Motorin' Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, Call_Of_Ktulu said: But the ref knew the rule and didn’t touch the ball and looked like he even threw a marker or something at it. It should’ve been a TD and that crew should be banned from the playoffs. Won't happen. The league knew the tv ratings would go down the tubes if the game was 23-0 at that point. That's when the black clad officials stepped out from the shadows and put the leagues interests ahead of the rules. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiotAct Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 6 minutes ago, zoid8jr said: Does anyone know or understand the ref wearing all black who ran onto the field was clearly responsible for changing the call? Watched a lot of football in my life but that was a first. Perhaps it's a playoff only type thing but it didn't pass the sniff test then or now. they were the NFL’s “Black Ops” team, mainly responsible for the happiness of JJ Watt. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
familykwi Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 42 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: The Victory formation analogy is faulty. The ball is in the field of play. The QB has to down it to end the play. For a touchback (as opposed to a Center snap to the QB) the ball can just hit the ground--no one needs to "down it". Back to the rule book. The ball needs to touch ground in the end zone UNTOUCHED to become a touchback. The receiver should have either let it hit and go out (like Roberts repeatedly did), or take a knee (or lay down). He caught it and tossed it forward, so it should have been an illegal forward pass in the endzone, therefore a safety. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billzgobowlin Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: The toss is the intent. I'm not sure how that wasn't obvious as a signal he wasn't going to run it out. ANd that's what the refs concluded. No one "intends" to fumble does that mean no one ever fumbles. If Josh Allen intends to complete a pass to Smokey but goes incomplete. Intent is not a good argument. It was a mental lapse, action actually matters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, JayBaller10 said: Hello, McFly? “INTENT” IS NOT IN THE RULES! I'm responding to the posters who keep saying things like what if he decided to run it out etc. He couldn't, because he quickly gave tossed the ball away to the ref. There is no way he could have done sort of "fake" knee or whatever it is they are getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hsker4life Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 9 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: It wasn't ambiguous--within 2 seconds he tossed it to the ref. Show me anywhere in the rule book where it allows a player to give himself up by tossing the ball to an official. The rule is CLEAR. To give oneself up, a player must: 1. Fall to the ground or take a knee AND 2. Make no move to advance the ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 2 minutes ago, Motorin' said: Won't happen. The league knew the tv ratings would go down the tubes if the game was 23-0 at that point. That's when the black clad officials stepped out from the shadows and put the leagues interests ahead of the rules. What were the ratings at 16-0 in the 3rd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real McClappy Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) It's like "No Goal" all over. A rule is a rule and why the whistle did not blow the play dead. The player never gave himself up. Bills got hosed out of 7 points. The Head ref knew the rule and avoided the ball thrown at him as he knew it was live. We get the TD and the same ref whom made the decision to say it was a live ball says TD Bills. How did review even overturn this TD? I honestly knew going into this game it was gonna be a 50/50 battle. My biggest concern going into the games the last 2 years are hoping for a fair proper called game by the officials. This play and several others broke the Bills yesterday. I'm tired of hearing you have to outplay the bad calls. In the playoffs with evenly matched teams, this is unacceptable for a multi Billion $ company. Sick to my stomach today. I love the Bills as many here do. I'm not sure how much more of the jaded officiating I can take anymore. It's a damn shame how officiating is ruining the game I love. There is zero homerism here either. If our returner did that and the opposing team was awarded a TD, I'd be going ape crap on how much an idiot he was and accept the outcome. TAKE a KNEE! Edited January 5, 2020 by Real McNasty 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Here's something I wonder about... Do teams have guys go through all 22, make highlights of missed calls, bad calls, etc., and then send it to the league? I feel like this needs to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
familykwi Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 As an official (local high school, not NFL), I've been bothered about what was actually ruled on the end zone play. I've been going through the 2019 NFL rulebook to sort out what should have been ruled. If a fair catch signal was given, the kick would have ended in a touchback, but no signal shows on film and the referee action makes it clear none was given. Now the rule book: Rule 6, Section 1, Article 5a: It is a touchback, if a free kick: touches the ground in the end zone before being touched by the receiving team. * This did not occur as the ball was caught in flight. It is a touchback, if a free kick: is downed in the end zone by the receiving team. * This required further research to determine what constitutes downing the ball. Unfortunately, the word "downed" is not defined in the rule book. I then went to a player giving himself up. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1d: An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: when a runner declares himself down by: falling to the ground, or kneeling, and clearly making no immediate effort to advance. sliding. When a runner slides, the ball is dead the instant he touches the ground with anything other than his hands or his feet. Neither of these things happen either. The burden of knowing this rule is on the player and this is where the problem occurs. At this point, the referee is correct in letting the play continue. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: when a forward pass (legal or illegal) is incomplete. THIS is what the kick returner did and this is what should have been ruled as the action of the play. As such, no touchdown should have been awarded. What should have been the outcome of the incomplete pass you ask? Since the forward pass was not thrown to an eligible receiver Rule 11, Section 5, Article 1(exception 2b) 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. A SAFETY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE CORRECT RULING. My observation is that no one on the crew considered the toss forward a forward pass. That wasn't the player's intention obviously, but there are a lot of actions the players don't intend to do, but rulings must be made. The referee was initially ruling this correctly by not awarding the fair catch, but confused the issue by ruling a touchdown. For those wondering who the black shirts were, it was noted during the broadcast that they were the backup officials. If an official goes down and needs to leave the field, they come in. I cannot say for sure they've never been consulted to assist with an on field ruling before, but I've never seen it as an official, or as a fan. Ruling that the player gave himself up may have been "common sense," but is not supported by the rule book. FTR, I submit this for clarity, not as a belief that the Bills were conspired against. it was a weird play and I hadn't considered the forward pass element myself until seeing someone mention it on twitter after the game. I beg responders to consider this informational, nothing more. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewin Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: The toss is the intent. I'm not sure how that wasn't obvious as a signal he wasn't going to run it out. ANd that's what the refs concluded. It appears you're just being a troll at this point - hopefully everyone in this thread just starts to ignore you Quote He meant to give himself up - but by rule did not. It is unambiguously defined in the rule book what needs to be done by a player to give himself up, and he did not do that. He did not hit the ground or take a knee - which is written in the rule as a requirement. It could not be more clear cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cage Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 50 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I am with the pundits. It is not a ref's job to interpret a player's intent. There's a long history of "bonehead plays" in the annals of sports that could be wiped out if referees routinely removed these plays due to interpretation of a player's intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrbojanglezs Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Is there a difference to this vs Tre White in the end zone on the int? Forgot which game it was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, stevewin said: It appears you're just being a troll at this point - hopefully everyone in this thread just starts to ignore you Trying my darndest--but there you are.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMF2006 Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 46 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: The Victory formation analogy is faulty. The ball is in the field of play. The QB has to down it to end the play. For a touchback (as opposed to a Center snap to the QB) the ball can just hit the ground--no one needs to "down it". Except the kickoff is a live ball hence the onside kick recovery teams attempt. He should have took a knee then tossed the ball that's why Corrente backed away when he tossed it at him the ball was still live. If he waved his arms to the side without catching the ball it would be a dead ball touch back under the new rules. But he didn't 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Somebody ask Kapernick for his interpretation... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 2 minutes ago, familykwi said: As an official (local high school, not NFL), I've been bothered about what was actually ruled on the end zone play. I've been going through the 2019 NFL rulebook to sort out what should have been ruled. If a fair catch signal was given, the kick would have ended in a touchback, but no signal shows on film and the referee action makes it clear none was given. Now the rule book: Rule 6, Section 1, Article 5a: It is a touchback, if a free kick: touches the ground in the end zone before being touched by the receiving team. * This did not occur as the ball was caught in flight. It is a touchback, if a free kick: is downed in the end zone by the receiving team. * This required further research to determine what constitutes downing the ball. Unfortunately, the word "downed" is not defined in the rule book. I then went to a player giving himself up. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1d: An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: when a runner declares himself down by: falling to the ground, or kneeling, and clearly making no immediate effort to advance. sliding. When a runner slides, the ball is dead the instant he touches the ground with anything other than his hands or his feet. Neither of these things happen either. The burden of knowing this rule is on the player and this is where the problem occurs. At this point, the referee is correct in letting the play continue. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 An official shall declare the ball dead and the down ended: when a forward pass (legal or illegal) is incomplete. THIS is what the kick returner did and this is what should have been ruled as the action of the play. As such, no touchdown should have been awarded. What should have been the outcome of the incomplete pass you ask? Since the forward pass was not thrown to an eligible receiver Rule 11, Section 5, Article 1(exception 2b) 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. A SAFETY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE CORRECT RULING. My observation is that no one on the crew considered the toss forward a forward pass. That wasn't the player's intention obviously, but there are a lot of actions the players don't intend to do, but rulings must be made. The referee was initially ruling this correctly by not awarding the fair catch, but confused the issue by ruling a touchdown. For those wondering who the black shirts were, it was noted during the broadcast that they were the backup officials. If an official goes down and needs to leave the field, they come in. I cannot say for sure they've never been consulted to assist with an on field ruling before, but I've never seen it as an official, or as a fan. Ruling that the player gave himself up may have been "common sense," but is not supported by the rule book. FTR, I submit this for clarity, not as a belief that the Bills were conspired against. it was a weird play and I hadn't considered the forward pass element myself until seeing someone mention it on twitter after the game. I beg responders to consider this informational, nothing more. Is there a section in the rules on what exactly happens on a play when a runner throws a forward lateral? And is there a difference between a forward lateral and a forward pass? Because it seems to me that those are two different plays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, JMF2006 said: Except the kickoff is a live ball hence the onside kick recovery teams attempt. He should have took a knee then tossed the ball that's why Corrente backed away when he tossed it at him the ball was still live. If he waved his arms to the side without catching the ball it would be a dead ball touch back under the new rules. But he didn't The point is, the refs were never determining his "intent"--they didn't have to because everyone knew the guy was not going to take that ball out of the EZ....everyone who was waghcing knew that. The issue is whether they can equate that with "giving himself up" in tha same manner as kneeling. They decided he gave himself up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said: Is there a difference to this vs Tre White in the end zone on the int? Forgot which game it was Yeah, Tre White went to the ground. Looked at the ref. The ref blew his whistle and made the hand signal for end of play. Tre White got up and celebrated after the play had been whistled dead. Edited January 5, 2020 by Motorin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Real McClappy Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: The toss is the intent. I'm not sure how that wasn't obvious as a signal he wasn't going to run it out. ANd that's what the refs concluded. You should make this your avatar Edited January 5, 2020 by Real McNasty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts