The fair catch, that wasn't.

[Scott7975]

22 hours ago, JGMcD2 said:

The first sentence says it all there... I’m not sure where this snipit is from but it actually supports the argument of the “nutty” Bills fans so I’d like to keep this on the record. 
 

Let’s break it down!

 

If the ball reaches the end zone and touches the ground it’s an automatic touchback. That would imply the player catching it and dropping it... BUT if you continue to read it gives more context and clarity! 
 

1) There is no need for the player to even catch the ball if they don’t intend to return it 

 

The next portion is critical in interpreting “the ball reaching the end zone and touching the ground it’s an automatic touchback”

 

2) There’s no need for the player to pick up the ball and kneel the football. This needs to be coupled with the actual rule that once the ball hits the end zone on the kick off... there is no need for the player to pick it up and kneel it because it’s already dead. 
 

There is no example of a player catching the football and then dropping it on the ground without signaling fair catch, taking a knee OR both. Your example above is strictly applied to the ball reaching the end zone in the air on the kickoff and then hitting the ground in the end zone... nothing else. It’s detailing that constitutes a dead ball and the player need not touch it to confirm a dead ball. 

 

That is rule is only true if it hits the ground before touching a player. 

22 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Sorry, but the rules changed with the new kickoff rules.  
 

If the ball on a kickoff touches the ground in the end zone without being touched - it is now a touchback regardless of where it hit the ground first.  It can hit at the 10 and bounce into the end zone and it is a touchback - like a punt.  The Bills/Jets kickoff would be a touchback today.  They updated the rule.  The ball is ruled dead the moment it hits the ground in the end zone.

 

In the original Bills/Jets game because no Bill touched it outside of the end zone - if Gillislee had recovered it in the end zone - it would have been a touchback not a safety.  It would only have been a safety if aBills player muffed the kickoff in the field of play and the ensuing momentum put the ball in the end zone where a Bills player would have recovered it.

 

I would love to see a collection of every touchback this season - because I swear I have seen the exact same thing several times - guy catches the ball and just tosses it to the ref.  It is nearly impossible to look for touchbacks though because it is such a boring play.  
 

I assumed because they do not show much of the kickoffs - on these deep kicks if they signal the refs and catch it - the play was over, but what I do not know is if they talked about that.  The referee on the field obviously thought it was a live ball - so he did not believe it was giving up, but as with all rule changes - maybe he was living in the past for a second.  

that rule is only true if it hits the ground first. The player caught the ball so that rule doesn’t apply. 

Edited January 6, 2020 by Scott7975

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Josh Intended to pass the ball when sacked 

 

YET the refs called Intentional grounding 

[Scott7975]

20 hours ago, row_33 said:

no it doesn’t

 

any action of dismissing a run back is enough, by word or hand wave or telling the official you will not be coming out of the EZ if it gets there

 

he clearly forfeited a return by his actions

 

give it up already....

Please show me those rules. Those aren’t in any rule that I’ve found. If you haven’t seen that in the actual rules then stop misinforming people. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bizarre-bills-kickoff-touchdown-overturned-after-officials-rule-the-returner-gave-himself-up/

 

Bizarre Bills kickoff touchdown overturned after officials rule the returner 'gave himself up'

The NFL is going to be taking a closer look at how kickoffs are fielded from now on

 

 

Usually, returners will call for a fair catch or take a knee in the end zone after they catch the ball, but Carter did neither. The officials quickly came together to discuss the original call, and moments later, head referee Tony Corrente announced that the ruling would be overturned. 

 

 

While by rule it should be regarded as a fumble and touchdown, he is not the first kick returner this season to fail to either kneel or call for a fair catch on a kickoff. 

You can't change the rules MID GAME!!!!! 

[Mango]

2 hours ago, BarleyNY said:

The ability of fans to delude themselves is unreal.  Now you’re adding this pretend slight to the list?  Wow. 

 

I don't think it was a slight. I was pointing out the called back TD was in part due to a mistake by the ref. They overturned the result  because of it. I pointed out an additional mistake by the ref that we had to live with. I don't think the ref's were slighting the Bills by any means. 

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

 

 

 

 

 

[ArtVandalay]

On 1/4/2020 at 8:24 PM, BuffaloBillsGospel said:

Because he clearly gave himself up and that would have been the most horrendous call in the history of the sport, just my opinion though.

He didn't follow the rule... Wave, kneel, or just let the ball land untouched. He screwed up, had a brain fart. That's on him. Not the refs to fix.

 

It was our tuck rule, and the NFL tore up the rule book and blew it. It's a joke.

Edited January 6, 2020 by ArtVandalay

[Jauronimo]

23 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

I have seriously seen this happen multiple times in other games. It is common. Trust me.

How was it ruled these multiple times?

[ArtVandalay]

7 minutes ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bizarre-bills-kickoff-touchdown-overturned-after-officials-rule-the-returner-gave-himself-up/

 

Bizarre Bills kickoff touchdown overturned after officials rule the returner 'gave himself up'

The NFL is going to be taking a closer look at how kickoffs are fielded from now on

 

 

Usually, returners will call for a fair catch or take a knee in the end zone after they catch the ball, but Carter did neither. The officials quickly came together to discuss the original call, and moments later, head referee Tony Corrente announced that the ruling would be overturned. 

 

 

While by rule it should be regarded as a fumble and touchdown, he is not the first kick returner this season to fail to either kneel or call for a fair catch on a kickoff. 

You can't change the rules MID GAME!!!!! 

Actually, by rule it was an illegal forward pass, down at spot, saftey.

[Jauronimo]

18 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Would love to see even one

Here's one.

 

 

[dave mcbride]

6 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

How was it ruled these multiple times?

No one did anything. That is, I saw a guy catch it, not take a knee, look at the official or some such, jog off, and then it was done.

[Hsker4life]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

No one did anything. That is, I saw a guy catch it, not take a knee, look at the official or some such, jog off, and then it was done.

Link?

[ms.sydney]

I have watched the replay of the kickoff multiple times, and have also read the NFL rulebook. As previously stated in this thread, a play ends when the player takes a knee. The official in the endzone stepped back from the ball when it was tossed his way because it was a live ball. The whistle had not been blown, so the play was not over. No where in the rule book does it state "giving yourself up". The NFL screwed up this call royally. I'm not saying the Bills would have won if the touchdown was not reversed-we will never know the answer to that.

 

But let's put this scenario in a different perspective. Let's say hypothetically  the Bills are winning by 4 and are running out the clock. Time is stopped with 10 seconds left and Houston has no timeouts left. Josh just needs to take a knee and game over-right? Instead, Josh takes the snap, stands there for a couple of seconds, then throws the ball towards an official. The official backs away from the ball, and a Houston player picks it up and runs for a TD. Now, did Josh give himself up? Not according to NFL rules. Is it common sense that he meant to? Probably, but players and officials are not mind readers which is why they use signals and motions to convey what is going on. The receiver did not convey his intent by not taking a knee, thus the ruling on the field that it was a live ball and a Buffalo TD.

[Jauronimo]

Just now, dave mcbride said:

No one did anything. That is, I saw a guy catch it, not take a knee, look at the official or some such, jog off, and then it was done.

Right.  So he didn't catch it, advance the ball a few steps forward, and then toss it to no one, then stand there as the kicking team recovered the ball, and it wasn't ruled a TD on the field, and subsequently the back judge, who is the only person on the field who can make the call, wasn't overruled by mysterious mechanisms involving back up officials thus negating any chance for video review and the correct call being made on the field of play. 

 

So in other words, this hasn't happened ever in the history of NFL football and is therefore significant. 

[dave mcbride]

Just now, Jauronimo said:

Right.  So he didn't catch it, advance the ball a few steps forward, and then toss it to no one, then stand there as the kicking team recovered the ball, and it wasn't ruled a TD on the field, and subsequently the back judge, who is the only person on the field who can make the call, wasn't overruled by mysterious mechanisms involving back up officials thus negating any chance for video review and the correct call being made on the field of play. 

 

So in other words, this hasn't happened ever in the history of NFL football and is therefore significant. 

The league REALLY wants teams to NOT return kicks, but they can't eliminate the play entirely the way they revised the rules in 2018. If it's fielded outside the end zone and on the field of play, so be it, but the goal is to radically reduce the return rate.

 

You seem to really want to litigate this and win on some sort of technicality, but there's a concept in law called the rule of reason, and even though it's specifically tied to antitrust law, it applies here. He had no intention of returning it, it was kicked deep in the end zone, he signaled that he wasn't going to return it, and he gave the ball to the ref. No one outside of the craziest of Buffalo fans thinks that the league screwed up here. The person who screwed up was the over-officious ref who didn't adhere to the spirit of the law. 

To illustrate my first point, there's this: "We're all concerned about the safety of the game,” said Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, a member of the competition committee. ... Murphy called the kickoff “by far the most dangerous play in the game.” The injury data shows, he said, that players are five times more likely to suffer a concussion on a kickoff than on a play from the line of scrimmage. According to McKay, there were 71 concussions suffered by players on kickoffs over the past three seasons. League leaders have said they will consider eliminating kickoffs from the sport if the play cannot be made safer. Murphy said he is “cautiously optimistic” about the proposed changes. Asked whether it’s possible to make the kickoff safe enough to avoid eliminating it, he said: “Time will tell. But I think so. You’ve got a lot of smart people here that coached a lot of football. I think they realize that this is a dangerous play.” But the changes must have an immediate effect, he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2018/05/02/the-nfl-is-going-to-change-its-kickoff-rules-to-try-to-keep-the-play-in-the-game/

 

 

13 minutes ago, Hsker4life said:

Link?

No link, of course. It's from memory. Man, you guys are laughably litigious about this. 

[BarleyNY]

27 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

I don't think it was a slight. I was pointing out the called back TD was in part due to a mistake by the ref. They overturned the result  because of it. I pointed out an additional mistake by the ref that we had to live with. I don't think the ref's were slighting the Bills by any means. 

Oh, then I misunderstood.  That’s my bad. Apologies. 

[ms.sydney]

13 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The league REALLY wants teams to NOT return kicks, but they can't eliminate the play entirely the way they revised the rules in 2018. If it's fielded outside the end zone and on the field of play, so be it, but the goal is to radically reduce the return rate.

 

You seem to really want to litigate this and win on some sort of technicality, but there's a concept in law called the rule of reason, and even though it's specifically tied to antitrust law, it applies here. He had no intention of returning it, it was kicked deep in the end zone, he signaled that he wasn't going to return it, and he gave the ball to the ref. No one outside of the craziest of Buffalo fans thinks that the league screwed up here. The person who screwed up was the over-officious ref who didn't adhere to the spirit of the law. 

 

 

 

 

Again, how can anyone know what another's intention is? We are not mind readers. Thus the reason for the clear and concise rules the NFL has! This is not a court of law, it is a game with specific rules that should be followed, but obviously were not in the game.

[dave mcbride]

Just now, ms.sydney said:

Again, how can anyone know what another's intention is? We are not mind readers. Thus the reason for the clear and concise rules the NFL has! This is not a court of law, it is a game with specific rules that should be followed, but obviously were not in the game.

Tell that to the refs who apply the PI rules.  

[Jauronimo]

15 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The league REALLY wants teams to NOT return kicks, but they can't eliminate the play entirely the way they revised the rules in 2018. If it's fielded outside the end zone and on the field of play, so be it, but the goal is to radically reduce the return rate.

 

You seem to really want to litigate this and win on some sort of technicality, but there's a concept in law called the rule of reason, and even though it's specifically tied to antitrust law, it applies here. He had no intention of returning it, it was kicked deep in the end zone, he signaled that he wasn't going to return it, and he gave the ball to the ref. No one outside of the craziest of Buffalo fans thinks that the league screwed up here. The person who screwed up was the over-officious ref who didn't adhere to the spirit of the law. 

To illustrate my first point, there's this: "We're all concerned about the safety of the game,” said Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, a member of the competition committee. ... Murphy called the kickoff “by far the most dangerous play in the game.” The injury data shows, he said, that players are five times more likely to suffer a concussion on a kickoff than on a play from the line of scrimmage. According to McKay, there were 71 concussions suffered by players on kickoffs over the past three seasons. League leaders have said they will consider eliminating kickoffs from the sport if the play cannot be made safer. Murphy said he is “cautiously optimistic” about the proposed changes. Asked whether it’s possible to make the kickoff safe enough to avoid eliminating it, he said: “Time will tell. But I think so. You’ve got a lot of smart people here that coached a lot of football. I think they realize that this is a dangerous play.” But the changes must have an immediate effect, he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2018/05/02/the-nfl-is-going-to-change-its-kickoff-rules-to-try-to-keep-the-play-in-the-game/

 

 

No link, of course. It's from memory. Man, you guys are laughably litigious about this. 

Thats the longest cop out I have seen in a while.  

 

ESPN commentators and multiple other media members know that the league dropped the ball here.  Had they kept the ruling on the field it would have automatically been reviewed in NYC to get the call correct.  How and why was the back judge overruled?  Why was protocol abandoned?

 

This many pages in you're just willfully ignorant.  

[ArtVandalay]

20 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The league REALLY wants teams to NOT return kicks, but they can't eliminate the play entirely the way they revised the rules in 2018. If it's fielded outside the end zone and on the field of play, so be it, but the goal is to radically reduce the return rate.

 

You seem to really want to litigate this and win on some sort of technicality, but there's a concept in law called the rule of reason, and even though it's specifically tied to antitrust law, it applies here. He had no intention of returning it, it was kicked deep in the end zone, he signaled that he wasn't going to return it, and he gave the ball to the ref. No one outside of the craziest of Buffalo fans thinks that the league screwed up here. The person who screwed up was the over-officious ref who didn't adhere to the spirit of the law. 

To illustrate my first point, there's this: "We're all concerned about the safety of the game,” said Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, a member of the competition committee. ... Murphy called the kickoff “by far the most dangerous play in the game.” The injury data shows, he said, that players are five times more likely to suffer a concussion on a kickoff than on a play from the line of scrimmage. According to McKay, there were 71 concussions suffered by players on kickoffs over the past three seasons. League leaders have said they will consider eliminating kickoffs from the sport if the play cannot be made safer. Murphy said he is “cautiously optimistic” about the proposed changes. Asked whether it’s possible to make the kickoff safe enough to avoid eliminating it, he said: “Time will tell. But I think so. You’ve got a lot of smart people here that coached a lot of football. I think they realize that this is a dangerous play.” But the changes must have an immediate effect, he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2018/05/02/the-nfl-is-going-to-change-its-kickoff-rules-to-try-to-keep-the-play-in-the-game/

 

 

No link, of course. It's from memory. Man, you guys are laughably litigious about this. 

Now do the Brady Tuck Rule.

[dave mcbride]

1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

Thats the longest cop out I have seen in a while.  

 

ESPN commentators and multiple other media members know that the league dropped the ball here.  Had they kept the ruling on the field it would have automatically been reviewed in NYC to get the call correct.  How and why was the back judge overruled?  Why was protocol abandoned?

 

This many pages in you're just willfully ignorant.  

LOL, Jauronimo. It's not a cop out because if it was, I'd be sheepish. I'm not. In fact, I'm absolutely convinced I'm right about this, which is why I'm bowing out. I'm not going to convince you, and you're certainly not going to convince me. Peace.

[pennstate10]

19 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Tell that to the refs who apply the PI rules.  

 

refs aren’t human, they make mistakes and overlook violations all the time. Like holding for instance. 

so I think it likely that a KO returner at some point has caught the ball and tosses it to official and official signals touchback. Although I can’t point to such a play. 
 

If, in the Bills game, the official caught the ball and signaled touchback, I don’t anyone would have said anything. 
 

BUT , in this game, the official enforced the rule. And then he lost his balls to the men in black. 
 

think of it like holding. A common rules violation often not called. But when it is called and confirmed by TV replay, I’ve never seen an official back off after men in black told him the OL didn’t intend to hold there. Never. 
 

it was poorly handled by the NFL and we haven’t heard the last of this 

[Do The Reich Thing]

22 minutes ago, pennstate10 said:

 

refs aren’t human, they make mistakes and overlook violations all the time. Like holding for instance. 

so I think it likely that a KO returner at some point has caught the ball and tosses it to official and official signals touchback. Although I can’t point to such a play. 
 

If, in the Bills game, the official caught the ball and signaled touchback, I don’t anyone would have said anything. 
 

BUT , in this game, the official enforced the rule. And then he lost his balls to the men in black. 
 

think of it like holding. A common rules violation often not called. But when it is called and confirmed by TV replay, I’ve never seen an official back off after men in black told him the OL didn’t intend to hold there. Never. 
 

it was poorly handled by the NFL and we haven’t heard the last of this 

100% agree with you, but I have seen nothing come out of this... even a complaint from the Bills since.

[4merper4mer]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Tell that to the refs who apply the PI rules.  

That is a completely different rule and, for obvious reasons, subjective.  The rule on the kickoff and how one gives himself up is objective.

Edited January 6, 2020 by 4merper4mer

[MDH]

On 1/4/2020 at 8:31 PM, peterpan said:

I'm sorry, but no he didn't.  By rule, the only way to clearly give yourself up, is by calling fair catch, or knelling.  I guess he could have laid down and curled up in a ball as well.  

 

By rule, he fumbled. 

 

By rule it was a forward pass and should have been a safety.

 

This whole "intent" thing is ridiculous. I don't care what a player's intent was, when Josh Allen throws a pick that wasn't his intent. You follow the rules of the game and don't judge what a player was intending to do.

[mannc]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

The league REALLY wants teams to NOT return kicks, but they can't eliminate the play entirely the way they revised the rules in 2018. If it's fielded outside the end zone and on the field of play, so be it, but the goal is to radically reduce the return rate.

 

You seem to really want to litigate this and win on some sort of technicality, but there's a concept in law called the rule of reason, and even though it's specifically tied to antitrust law, it applies here. He had no intention of returning it, it was kicked deep in the end zone, he signaled that he wasn't going to return it, and he gave the ball to the ref. No one outside of the craziest of Buffalo fans thinks that the league screwed up here. The person who screwed up was the over-officious ref who didn't adhere to the spirit of the law. 

To illustrate my first point, there's this: "We're all concerned about the safety of the game,” said Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, a member of the competition committee. ... Murphy called the kickoff “by far the most dangerous play in the game.” The injury data shows, he said, that players are five times more likely to suffer a concussion on a kickoff than on a play from the line of scrimmage. According to McKay, there were 71 concussions suffered by players on kickoffs over the past three seasons. League leaders have said they will consider eliminating kickoffs from the sport if the play cannot be made safer. Murphy said he is “cautiously optimistic” about the proposed changes. Asked whether it’s possible to make the kickoff safe enough to avoid eliminating it, he said: “Time will tell. But I think so. You’ve got a lot of smart people here that coached a lot of football. I think they realize that this is a dangerous play.” But the changes must have an immediate effect, he said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2018/05/02/the-nfl-is-going-to-change-its-kickoff-rules-to-try-to-keep-the-play-in-the-game/

 

 

No link, of course. It's from memory. Man, you guys are laughably litigious about this. 

Show me where the “rule of reason” is incorporated into the NFL rulebook as a whole or in this particular rule.  Does the “rule of reason” also apply to helmet to helmet tackles or technically illegal crackback blocks, as well?  if there is a rule of reason that applies generally, then every rule is subject to the referee’s opinion on any given play, right?  I guess this would also apply to play clock violations too, because who cares about a second or two during an NFL game, right? 

[dave mcbride]

11 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

That is a completely different rule and, for obvious reasons, subjective.  The rule on the kickoff and how one gives himself up is objective.

Bottom line for me: winning an athletic contest through a non-athletic event that has some hazy and recently dramatically altered "rule" attached to it that essentially constitutes a land mine for an unknowing participant is BS and unworthy of real sports competition. Think of George Brett and the pine tar rule. I truly think less of Bills fans who are intent on dying on this hill. 

Just now, mannc said:

Show me where the “rule of reason” is incorporated into the NFL rulebook as a whole or in this particular rule.  Does the “rule of reason” also apply to helmet to helmet tackles or technically illegal crackback blocks, as well?  if there is a rule of reason that applies generally, then every rule is subject to the referee’s opinion on any given play, right?  I guess this would also apply to play clock violations too, because who cares about a second or two during an NFL game, right? 

See my response above.

[mannc]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

Bottom line for me: winning an athletic contest through a non-athletic event that has some hazy and recently dramatically altered "rule" attached to it that essentially constitutes a land mine for an unknowing participant is BS and unworthy of real sports competition. Think of George Brett and the pine tar rule. I truly think less of Bills fans who are intent on dying on this hill. 

See my response above.

I'm not sure which response you're referring to, but i assume you are acknowledging that the NFL rulebook does not expressly adopt this rule of reason concept that applies to US Antitrust law.  You're just saying it should.  Unless I'm missing something...

[GoBills808]

Still waiting to see some evidence of this happening. Shouldn't take this long as it reportedly occurs all the time

3 hours ago, Hsker4life said:

Link?

You'll get no link and you'll like it!

[BillsFan692]

On 1/5/2020 at 2:09 PM, MJS said:

Tre could have gotten up and returned the INT. He got right up and instead of returning it, he ran the opposite direction.

He gave himself up by downing the ball,something the punt returner did not do

[Jauronimo]

10 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Bottom line for me: winning an athletic contest through a non-athletic event that has some hazy and recently dramatically altered "rule" attached to it that essentially constitutes a land mine for an unknowing participant is BS and unworthy of real sports competition. Think of George Brett and the pine tar rule. I truly think less of Bills fans who are intent on dying on this hill. 

See my response above.

I don't know what to think of a person who still maintains that the correct ruling on the field should be based on the officials whim and your own personal level of comfort with winning or losing based on the outcome.  

[dave mcbride]

4 minutes ago, mannc said:

I'm not sure which response you're referring to, but i assume you are acknowledging that the NFL rulebook does not expressly adopt this rule of reason concept that applies to US Antitrust law.  You're just saying it should.  Unless I'm missing something...

The rule of reason is about approaching anti-trust reasonably - that is, if a natural monopoly emerges but doesn't result in restraint of trade/harm to consumers, then let it go. So yes, I do think it applies in a general sense. There are a ton of penalties that go uncalled every game because they're away from the play. And tons of ticky tack stuff doesn't get called because it's, well, ticky tack. Anyone who denies this is either a fool or a knave. Going after a returner for doing the arm sweep followed by the toss to the official on a play that was effectively and obviously dead (7-8 yards deep in the EZ) and in which intent was CLEARLY obvious is beneath sports fans (as opposed to game-y -- in the hardcore boardgaming sense -- rules obsessives always looking to lawyer their way to a better place). 

[MJS]

1 minute ago, BillsFan692 said:

He gave himself up by downing the ball,something the punt returner did not do

He didn't down the ball, though. He was on the ground do to the play. The only indication that he gave himself up was running backwards instead of forwards.

 

Anyways, I believe the returner didn't down the ball either. I just think Tre should have done more to indicate that he was giving himself up.

[GoBills808]

 

@dave mcbride-"Touchdown!"

[GoBills808]

19 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

I don't know what to think of a person who still maintains that the correct ruling on the field should be based on the officials whim and your own personal level of comfort with winning or losing based on the outcome.  

I think we need to go over the rulebook with a fine tooth comb and decide how each one makes people feel. The best way to officiate pro football games is nearly ALWAYS gauging individual fans' personal feelings about the rules.

[reddogblitz]

4 hours ago, SlimShady'sGhost said:

While by rule it should be regarded as a fumble and touchdown, he is not the first kick returner this season to fail to either kneel or call for a fair catch on a kickoff. 

 

Another Rule also says all scoring plays have to be video reviewed.  It was ruled a scoring play on the field.  they changed that rule too. 

[Jauronimo]

30 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The rule of reason is about approaching anti-trust reasonably - that is, if a natural monopoly emerges but doesn't result in restraint of trade/harm to consumers, then let it go. So yes, I do think it applies in a general sense. There are a ton of penalties that go uncalled every game because they're away from the play. And tons of ticky tack stuff doesn't get called because it's, well, ticky tack. Anyone who denies this is either a fool or a knave. Going after a returner for doing the arm sweep followed by the toss to the official on a play that was effectively and obviously dead (7-8 yards deep in the EZ) and in which intent was CLEARLY obvious is beneath sports fans (as opposed to game-y -- in the hardcore boardgaming sense -- rules obsessives always looking to lawyer their way to a better place). 

Hes OBVIOUSLY down and gave himself up until the day someone changes their mind.   They see the coverage is dogging it down the field because the kick was 7 yards deep in the end zone, and what person in their right mind wouldn't down it 7 yards deep, and after two steps and a balk toward the ref they run it out for a big play...Only to have it called back of course because the ref assumed that the returner intended to take a knee.  Then you have controversy and we need to discuss a mechanism by which to determine when a player is indeed giving themselves up and when they are an eligible runner.

 

Wait, what?  We already have that exact f@#$ing system for that exact f@#$oing reason?!?!?! WELL I'LL BE F@#$ED!!!

Edited January 6, 2020 by Jauronimo

[GoBills808]

Everyone just needs to calm down and use some common sense...you know, like how we do with literally nothing else in society, since forever.

[RichRiderBills]

"Cooler heads shall prevail." Waves hand jedi style.

 

 

 

[T&C]

Not sure if this has been posted... skip to 5:10: