BuffaloTX Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 Just further proof that inside betting is in the NFL.
DabillsDaBillsDaBills Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 I'm absolutely flabbergasted that the refs didn't overturn this call. It was, objectively, the wrong call. https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/ From the NFL rulebook 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. Per the underlined sentence, this was NOT a simultaneous catch. Kroft clearly makes the catch and then the defender gains joint control. Per the bolded sentence, even if this was a simultaneous catch (which it was not), the tie goes to the offense. I'm disgusted that this call wasn't overturned, and am really looking forward to an explanation from the league office (unlikely to happen, but a guy can dream). 2
Playoffs? Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 The Bills absolutely should make a big deal out of that call. Demand an explanation until we get one. Get fined... who cares? Billsmafia will pay it.
DabillsDaBillsDaBills Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/nfl-explains-why-controversial-interception-was-not-overturned/article_3144b798-00fc-11eb-b691-d383bab887e8.html Via a pool reporter, NFL Senior Vice President of Officiating Al Riveron said, “Anytime we go into a replay review, we have to start with the ruling on the field. And the ruling on the field is an interception. So therefore, the officials ruled that the process of the catch had not been completed by the offensive player. And if the process of the catch is not over, in their opinion, the defender comes up with the football and they rule an interception. "We have to start with the ruling on the field, and that’s why I want to walk you through the process. The ruling on the field is an interception. In order for us to change the ruling on the field, we have to have clear and obvious visual evidence to overturn that ruling. So therefore, if they rule that the process of the catch is not over and the defender comes up with the ball, we have to have clear and obvious evidence to rule otherwise, which we don’t. We do not have clear and obvious evidence to rule otherwise. Therefore, we must stay with the ruling on the field.”
Playoffs? Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 I’d like to give Al Riverton a clear and obvious punch to the nuts. Guy is the worst. 1
apuszczalowski Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Livinginthepast said: First of all it if that actually was a take away then why is it called a INT. The DB did not intercept a pass. He placed his hands on an already caught ball. Then the receiver who caught the ball first , hits the ground. The play is actually over at that point. The Simultaneous possession rule clearly states the ball belongs to the offense. In no way was that an INT or a fumble. The refs didnt seem to understand their own rule on that play but of course clearly understand the nonsense no horsecollar in the pocket rule in full detail. The Horsecollar in the pocket one confuses me since its apparently such a dangerous tackle that they don't want to risk WR & RB injuries with it, but the one player that is always given even more protection in the pocket is ok to tackle with it? 1
Livinginthepast Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 1 minute ago, apuszczalowski said: The Horsecollar in the pocket one confuses me since its apparently such a dangerous tackle that they don't want to risk WR & RB injuries with it, but the one player that is always given even more protection in the pocket is ok to tackle with it? Only in the Alice in wonderland world of NFL officiating does a rule so intensely stupid get created. Its as bad as the tuck rule or some of the leagues idiotic attempts to define a catch in recent years!
The Red King Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 The defender never had sole possession, and joint possession goes to the offense. Cut and dry call here.
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 27, 2020 Posted September 27, 2020 34 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said: https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/nfl-explains-why-controversial-interception-was-not-overturned/article_3144b798-00fc-11eb-b691-d383bab887e8.html Via a pool reporter, NFL Senior Vice President of Officiating Al Riveron said, “Anytime we go into a replay review, we have to start with the ruling on the field. And the ruling on the field is an interception. So therefore, the officials ruled that the process of the catch had not been completed by the offensive player. And if the process of the catch is not over, in their opinion, the defender comes up with the football and they rule an interception. "We have to start with the ruling on the field, and that’s why I want to walk you through the process. The ruling on the field is an interception. In order for us to change the ruling on the field, we have to have clear and obvious visual evidence to overturn that ruling. So therefore, if they rule that the process of the catch is not over and the defender comes up with the ball, we have to have clear and obvious evidence to rule otherwise, which we don’t. We do not have clear and obvious evidence to rule otherwise. Therefore, we must stay with the ruling on the field.” Riverton is simply a well paid dishonest stooge for the NFL to make decisions that help the NFL make money. The fact that he can say Kroft did not absolutely catch it first and still have 50% control when his knee hit the ground is just a simple lie.
Recommended Posts