce in the end zone. Seems there is no good reason to even touch the ball as a returner if you are not planning to bring it out. Because he was contemplating running the ball out. That's why he was so ambiguous with his signaling ?
Michael1962 Posted January 6, 2020 Author Posted January 6, 2020 5 minutes ago, Livinginthepast said: Was there any explanation as to why the play wasn't reviewed? or any explanation on those secret agent officials who barged onto the field? The only explanation I can think of makes me sound like Mel Gibson in "Conspiracy Theory." Only in that movie there were black helicopters.
Recommended Posts