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.

[Jauronimo]

Just now, Alphadawg7 said:

 

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.  

When you come into a thread with no knowledge of relevant rules, understanding of the events, declare it a non-issue, and tell us all that we're crazy idiots for even discussing the topic your odds of a swift rebuke increase dramatically. 

 

Sometime down the road when a huge return gets called back because a ref circumvented the rule book in favor of "common sense" to determine a runner gave himself prior to the return I expect to see an equally fervent stand on your part in defense of a refs right to arbitrary bull####.  There are rules for a reason.   I don't see how anyone who follows the game wouldn't be alarmed by the precedent just set.

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

When you come into a thread with no knowledge of relevant rules, understanding of the events, declare it a non-issue, and tell us all that we're crazy idiots for even discussing the topic your odds of a swift rebuke increase dramatically. 

 

Sometime down the road when a huge return gets called back because a ref circumvented the rule book in favor of "common sense" to determine a runner gave himself prior to the return I expect to see an equally fervent stand on your part in defense of a refs right to arbitrary bull####.  There are rules for a reason.   I don't see how anyone who follows the game wouldn't be alarmed by the precedent just set.

But on the plus side, we've established a very safe, very inclusive non-binary policy toward downing kickoffs, so there's that.

[T&C]

7 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

When you come into a thread with no knowledge of relevant rules, understanding of the events, declare it a non-issue, and tell us all that we're crazy idiots for even discussing the topic your odds of a swift rebuke increase dramatically. 

 

Sometime down the road when a huge return gets called back because a ref circumvented the rule book in favor of "common sense" to determine a runner gave himself prior to the return I expect to see an equally fervent stand on your part in defense of a refs right to arbitrary bull####.  There are rules for a reason.   I don't see how anyone who follows the game wouldn't be alarmed by the precedent just set.

He strikes me as someone who wants to challenge you to a game of Battleship... but, you have to wear a mirror on your forehead.

[Alphadawg7]

9 minutes ago, T&C said:

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.

 

You mean the video you put up where the specialist on NFL rules coverage agreed with the ruling?  Yeah I saw it, and I saw it live on TV too.  

 

I agree the player gave himself up, and have no issue with the refs making that determination based on the series of events.  I have seen the refs make other "he gave himself up" rulings before too in various situations.  

[Jauronimo]

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

But on the plus side, we've established a very safe, very inclusive non-binary policy toward downing kickoffs, so there's that.

I can't wait to officiate a game.  I'm hoping next year, New England v Buffalo.

 

Brady 5 step drop, clean pocket, all day to pass and he gives himself up, loss of 8 on the play.  Neal free release, he gets behind the secondary, its caught, theres nothing but daylight AND he gives himself up 40 yards shy of the endzone.  Bills punting, Edelman back to return, hes breaks a tackle hes free, hes going to score and NOOOO its been called back, he gave himself up at the spot of the catch. 

 

Allen on the QB keeper, and theres a gust of wind, the BALL  IS OUT, the ball is out, and New England says they have the ball!!! The officials are huddling and it turns out Allen gave himself up nano-seconds before the fumble.  Wow, great judgement by the officials. Top notch common sense.

 

New England down by 1, 2 seconds on the clock and they're attempting the game winning field goal and OH the holder gave himself up, turnover on downs.  Buffalo Wins!!

[pennstate10]

44 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.  

 

Two points here:

1)  The situation in the Bills game was completely unprecedented in the NFL.  By that, I mean a KO returner not signaling fair catch, catching a ball in the end zone, not taking a knee,  tossing the ball to the ref, followed by the kicking team recovering ball, and ref signalinig TD.  That sequence of events is completely unprecedented in the NFL.  In other walks of life (law, medicine, science), when one encounters an uprecedented event, most rational people look to precedents from similar (not identical) events.  The closest precedent is the SC St/Clemson game this year in college football, where the same sequence of events occurred, and was ruled a TD for the kicking team.  The only difference in these two events was that the SC St player tossed the ball backward to the ref, and 1-2 sec after he tossed the ball, had a look of horror on his face as he realized that he F@##$%$ up.

 

2) Given that this play is unprecedented, I'm unsure whether it should have been a TD or illegal forward pass.  A forward pass implies a receiver; there was none here.  If a QB is being pulled down by the pass rush, feels the ball coming out, but is able to push it forward, is that a forward pass or a fumble?  What about an NFL receiver who catches a pass, runs a few steps and trips over a turf monster, and slams the ball down (slightly forward) in disgust, never begin touched down.  Is that a fumble?  An illegal forward pass? or is he ruled to have given himself up?  I sort of think I've seen that ruled a fumble in the past.

[T&C]

15 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

You mean the video you put up where the specialist on NFL rules coverage agreed with the ruling?  Yeah I saw it, and I saw it live on TV too.  

 

I agree the player gave himself up, and have no issue with the refs making that determination based on the series of events.  I have seen the refs make other "he gave himself up" rulings before too in various situations.  

The "specialist" was wrong as *****... I'm good with you and I see your angle, so keep on keeping on.

[GoBills808]

16 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

I can't wait to officiate a game.  I'm hoping next year, New England v Buffalo.

 

Brady 5 step drop, clean pocket, all day to pass and he gives himself up, loss of 8 on the play.  Neal free release, he gets behind the secondary, its caught, theres nothing but daylight AND he gives himself up 40 yards shy of the endzone.  Bills punting, Edelman back to return, hes breaks a tackle hes free, hes going to score and NOOOO its been called back, he gave himself up at the spot of the catch. 

 

Allen on the QB keeper, and theres a gust of wind, the BALL  IS OUT, the ball is out, and New England says they have the ball!!! The officials are huddling and it turns out Allen gave himself up nano-seconds before the fumble.  Wow, great judgement by the officials. Top notch common sense.

 

New England down by 1, 2 seconds on the clock and they're attempting the game winning field goal and OH the holder gave himself up, turnover on downs.  Buffalo Wins!!

This is totally ridiculous.

 

As if we'd ever have the lead on the Patriots before things get weird.

[Scott7975]

4 hours 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.

 

The only one dying on a hill is you because you are flat out wrong.  The rule states you kneel the ball period

 

This isn't some grey area thing.  The rulebook literally spells it out.

 

 

 

I mean watch this thing.  It looks like the damn mafia coming from Vegas and bullying this guy out of a call.

Edited January 7, 2020 by Scott7975

[Scott7975]

2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

He gave himself up.  Play was over.  0% chance you or any other person on this board would agree it would be a TD had a Bills player did that.  All of you would be yelling he gave himself up.  Anyone claiming otherwise is lying.

 

Alpha, I love you man but you are wrong.  The only way to give yourself up in this situation is to go to the ground.  It is clearly spelled out in the rulebook.  If this happened the other way for the Bills, I would do the same I am doing now... going to the actual NFL rulebook and looking up the actual rule.  Not some mythical spirit of the rule or feeling of how it should be but the actual official rule.  Then I would be embarrassed that our Bills messed up and I would be yelling about how the coaches didn't prepare these guys.

 

and don't call me a liar.  There are 3 things I hate in this world... liars, cheaters, and thieves.

Edited January 7, 2020 by Scott7975

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Alpha, I love you man but you are wrong.  The only way to give yourself up in this situation is to go to the ground.  It is clearly spelled out in the rulebook.  If this happened the other way for the Bills, I would do the same I am doing now... going to the actual NFL rulebook and looking up the actual rule.  Not some mythical spirit of the rule or feeling of how it should be but the actual official rule.  Then I would be embarrassed that our Bills messed up and I would be yelling about how the coaches didn't prepare these guys.

 

Its all good man, I just don't have an issue with the refs ruling here.  

[Scott7975]

1 hour 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.  

 

Alpha you are wrong.  Just flat out wrong.  For one more time I will post the rule from the official rulebook

 

Quote

ARTICLE 5. FREE KICK CROSSES GOAL LINE

It is a touchback, if a free kick:

1. touches the ground in the end zone before being touched by the receiving team.
2. goes out of bounds behind the receiving team’s goal line;
3. strikes the receiving team’s goal post, uprights, or cross bar; or
4. is downed in the end zone by the receiving team.

 

There IS NO GIVING YOURSELF UP.  There IS NO JUDGEMENT CALL.  The rule is clearly defined.  "DOWNED IN THE END ZONE BY THE RECEIVING TEAM." That is the rule.  You down the ball by going to the ground.  That is the only way to down the ball.  There is no "giving yourself up."  That is something entirely different and not applicable in this case.

[Pokebball]

8 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. 

Do you really want to give game officials this, "rule of reason" you speak of?  That'll be fun.

[Pokebball]

1 hour 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.  

The offense got into the victory formation, clearly signaling they were going to take a knee and run off the last few seconds before the end of the first half.  But man, they didn't take that knee.  They faked it and took off running.  Didn't we see this earlier this year (Ravens I believe).

 

I can see every team now, giving this "I'm not running it out of the endzone sign" and then running it out.

 

We've got a very simple rule in place, wouldn't it be easier to just use it?  Why make it as difficult as you seem to want to make it.  Just take the dang knee and let's move on.

[Scott7975]

21 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Its all good man, I just don't have an issue with the refs ruling here.  

 

Its cool you don't have an issue.  Telling people they are wrong when they are not is different.  We don't need grey area rules when they are clearly defined and defined for a reason.  There simply is no judgement call on a clearly defined rule.

[GaryPinC]

3 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

WOW lmao...16 pages on a topic thats a non-topic?  

 

Come on, no one can really be arguing that we should have been given the TD there right?  I mean its clear he gave himself up, whining about its just being poor sports about the loss.  

 

ONE MILLION PERCENT no one would be claiming that was a TD had a Bills player been the one receiving and did that.  Anyone who claims they would still see it as a TD for the kicking team had the Bills been receiving that kick and that happened is lying.  

Actually, I don't believe the refs cut us that break.  That's their Billsy.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, pennstate10 said:

 

Two points here:

1)  The situation in the Bills game was completely unprecedented in the NFL.  By that, I mean a KO returner not signaling fair catch, catching a ball in the end zone, not taking a knee,  tossing the ball to the ref, followed by the kicking team recovering ball, and ref signalinig TD.  That sequence of events is completely unprecedented in the NFL.  In other walks of life (law, medicine, science), when one encounters an uprecedented event, most rational people look to precedents from similar (not identical) events.  The closest precedent is the SC St/Clemson game this year in college football, where the same sequence of events occurred, and was ruled a TD for the kicking team.  The only difference in these two events was that the SC St player tossed the ball backward to the ref, and 1-2 sec after he tossed the ball, had a look of horror on his face as he realized that he F@##$%$ up.

 

2) Given that this play is unprecedented, I'm unsure whether it should have been a TD or illegal forward pass.  A forward pass implies a receiver; there was none here.  If a QB is being pulled down by the pass rush, feels the ball coming out, but is able to push it forward, is that a forward pass or a fumble?  What about an NFL receiver who catches a pass, runs a few steps and trips over a turf monster, and slams the ball down (slightly forward) in disgust, never begin touched down.  Is that a fumble?  An illegal forward pass? or is he ruled to have given himself up?  I sort of think I've seen that ruled a fumble in the past.

First, I think we generally agree.

 

Second, I don't know that the situation is unprecedented in the NFL.   No NFL returner ever caught the ball in the end zone held it, made no effort to advance, and then let go of the ball without taking a knee?  Never in 100 years of NFL play?   I'd guess that you're wrong about that.  I'd guess that it happened, sometime.  

 

Third, you're wrong about the first place to look is something similar.  The first place to look is the rules.   And the rules are completely clear and unambiguous on this subject.   The rules say, in some way, that play continues so long as the ball is live.   When it's a dead ball, nothing can happen, but while it's live, all kinds of things can happen.  So the first thing we know is the returner, when he caught the ball, was holding a live ball.  We know that.   The second thing we know is that one way the ball could become a dead ball was if an official blew a whistle and stopped the play.   The official in the end zone certainly did not do that; just the opposite, he was waiting to see what the returner was going to do, because although he was standing motionless in the end zone, so long as he was standing and holding the ball, he was free to try to advance it.   

 

Okay, so the returner is holding a live ball.  He is entitled to make it a dead ball.  How?  The rules say how.   Slide, take a knee.   There is essentially no other way.   One basic premise of interpreting rules is if the ruless explain how to do something, then that is the exclusive way to do it.   There aren't other ways.   So if the returner wanted to make the ball a dead ball, he had to take a knee.

 

What happened next?   He didn't slide or take a knew.   He intentionally tossed it forward.   He tossed a live ball forward.   That's a forward pass, as defined by the rules.  He didn't throw it backward, and he didn't fumble it and have it go forward.  He intentionally threw it forward.   There doesn't have to be a receiver in the area to make it a forward pass.   All he has to do is throw it forward.  So he threw a forward pass, and it is against the rules to throw a forward pass on any play except a play from scrimmage.  Can't do it on a kickoff return, can't do it on a punt return, can't do it on an interception or fumble return.   This was not a play from scrimmage.   So he threw an illegal forward pass.

 

A Buffalo Bill recovered it.  What happens when the defensive team recovers (not intercepts but "recovers") and illegal forward pass in the end zone?   There's a rule for that.   The rule says it's a safety.   

 

So for every step along the way in what happened, there is an unambiguous rule governing the step.   We don't have to look at the Clemson game, although the officials in the Clemson game reach the exact same conclusion I just set forth.  The ball was live, the returner threw an illegal forward pass, the Bills recovered in the end zone.  Safety.

 

The ONLY way that we'd reach a different result would be if there is a rule that says that the official can declare the ball dead because for some reason he thinks the play is over even though nothing in the rules says it's over.   That is, he can declare it dead because he thinks it should be dead.  That's what AlphaDawg says can happen, but there's nothing in the rules that says the official can do that.  The official can blow the whistle, ending the play, but the official closest to the ball didn't blow his whistle, clearly didn't, and I doubt any other official blew his whistle, because they generally defer to the official whose call it is.   

 

Think about this:  on a punt, ball is rolling on the field, return man has run away from the play and the ball is surrounded by members of the kicking team.   Does the official blow his whistle and declare the ball dead?   No.   Never.   It's not a dead ball if it's moving on the ground, and the official doesn't exercise his judgment that since the return man has run away, the ball his dead.   The ball is live until the other team touches it or until it stops moving.   

 

The officials have no discretion to declare the ball dead, and the official in the end zone on that play knew he had no discretion.  He was waiting for an event that would allow him to declare it dead.   Once the return man caught, the ball was live until he took a knee, ran out of bounds, scored a touchdown or was tackled.   It was a live ball, and everyone knew it except the returner.   He threw it forward.   It was an illegal forward pass.   The Bills recovered in the end zone.  It's a safety.  

[Sig1Hunter]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I agree the player gave himself up, and have no issue with the refs making that determination based on the series of events.  I have seen the refs make other "he gave himself up" rulings before too in various situations.  

And I’m willing to bet in EVERY single one of those instances, the player went down to the ground - which is one of the elements required by the rule to give yourself up. I missed the part where any part of  #14 went to the ground to give himself up...  i.e. his knee. 

[NoSaint]

10 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

First, I think we generally agree.

 

Second, I don't know that the situation is unprecedented in the NFL.   No NFL returner ever caught the ball in the end zone held it, made no effort to advance, and then let go of the ball without taking a knee?  Never in 100 years of NFL play?   I'd guess that you're wrong about that.  I'd guess that it happened, sometime.  

 

Third, you're wrong about the first place to look is something similar.  The first place to look is the rules.   And the rules are completely clear and unambiguous on this subject.   The rules say, in some way, that play continues so long as the ball is live.   When it's a dead ball, nothing can happen, but while it's live, all kinds of things can happen.  So the first thing we know is the returner, when he caught the ball, was holding a live ball.  We know that.   The second thing we know is that one way the ball could become a dead ball was if an official blew a whistle and stopped the play.   The official in the end zone certainly did not do that; just the opposite, he was waiting to see what the returner was going to do, because although he was standing motionless in the end zone, so long as he was standing and holding the ball, he was free to try to advance it.   

 

Okay, so the returner is holding a live ball.  He is entitled to make it a dead ball.  How?  The rules say how.   Slide, take a knee.   There is essentially no other way.   One basic premise of interpreting rules is if the ruless explain how to do something, then that is the exclusive way to do it.   There aren't other ways.   So if the returner wanted to make the ball a dead ball, he had to take a knee.

 

What happened next?   He didn't slide or take a knew.   He intentionally tossed it forward.   He tossed a live ball forward.   That's a forward pass, as defined by the rules.  He didn't throw it backward, and he didn't fumble it and have it go forward.  He intentionally threw it forward.   There doesn't have to be a receiver in the area to make it a forward pass.   All he has to do is throw it forward.  So he threw a forward pass, and it is against the rules to throw a forward pass on any play except a play from scrimmage.  Can't do it on a kickoff return, can't do it on a punt return, can't do it on an interception or fumble return.   This was not a play from scrimmage.   So he threw an illegal forward pass.

 

A Buffalo Bill recovered it.  What happens when the defensive team recovers (not intercepts but "recovers") and illegal forward pass in the end zone?   There's a rule for that.   The rule says it's a safety.   

 

So for every step along the way in what happened, there is an unambiguous rule governing the step.   We don't have to look at the Clemson game, although the officials in the Clemson game reach the exact same conclusion I just set forth.  The ball was live, the returner threw an illegal forward pass, the Bills recovered in the end zone.  Safety.

 

The ONLY way that we'd reach a different result would be if there is a rule that says that the official can declare the ball dead because for some reason he thinks the play is over even though nothing in the rules says it's over.   That is, he can declare it dead because he thinks it should be dead.  That's what AlphaDawg says can happen, but there's nothing in the rules that says the official can do that.  The official can blow the whistle, ending the play, but the official closest to the ball didn't blow his whistle, clearly didn't, and I doubt any other official blew his whistle, because they generally defer to the official whose call it is.   

 

Think about this:  on a punt, ball is rolling on the field, return man has run away from the play and the ball is surrounded by members of the kicking team.   Does the official blow his whistle and declare the ball dead?   No.   Never.   It's not a dead ball if it's moving on the ground, and the official doesn't exercise his judgment that since the return man has run away, the ball his dead.   The ball is live until the other team touches it or until it stops moving.   

 

The officials have no discretion to declare the ball dead, and the official in the end zone on that play knew he had no discretion.  He was waiting for an event that would allow him to declare it dead.   Once the return man caught, the ball was live until he took a knee, ran out of bounds, scored a touchdown or was tackled.   It was a live ball, and everyone knew it except the returner.   He threw it forward.   It was an illegal forward pass.   The Bills recovered in the end zone.  It's a safety.  

though it then rolls over to a replay system not equipped to handle a play like this. 
 

ruled a turnover and TD you get reviewed and the turnover is overturned. But is the illegal forward pass able to be called there on review?

2 hours 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.  

a totally unrelated football board I read for another team is actually much more slanted towards the refs having blown it. 

[pennstate10]

Yeah, we basically agree.

But please read what I wrote once more.

 

"By that, I mean a KO returner not signaling fair catch, catching a ball in the end zone, not taking a knee,  tossing the ball to the ref, followed by the kicking team recovering ball, and ref signalinig TD."  

 

I bolded the pertinent part.  this is truly unprecedented.

 

Law is the field where precedence is most commonly searched and cited.  There was a dispute about rule interpretation.  The men in black had a different interpretation than the ref on the field.  I think it does make some sense to look for precedents.

 

Still not sure it should be safety or TD.

 

Interesting, I saw a replay.  Early in the discussion, one of the striped refs walk in and just drops a flag.  Not throwing at at a foul (like coach coming off the bench) but just a drop.  Like you see them do when they watch a replay and decide there should be a grounding call.  That makes me think that they re-interpreted the play as an illegal forward pass, but then the men in black convinced them otherwise.