NoSaint Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 29 minutes ago, Jauronimo said: If NYC was in their earpieces during that process and helped them determine their ultimate ruling then we have a major problem. If it came from NY, it should’ve just come in a normal review of the scoring play. The third party involvement was truly bizarre 14 minutes ago, GaryPinC said: Anybody have the rule # on that? I saw it defined that way for offensive possession but not on kickoffs. ignore the idea of tossing it to the ref and imagine throwing a lateral across the field of course it’d be handled the same as an offensive lateral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Jauronimo said: If NYC was in their earpieces during that process and helped them determine their ultimate ruling then we have a major problem. Either way, I think it was a major problem. Substitute refs overruling the head ref, who had the rule right, is quite a problem. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, bbb said: Either way, I think it was a major problem. Substitute refs overruling the head ref, who had the rule right, is quite a problem. Anything other than video review for the score is quite a problem. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, GaryPinC said: There is one other angle worth discussing. The toss to the ref being an illegal forward pass. Receiver used a forward motion and the ball did go forward towards the oponnents goal line, so I think it fits that description. It hit the ground (wasn't intercepted) so would be a dead ball and 5 yard penalty from the spot of the foul. Being in the end zone, there's no guidance in the rule book on enforcement from the endzone on kicks so that may be why the extra refs came on to discuss and they decided thusly. Though I think they could have ruled safety despite no line of scrimmage. It'll be interesting if the NFL redefines a player giving up for the touchback or stipulates the penalty for illegal forward pass in the endzone on kicks. I'm thinking the latter. Maybe both! According to Mike Pereira, who I would think has it under pretty good authority, when a player in the endzone either tosses the ball on the ground or to the ref, that act constitutes giving himself up. It’s interesting that the ref chose not to take it, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, GaryPinC said: There is one other angle worth discussing. The toss to the ref being an illegal forward pass. Receiver used a forward motion and the ball did go forward towards the oponnents goal line, so I think it fits that description. It hit the ground (wasn't intercepted) so would be a dead ball and 5 yard penalty from the spot of the foul. Being in the end zone, there's no guidance in the rule book on enforcement from the endzone on kicks so that may be why the extra refs came on to discuss and they decided thusly. Though I think they could have ruled safety despite no line of scrimmage. It'll be interesting if the NFL redefines a player giving up for the touchback or stipulates the penalty for illegal forward pass in the endzone on kicks. I'm thinking the latter. Maybe both! Yes there is. An illegal forward pass results in a 5 yard penalty from the spot of the ball. Any offensive penalty that would result in the ball being spoted beyond the goal line results in a safety. So the correct move when a player doesn't down it and throws the ball at the ref is for the ref to throw a flag and make a safety sign. That would be the biggest dick move ever though, if you think about it. Edited January 9, 2020 by Motorin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 34 minutes ago, K-9 said: According to Mike Pereira, who I would think has it under pretty good authority, when a player in the endzone either tosses the ball on the ground or to the ref, that act constitutes giving himself up. It’s interesting that the ref chose not to take it, though. Then why isn't it in the rule book? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Do The Reich Thing Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Don’t know if it was posted, but Feliciano and Ferguson were tweeting how it was a bs call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Success Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 It didn't last long - but that sideline reporter getting interrupted, and then seeing the Bills celebrate in the EZ and the TV score going up to 19, was definitely the most exciting playoff moment I've experienced since the '90's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 27 minutes ago, bbb said: Then why isn't it in the rule book? Have to ask Pereira, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo716 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 hours ago, GaryPinC said: There is one other angle worth discussing. The toss to the ref being an illegal forward pass. Receiver used a forward motion and the ball did go forward towards the oponnents goal line, so I think it fits that description. It hit the ground (wasn't intercepted) so would be a dead ball and 5 yard penalty from the spot of the foul. Being in the end zone, there's no guidance in the rule book on enforcement from the endzone on kicks so that may be why the extra refs came on to discuss and they decided thusly. Though I think they could have ruled safety despite no line of scrimmage. It'll be interesting if the NFL redefines a player giving up for the touchback or stipulates the penalty for illegal forward pass in the endzone on kicks. I'm thinking the latter. Maybe both! If they went forward lateral in the endzone it would still be a safety Like a holding call in the endzone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 23 hours ago, Rick 'r Mortis said: Not my fault you and so many others don't watch other NFL team teams play their games. The terrible officiating is a large reason why I do not watch other games- and this play is part of issue. The " highlights" I saw of other games was filled with blown calls and officials not knowing rule book- like the blindsided block call on Ford which was not blindsided at all. I am not blaming you for watching but it is not entertaining to me for what seems like any game with equal teams the officials are the dominant factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaw66 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Nobody's talked about this, I don't think, but both McDermott and Beane were asked about the call during their end-of-season pressers. They stuck to the party line. McD said they talked to the league about it, and these are matters that the league decides. It was clear that he didn't want to talk about it, and it was easy to guess that he didn't agree with the explanation he got. It seemed to me that he was being a good soldier. I think the league told him "we will avoid controversy if we can; that's what's good for the league. They made the call, the public has moved on, and we're not going to stir up a hornet's nest and we don't want you to, either. That way it will blow over the league's image won't be tarnished." McD didn't say any of that, but the little he said implied that he was going to be a team player about this. Beane was just a little franker. You could tell that he was pissed off about it but he wouldn't say that. He just ended it by saying something like "I'm not going to say any more about it because I want to keep my money in my wallet." In other words, if I tell you what I think, I'll be fined big time. It's another example of the haves and the have nots. The league tells Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft the same thing, they tell the league they're going to say what they damn well please, and the league will just have to deal with it. The league told the Bills to sit down and shut up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo716 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, K-9 said: According to Mike Pereira, who I would think has it under pretty good authority, when a player in the endzone either tosses the ball on the ground or to the ref, that act constitutes giving himself up. It’s interesting that the ref chose not to take it, though. That certainly is his opinion but not the actual NFL rule They screwed the pooch and are trying to save face anyway.. You can fake knees and reverses so tossing a ball in the endzone had ALWAYS BEEN LIVE Unless a fair catch was called 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Do The Reich Thing Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 8 minutes ago, K-9 said: Have to ask Pereira, I guess. A question he will never answer. Anything to protect the shield. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaryPinC Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 hours ago, NoSaint said: If it came from NY, it should’ve just come in a normal review of the scoring play. The third party involvement was truly bizarre ignore the idea of tossing it to the ref and imagine throwing a lateral across the field of course it’d be handled the same as an offensive lateral I'm not so sure. A couple defined areas of safties: https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/safety/ Exceptions: It is not a safety: If a forward pass from behind the line of scrimmage is incomplete in the end zone. It does not specify legal or illegal and I'm not sure if it includes both. But the rule defines a safety as either the offense commits a foul in its endzone or the ball goes dead in the endzone or the ball goes out behind the goal line. That's it. Hence this exception for the forward pass. There's also these rules on an interception: If a player of the team which intercepts, catches, or recovers the ball commits a live-ball foul in the end zone, it is a safety. If a player who intercepts, catches, or recovers the ball throws a completed illegal forward pass from the end zone, the ball remains alive. If his opponent intercepts the illegal pass thrown from the end zone, the ball remains alive. If he scores, it is a touchdown. So on a change of possession rule 2 allows an illegal completed pass out of the endzone, but it seems to me an incomplete illegal would be a dead ball in this situation since it allows the illegal completed pass. Now how does that apply to kicks and the receiving team? WRT Periera saying the player have himself up, as a soccer ref I judge intent all the time and I agree with him but this is football and the NFL likes to exhaustively define things and not judge intent. And by rule the player did not give himself up properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pennstate10 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 44 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: Nobody's talked about this, I don't think, but both McDermott and Beane were asked about the call during their end-of-season pressers. They stuck to the party line. McD said they talked to the league about it, and these are matters that the league decides. It was clear that he didn't want to talk about it, and it was easy to guess that he didn't agree with the explanation he got. It seemed to me that he was being a good soldier. I think the league told him "we will avoid controversy if we can; that's what's good for the league. They made the call, the public has moved on, and we're not going to stir up a hornet's nest and we don't want you to, either. That way it will blow over the league's image won't be tarnished." McD didn't say any of that, but the little he said implied that he was going to be a team player about this. Beane was just a little franker. You could tell that he was pissed off about it but he wouldn't say that. He just ended it by saying something like "I'm not going to say any more about it because I want to keep my money in my wallet." In other words, if I tell you what I think, I'll be fined big time. It's another example of the haves and the have nots. The league tells Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft the same thing, they tell the league they're going to say what they damn well please, and the league will just have to deal with it. The league told the Bills to sit down and shut up. As a Bills fan, I'm not sure I like these answers by McD or Beane. Based on your quote, Beane is saying he disagrees, but doesnt want to be fined. As a Bills fan, I want him to go to the mat. If he pays a 10-50-100,000 fine, I dont care. I really dont care if Beane makes $4.0 million/yr or $3.9 million. I'm pretty sure most Bills fans making $70K /year agree with me. I want him to stick up for my team, as well as whats right. Now, If he's concerned that this will be a negative for Bills rulings going forward, thats a different issue. But also a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bookie Man Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Even if it was just a safety, 2 points and possession would have been HUGE right there. Didn't houston go on to score that drive? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 11 minutes ago, NC Book said: Even if it was just a safety, 2 points and possession would have been HUGE right there. Didn't houston go on to score that drive? No. I believe they went 3 and out. In fact Watson threw what should have been an easy INT to Neal, Neal might have had a pick 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bookie Man Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 11 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: No. I believe they went 3 and out. In fact Watson threw what should have been an easy INT to Neal, Neal might have had a pick 6. Oh that's right. Soo many chances in this game.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1 hour ago, bbb said: Then why isn't it in the rule book? Mike Perrera is total tool. After Seattle got the royal screw job by the refs in SB XL I watched him on NFL Network go through all the penalties rationalizing each one, including an illegal block by the defense. Clearly he's making stuff up again. If what he says is true, why is it not in the rule book? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts