Mr_Blizzard Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 God, people are moody after a loss I know it has been around for ages thanks. I just never saw it before in a game and I watch a fair amount of football. I think it makes more sense that it is incomplete because neither has full possession of the ball, if the other guy has it too. That make more sense to me. Hey lets look at the bright side - The Bills show up in another NFL Blooper video! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 I totally did not understand the outcome of this play? I do get that a "tie" in possession goes to the offense..fine. But the guys shoulder pads landed out of bounds? I thought on a reception, the receiver has to land with some part of his body in-bounds first? Seemed like a gift to Minnesota to award them a TD on that one. We've seen some weird crap happen to the Bills this year. Like Reggie Corner's non-interception vs. Baltimore b/c his foot was on Boldin's foot when they landed. Then the very next week in a random NFL game, I watched the same play get awarded as an interception. Just weird man. He did. If you watch it again, and as the announcers repeatedly showed and commented on during the review, he got both feet in bounds before his shoulders hit. They got it right on the review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FightClub Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 "Tie goes to the offense" applies in baseball as well, as in if a runner hits the bag the same time as the throw get there, the runner is safe. In basketball and hockey, you can face-off/jump ball, but you can't exactly do that in football or baseball. No. See # 5 here There is no such rule in baseball. People just think there is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsForever Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 (edited) No. See # 5 here There is no such rule in baseball. People just think there is. If you read the rules it doesn't specifically state of a "tie" but the logic behind the wording would go to the runner and that's the way umpires call it in the game. In all sports especially baseball there is subjectiveness in how the game is called. It is not a myth if umpires use this same logic when it comes to benefit of the doubt. Edited December 6, 2010 by BuffaloBillsForever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cookiemonster Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 I totally did not understand the outcome of this play? I do get that a "tie" in possession goes to the offense..fine. But the guys shoulder pads landed out of bounds? I thought on a reception, the receiver has to land with some part of his body in-bounds first? Seemed like a gift to Minnesota to award them a TD on that one. We've seen some weird crap happen to the Bills this year. Like Reggie Corner's non-interception vs. Baltimore b/c his foot was on Boldin's foot when they landed. Then the very next week in a random NFL game, I watched the same play get awarded as an interception. Just weird man. Exactly what I was thinking, come on, nobody had possesion until they both came down and landed out of bounds, should have been an incomplete pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richmond_Bills Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 "Tie goes to the offense" applies in baseball as well, as in if a runner hits the bag the same time as the throw get there, the runner is safe. In basketball and hockey, you can face-off/jump ball, but you can't exactly do that in football or baseball. This is the biggest myth in all of sports. As a long time baseball/softball official, there is no specific rule that says "a tie goes to the runner". In fact in every umpire clinic/camp/class that I have ever been to says that a good defensive play should be rewarded on a bang-bang type play. Conversely - in football there IS a rule about simultaneous possession. I just wanted to clear this up as it drives me crazy when people try to quote baseball rules that aren't rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandemonium Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 I understand the rule and why a simultaneous catch goes to the offensive player, but I disagree with the premise that offense is more exciting than defense that many are stating as reasoning behind or justification of the rule. Attempting to look at yesterday's situation as an unbiased observer instead of a Bills fan, the play was exciting when the offense retained possession only because it resulted in a touchdown. If the same play happened at midfield, though, an interception would be more exciting than a catch on the sideline by the offense in my opinion. Its not as if a turnover results in less offense, it just changes the team with the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted December 6, 2010 Share Posted December 6, 2010 Had they called the offensive pass interference on that play the whole thing would have been a non issue.... We didn't deserve to win....but the officiating was rediculous.....the Vikings QB gets hit right as he is sliding....out comes the flag.... Fitz is visable down and someone comes in with a late hit......no call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted December 7, 2010 Share Posted December 7, 2010 Its got to go to someone. Cant just do a jump ball like the NBA. Why not? That could be funny to see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowery4 Posted December 7, 2010 Author Share Posted December 7, 2010 Why not? That could be funny to see They do something similar in rugby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts