26CornerBlitz Posted October 17, 2017 Author Share Posted October 17, 2017 Now the Jets' TD that was overturned. Tony Corrente and Alberto Riveron !@#$ed that call up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talley56 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 http://www.footballzebras.com/2017/10/15/jets-lose-touchdown-ball-tight-replay-reversal/ Week 6: Patriots at Jets (video) Jets tight end Austin Seferian-Jenkins scored what appeared to be a clear touchdown. On review, not only was the touchdown reversed, the ball went to the Patriots on a touchback. Seferian-Jenkins bobbles the ball at the 1-yard line and subsequently re-controls the ball. The bobble makes the ball a “loose ball” under the rules. Any loose ball (which includes passes) follows the catch process to establish possession. It may seem like an arbitrary designation, but this is a clear way to bookend loose ball calls by keeping all loose balls consistent, no matter how they occur. Seferian-Jenkins is going to the ground as he regains control of the ball, and lands out of bounds in the end zone. After landing, he is still struggling to demonstrate control of the ball, which is a determining factor if a player had “survived the ground,” establishing possession. This additional attempt to control takes the ball, still considered loose, out of bounds in the end zone, which is a touchback and loss of possession. No, this is just wrong, he regains control before going to the ground and landing out of bounds. He may have been holding it against his body but who's to say that isn't possession? At the very least there was no proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that he didn't have it which is what you are supposed to have in order to overturn something that was already called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Is that even physically possible in this instance? Guy is running full speed at a QB who is known to run with the ball, goes in for the tackle to bring him down, and is somehow supposed to just let up without even knowing if he threw the ball? My point is I don't think he did anything that was unnecessary which would be why the rule you are stating doesn't apply I've seen a lot of guys just shoving a QB in that position, and it's rarely called a foul. That seems like the MO these days. It's pretty unusual to see a defender wrap a QB up and take him to the ground like Barr did after he's thrown the ball, nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted October 17, 2017 Author Share Posted October 17, 2017 No, this is just wrong, he regains control before going to the ground and landing out of bounds. He may have been holding it against his body but who's to say that isn't possession? At the very least there was no proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that he didn't have it which is what you are supposed to have in order to overturn something that was already called. I agree. They blew the call 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 I don't think the NFL really wants the kind of play you are guys are arguing about. If the rule is really this bad that people think it is was the league needs. Then it needs to be written better. Like about 1000 other NFL rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talley56 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 I agree. They blew the call 100%. Yeah, it stinks. Thank you for posting all of this as I was wondering what the NFL's reaction would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 The Jets call was BS. The Rodgers hit was legal AND clean. My opinions. Exactly. Don't know why people think the hit on A Rod was dirty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 I always cringe when a Bills player or player for any team playing NE (my two favorite teams) stretches out at the goal line. It never seems worth it, because if the ball moves AT ALL in your hands and you're an inch from that line instead of just lining up and sneaking the inch the next play the other team gets the ball at the 20. Stupid rule, and it completely crushes your team. It almost always costs you the game as well, given how close these games are. It cost the Rams a game this season vs the Seahawks when Gurley fumbled it into the endzone trying to stretch across. It cost the Bills vs KC a couple years ago. Now it cost a team vs NE (don't care about the Jets at all, just sucks NE got a W) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 17, 2017 Share Posted October 17, 2017 Exactly. Don't know why people think the hit on A Rod was dirtyIt's explained in detail in this thread. Give it a read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 It's explained in detail in this thread. Give it a read. It was a legal hit It's explained in detail in this thread. Give it a read. Its football and it is a contact sport. If Rodgers doesn't want to be tackled then maybe he should switch to basketball or baseball because there was nothing wrong with that hit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 It's explained in detail in this thread. Give it a read. It was well explained why it was legal, why there was no flag, why there will be no suspension, fine, why multiple officiating expert corroborated the call. It's correct. Just because Rodgers was mad it doesn't change it. Not sure why it would be a challenge to understand why it was legal, but people argue from uninformed positions with misinterpretations of facts all the time. What WILL happen, to prove the above, is the rule will be examined in the offseason and revised, because the nfl doesn't like losing star performers to fractured collarbones and I do assert that Barr could have dove around him. He knew he was getting an intimidation hit on the QB who had release the ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 (edited) It was well explained why it was legal, why there was no flag, why there will be no suspension, fine, why multiple officiating expert corroborated the call. It's correct. Just because Rodgers was mad it doesn't change it. Not sure why it would be a challenge to understand why it was legal, but people argue from uninformed positions with misinterpretations of facts all the time. What WILL happen, to prove the above, is the rule will be examined in the offseason and revised, because the nfl doesn't like losing star performers to fractured collarbones and I do assert that Barr could have dove around him. He knew he was getting an intimidation hit on the QB who had release the ball Exactly. When I saw him to tell me to read it, I thought I miss read it but I read it right. The play looked clean and by rule it was clean, so not sure why a lot of fans think it was dirty. Edited October 18, 2017 by billsfan11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 It was a legal hit Its football and it is a contact sport. If Rodgers doesn't want to be tackled then maybe he should switch to basketball or baseball because there was nothing wrong with that hit Wow, an internet tough guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Exactly. When I saw him to tell me to read it, I thought I miss read it but I read it right. The play looked clean and by rule it was clean, so not sure why a lot of fans think it was dirty. People think it was dirty because he could have let up on the hit. But hitting QBs is their job and within the rules you get as many as you can to try and win at football Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 It was well explained why it was legal, why there was no flag, why there will be no suspension, fine, why multiple officiating expert corroborated the call. It's correct. Just because Rodgers was mad it doesn't change it. Not sure why it would be a challenge to understand why it was legal, but people argue from uninformed positions with misinterpretations of facts all the time. What WILL happen, to prove the above, is the rule will be examined in the offseason and revised, because the nfl doesn't like losing star performers to fractured collarbones and I do assert that Barr could have dove around him. He knew he was getting an intimidation hit on the QB who had release the ball And that's exactly why it was illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 It's explained in detail in this thread. Give it a read. It was legal. It wasn't late. It was not helmet to helmet. He got hit. He got driven to the ground and he got hurt. You know what that's called? A hit with an unfortunate outcome for the QB. It's part of the game and there was nothing wrong with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 It was legal. It wasn't late. It was not helmet to helmet. He got hit. He got driven to the ground and he got hurt. You know what that's called? A hit with an unfortunate outcome for the QB. It's part of the game and there was nothing wrong with it. You're wrong. Go read the rule, which is posted in full up-thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 (edited) And that's exactly why it was illegal. Not if you're literate. It's quite clear. Edited October 18, 2017 by Over 29 years of fanhood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 You're wrong. Go read the rule, which is posted in full up-thread. I assure you that I am not wrong. Go re-read the rule. Then re-watch the hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan130 Posted October 18, 2017 Share Posted October 18, 2017 Wow, an internet tough guy. Not at all actually, just proving my point. I played hockey and football my whole life, I have no sympathy for players crying over a perfectly legal hit, especially when you are making like 25 mil per year It was legal. It wasn't late. It was not helmet to helmet. He got hit. He got driven to the ground and he got hurt. You know what that's called? A hit with an unfortunate outcome for the QB. It's part of the game and there was nothing wrong with it. Yep. He seems to be getting a little defensive that he wasn't correct in saying it was a dirty hit. Nothing wrong with the hit at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts