The fair catch, that wasn't.

[CoudyBills]

On 1/4/2020 at 8:28 PM, RobbRiddick said:

If you need to rely on a BS call like that then you don't deserve to be there in the first place. Even at the time I thought I hope they overturn it because that's all that will be talked about after the game. Rather we won it fairly, sadly they didn't!

Fairly?  Rules exist for a reason.  I have a feeling if this were a Bills Pats game and New England did it every talking head would be writing about how the Bills were outcoached by Belichick because he had his guys coached up on the written rules.  I get where you are coming from, I immediately looked at my father and said overturn that, but the rules have to be enforced properly or none of them are worth anything.  

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

No Dawg, you're wrong here.  Not completely wrong, but wrong enough.

 

Yes, every fan in America would argue he gave himself up.  Yes, there are fans of teams who would argue, as you do, that the right thing to do was to correct the objectionable call and be on our way. 

 

Of course this is one of the reasons we lost.  When you take 6 points off the board in a 22-19 game, well the math is what it is.  It's not the sole reason, nor is it even perhaps the primary reason.  That matter is debatable.

 

You have a rule, or you do not.  We all have seen plays when a turnover occurred, or a player was fighting for extra yardage only to find later that the whistle had blown and whatever else happened, it was what it was.  We have all seen plays with inconsistent officiating where one action was determined to be penalty-worthy and a similar play a short time later was not called.  We have seen and heard "Great no call!" or "They are letting them play!" which, of course, are muttered because in other games the exact opposite happens.

 

The official on the field made the call, made it definitively and quickly.  The fact that the receiver was lazy in his job means little, just like a Qb who decides to give himself up 2 yards from the out of bounds line and gets tackled because he got lazy.  The fact that he got lazy in the field of play is irrelevant, except of course when the rule can be changed on the spot based on 'feelings'. Had the official ruled in Houston's favor, it's a judgement call. Still wrong, but you're going nowhere fast with that. 

 

Should have been a TD, was a TD until those Men in Black ran out and carved an on-the-spot exception to the rule.  

 

 

 

 

 

Except you are wrong.  The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up.  He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball.  There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him.  The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate.  Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.  

 

It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD.  Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.

5 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

He clearly and without question took none of the actions that constitute "giving himself up" per NFL rules.  And no, the refs have ZERO ability to change the rule book mid game.  ZERO.  At least they didn't until Saturday.  

 

 

 

Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.  

5 minutes ago, mannc said:

You keep repeating this, but are you aware that there is an actual rule regarding how a kickoff return man may "give himself up"?  If so, will you admit that that rule was not followed?   

 

Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up.  He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref.  Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred.  Case closed.  

[Motorin']

3 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

You're almost right, but you're wrong.   

 

When he threw it forward, it was an illegal forward pass.   The rules say that when an illegal forward pass is recovered in the end zone, it's a safety.  Two points to Buffalo, and Houston kicks from their 20.   

 

That was the correct call, and there is no questions about it.  

 

A Safety is the correct call. Not because it was recovered. You can not recover an illegal forward pass. It's a dead ball... It's a safety because the illegal forward pass happened in the end zone.

 

SECTION 29 SAFETY It is a Safety if the spot of enforcement for a foul by the offense is behind its own goal line, or if the ball is dead in possession of a team on or behind its own goal line when the impetus (3-17) comes from the team defending that goal line.

8 minutes ago, mannc said:

I don't think that's correct, but assuming it is, what should have been the result?  Safety?

I didn't think it was either. I assumed a defense could recover a forward lateral like a fumble. 

 

But the NFL rule book says that an illegal forward pass is a dead ball if it hits the ground and results in a 5 yard penalty from the spot of the illegal forward pass.

[Markaf431]

5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Except you are wrong.  The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up.  He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball.  There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him.  The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate.  Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.  

 

It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD.  Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.

 

Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.  

 

Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up.  He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref.  Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred.  Case closed.  

just because you keep saying judgement doesn’t make it true. In the specific instance of a kick return it specifically lists the ways to give themselves up. That isn’t up to interpretation or judgement. That is black and white.

[mannc]

8 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Except you are wrong.  The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up.  He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball.  There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him.  The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate.  Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.  

 

It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD.  Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.

 

Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.  

 

Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up.  He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref.  Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred.  Case closed.  

No.  They are not allowed to make such a judgment call on a kickoff return.  That might be true on a quarterback scramble or a defensive back who's just intercepted a pass, but there is a specific rule that governs how the return man must "give himself up" on a kickoff into the endzone and there is no room for the referee to make such a judgment call.   

Edited January 6, 2020 by mannc

[T&C]

6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Except you are wrong.  The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up.  He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball.  There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him.  The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate.  Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.  

 

It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD.  Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.

 

Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.  

 

Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up.  He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref.  Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred.  Case closed.  

You are completely wrong on this... look up rule 7 section 2 article 1 in the NFL rule book. Notice the word "and".

[mannc]

6 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

A Safety is the correct call. Not because it was recovered. You can not recover an illegal forward pass. It's a dead ball... It's a safety because the illegal forward pass happened in the end zone.

 

SECTION 29 SAFETY It is a Safety if the spot of enforcement for a foul by the offense is behind its own goal line, or if the ball is dead in possession of a team on or behind its own goal line when the impetus (3-17) comes from the team defending that goal line.

I didn't think it was either. I assumed a defense could recover a forward lateral like a fumble. 

 

But the NFL rule book says that an illegal forward pass is a dead ball if it hits the ground and results in a 5 yard penalty from the spot of the illegal forward pass.

I looked it up too and you are correct.  It should have been ruled a Bills safety, assuming he tossed it forward to the ref, which I think is what happened.  If he tossed it sideways or backward, it's a fumble and a live ball.  (Are we sure he tossed it forward?)

[Jauronimo]

6 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Except you are wrong.  The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up.  He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball.  There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him.  The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate.  Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.  

 

It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD.  Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.

 

Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.  

Except, the no return sign is only a signal to his own players and not recognized by any NFL rules as "giving yourself up".  There is no judgement on whether the return man met any of the criteria to give himself up, which has been explained to you about a dozen times.  The refs have no power to suggest a player meant to call a fair catch, or meant to take a knee, or meant to not field the kick off at all.  None. Zero. Zilch. 

 

Refs are required to make judgement on things that actually happened in the field of play.  Instead, they ruled a player meant to give himself up DESPITE the glaringly obvious fact that Carter took none of the actions which constitute giving oneself up per NFL rules.   Carter did NOT signal a fair catch, he did NOT take a knee, and he did NOT decide to let the ball land in the end zone.     Yet the referee determined he "gave himself up" all the same and thats good enough for you.  What is there to argue?

 

You are embarrassing yourself, but something tells me you're only getting started.

[GoBills808]

Just so everyone is clear- airplane arms is not a recognized signal by the refs. That's to alert your teammates you aren't returning the kick. You can signal fair catch, you can kneel, you can slide, or you can put another qualifying body part on the ground after catching the kickoff to 'give yourself up'. 

[Motorin']

4 minutes ago, mannc said:

I looked it up too and you are correct.  It should have been ruled a Bills safety, assuming he tossed it forward to the ref, which I think is what happened.  If he tossed it sideways or backward, it's a fumble and a live ball.  (Are we sure he tossed it forward?)

It definitely went forward. 

[Alphadawg7]

13 minutes ago, Markaf431 said:

just because you keep saying judgement doesn’t make it true. In the specific instance of a kick return it specifically lists the ways to give themselves up. That isn’t up to interpretation or judgement. That is black and white.

 

Refs can still make a judgement call in any circumstance that a player gave themselves up, and they have before.  

 

There is like 10 people in the world arguing it was a TD and they are all in this thread lol.  

Edited January 6, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[Jauronimo]

13 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up.  He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref.  Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred.  Case closed.  

Here is what 50 people are all trying to explain to you.  The "Safe" signal is not recognized as "giving himself up".  He still could have taken off and returned that ball for 6 at any moment.  And the CORRECT ruling on the field in that event would have been a touchdown.  

 

The officiating crew simply folded under the pressure of making such a meaningful call in a playoff game.  Likely because similarly sloppy BS was let go during the year but the reasons are irrelevant.  They abandoned the rule book and review protocol and opened up a pandora's box of "common sense". 

 

But you and others can sleep soundly knowing we don't have the pressure of playing next Sunday due to "technicalities" like a literal interpretation of the rule book.

[Alphadawg7]

Not a TD.  Nothing anyone can say to me will change that stance.  All good.  

 

We lost, but not because of this play IMO.  We lost because of other terrible gaffes by the refs, especially in OT.  Im done discussing this non issue.  Go Bills.

 

1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

Here is what 50 people are all trying to explain to you.  The "Safe" signal is not recognized as "giving himself up".  He still could have taken off and returned that ball for 6 at any moment.  And the CORRECT ruling on the field in that event would have been a touchdown.  

 

The officiating crew simply folded under the pressure of making such a meaningful call in a playoff game.  Likely because similarly sloppy BS was let go during the year but the reasons are irrelevant.  They abandoned the rule book and review protocol and opened up a pandora's box of "common sense". 

 

But you and others can sleep soundly knowing we don't have the pressure of playing next Sunday due to "technicalities" like a literal interpretation of the rule book.

 

I know what the safe signal is.  I also know its VERY CLEAR that the player was not returning the kick, and therefore was determined to give himself up.  Case closed.  Move on.  

 

Refs did screw us later in the game multiple times.  Complain about that and I am all on board.  Complaining about this weak play is silly to me.

Edited January 6, 2020 by Alphadawg7

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, Spiderweb said:

That must be cleaned up this off-season. The ball must be downed in the endzone. Even with current rule, it was a wrong call.

 

I suspect the rule will be changed to when the football crosses the goal line either in the air or not it is a touch back.  Will make fewer returns too which is what they really want.

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Did it remain a TD?  No, so apparently it was clear to them.  There is literally nothing to discuss here. 

 

Yet you are discussing it

[Alphadawg7]

3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

I suspect the rule will be changed to when the football crosses the goal line either in the air or not it is a touch back.  Will make fewer returns too which is what they really want.

 

Yet you are discussing it

 

Touche, yes got pulled in.  But only because like 5 or 6 people immediately all started making the same exact comments to me, so just replied back.  

[GoBills808]

Arguing for 'common sense' when there's a rule in place like

 

[4merper4mer]

13 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Refs can still make a judgement call in any circumstance that a player gave themselves up, and they have before.  

 

There is like 10 people in the world arguing it was a TD and they are all in this thread lol.  

If the rule book says he needs to sing"The Good Ship a Lollipop" to give himself up then that is what he needs to do.

[BuffaloRebound]

7 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Not a TD.  Nothing anyone can say to me will change that stance.  All good.  

 

We lost, but not because of this play IMO.  We lost because of other terrible gaffes by the refs, especially in OT.  Im done discussing this non issue.  Go Bills.

 

 

I know what the safe signal is.  I also know its VERY CLEAR that the player was not returning the kick, and therefore was determined to give himself up.  Case closed.  Move on.  

 

Refs did screw us later in the game multiple times.  Complain about that and I am all on board.  Complaining about this weak play is silly to me.

 

20 plus years ago I might’ve agreed with you. But wankers like Belichik spend thousands of hours reading through the rule book looking for an edge.  You can’t use judgement when not allowed even when it looks obvious because d-bags like Belichik will exploit that and have his returner fake the handsign to his team and return the kick.  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

28 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Except you are wrong.  The returner signaled NO RETURN prior to giving the ball up.  He established there would be NO RUN BACK via signal and gestured to the ref to give him the ball.  There were no players within the immediate vicinity of him.  The refs have the ability to make the determination if the player had chosen to give themself up, which they clearly did and was accurate.  Refs have the ability to rule that a player has chosen to give themselves up versus being touched down by contact.  

 

It was absolutely the correct call to remove the TD.  Its not the first time this season a player was ruled to have "given himself up" either.

 

Except the fact refs have the ability to make that determination, and like many rules, its often a judgement call.  

 

Here is what you and others are missing...refs are allowed to make a judgement call on whether a runner has given himself up.  He signaled no return and tried to hand the ball to the ref.  Pretty clear as day that he gave himself up, and refs concurred.  Case closed.  

Since we're just making up new ways to signal on this issue, and its basically anything goes,  next time the returner can just do an Enrico Pallazo so everyone in America (except the on-the-spot official) is on the same page. 

 

I suppose on the bright side it allows players in a league where you can be fined for wearing the wrong color socks the freedom to live their truth on kickoffs. 

[T&C]

17 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Not a TD.  Nothing anyone can say to me will change that stance.  All good.  

 

We lost, but not because of this play IMO.  We lost because of other terrible gaffes by the refs, especially in OT.  Im done discussing this non issue.  Go Bills.

 

 

I know what the safe signal is.  I also know its VERY CLEAR that the player was not returning the kick, and therefore was determined to give himself up.  Case closed.  Move on.  

 

Refs did screw us later in the game multiple times.  Complain about that and I am all on board.  Complaining about this weak play is silly to me.

Did you watch the video I put up... starting at 5:10?

 

If not I'm pretty sure you are either hard headed or don't read your quotes. Let us know.