BUF-HOU Playoff Redux: 2nd Half Kickoff

[GoBills808]

Please answer honestly and to the best of your abilities

[May Day 10]

After the fact, looking at the interpretations and such, IMO it should have been a safety.  

 

 

With that said, I do not blame the loss on that, nor think anyone went out of the way to screw the Bills over.  

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

After the fact, looking at the interpretations and such, IMO it should have been a safety.  

 

 

With that said, I do not blame the loss on that, nor think anyone went out of the way to screw the Bills over.  

Noted

 

thank you for your participation

[Putin]

This is the first I seen a player not taking a knee after catching the ball , 

[GoBills808]

3 minutes ago, Putin said:

This is the first I seen a player not taking a knee after catching the ball , 

A very astute observation

[flaz]

Everyone I talked to knew he was giving himself up. Did he do it by the rules of the game, no. But the intent was obvious JMO

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, fl az fan said:

Everyone I talked to knew he was giving himself up. Did he do it by the rules of the game, no. But the intent was obvious JMO

If I intend to catch a fish but lose it at gaff...have I still caught it?

[BuffaloBillies]

I have a question for everyone who says he was "obviously" giving himself up.

 

(I know it wasn't), but what if it was a trick play by Houston... and they had another player come around and scoop up the ball he threw to the ground and ran it back (some distance or the whole way), because our KO team stopped playing.

 

If that happened, do you think they still would have called the ball dead for a touchback?

 

Rules are rules. He didn't follow protocol. Call should have stood as on field.

Edited March 10, 2020 by BuffaloBillies

[May Day 10]

1 minute ago, fl az fan said:

Everyone I talked to knew he was giving himself up. Did he do it by the rules of the game, no. But the intent was obvious JMO

 

I just wonder what happens if he is in his "giving up stance", the ref is saying 'no!' and holding his hand up.... and the returner decides to streak up the field and score a touchdown.  

 

That could happen, and IMO would count.  That is what the fair catch signal and taking a knee are for.  To cut the gray area.  

 

 

[ogham26]

 When a fumble goes out of bounds in the end zone, the following shall apply:

1. If a ball is fumbled in the field of play, and goes forward into the opponent’s end zone and over the end line or sideline, a touchback is awarded to the defensive team; or
2. If a ball is fumbled in a team’s own end zone or in the field of play and goes out of bounds in the end zone, it is a safety, if that team provided the impetus that sent the ball into the end zone (See 11-5-1 for exception for momentum). If the impetus was provided by the opponent, it is a touchback.

 

 

so by rule it should have been a safety.  we still should have won the game but those extra 2 points and the ball could have ended things right then and there I believe.  

 

 

 

[flaz]

If you touched the leader with your hand, yes. lol

[warrior9]

5 minutes ago, fl az fan said:

Everyone I talked to knew he was giving himself up. Did he do it by the rules of the game, no. But the intent was obvious JMO

If the game of football was played based on intent, there would never need to be a game. 

[Putin]

So how is this any different then a receiver who drops the ball prematurely/celebrating before crossing the goal line ? 

[BuffaloBillies]

1 minute ago, Putin said:

So how is this any different then a receiver who drops the ball prematurely/celebrating before crossing the goal line ? 

 

Right, he "obviously intended" to drop it after crossing the line. No

[GoBills808]

For further investigation, here is the play in it's entirety:

 

 

Near the end you can hear Joe Tessitore, renowned football expert and judge of the human condition, exclaim his satisfaction with 'common sense' prevailing. 

 

Note: the rule on all turnovers and scoring plays is video replay review to overturn. Additionally, the ruling on the field immediately after the ball is recovered by Jaquan Johnson a touchdown as signaled by the official in the endzone.

[Putin]

Just now, BuffaloBillies said:

 

Right, he "obviously intended" to drop it after crossing the line. No

Absolutely !

[BuffaloBillies]

I have no idea how it would ever be a safety.

It's either a TD or touchback.

[Shaw66]

Illegal forward pass in the end zone.  Safety.  

 

Player's intention is irrelevant.   Player's lack of knowledge of the rules is irrelevant.  

 

Guy running free downfield, in celebration drops the ball and raises his arms before crossing the goal line.   It's a fumble, intention doesn't matter.  

 

Before the rule change, guy doesn't touch the kickoff and it's rolling freely in the end zone.  Kicking team recovers.  Touchdown, intention doesn't matter.   

 

Quarterback under pressure throws deep up the left sideline.   About the time the QB releases the ball, the receiver, having misread the defense breaks off the route and crosses the field.   Intentional grounding, intention doesn't matter.   Yes, even "intentional" grounding, intention doesn't matter.  

[ogham26]

Just now, BuffaloBillies said:

I have no idea how it would ever be a safety.

It's either a TD or touchback.

 

because its technically an illegal forward pass in the endzone I think which is why it would be considered a safety

[GoBills808]

Just now, BuffaloBillies said:

I have no idea how it would ever be a safety.

It's either a TD or touchback.

If you listen to the ref, his mic is hot when he starts conversing with the replacement ref in black...he starts saying (I think) 'So we've got an illegal forward pass...' and then he turns off his mic. 

 

A penalty by the offense in the endzone is an automatic safety.

[The Jokeman]

17 minutes ago, fl az fan said:

Everyone I talked to knew he was giving himself up. Did he do it by the rules of the game, no. But the intent was obvious JMO

It doesn't matter it's like when Kirk Cousins took a knee a few years ago, he intended to spike it yet he didn't as a result the refs let the clock run out and the Redskins didn't score before end of the half. To me the rules are written based on what a player does not their intent. 

[RoyBatty is alive]

"Mike Pereira, the NFL’s former vice president of officiating, backed up the call being change. “Didn’t see what happened on the touchback in the end zone but even if you don’t down it, tossing the ball to the official or dropping the ball intentionally ends the play,” Pereira wrote on Twitter. “You are deemed to have given yourself up.”

 

Pretty obvious and straightforward to me.

 

Bills fans have a tough time psychologically on this one for sure.

 

 

By the way, I think such a poll here at a Buffalo Bills chatroom will come up with totally logical and unbiased responses.

 

 

[BuffaloBillies]

2 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Illegal forward pass in the end zone.  Safety. 

 

OK - didn't think of that

[ProcessYaDigg]

I don't like the notion of "common sense" prevailing.  There are rules for a reason.  If a ref doesn't know how or what to do in any given situation, refer to the black and white (rule book, not their stripes).  Just like here in the military, if we do exactly what instructions and publications say, then no one can tell us we're wrong.  They need to be consistent and the only way to do that is follow the rules.  It's that simple.  Now with that said, it should've been counted as an illegal forward lateral in the end zone, thus, awarding us a safety.

[GoBills808]

1 minute ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

"Mike Pereira, the NFL’s former vice president of officiating, backed up the call being change. “Didn’t see what happened on the touchback in the end zone but even if you don’t down it, tossing the ball to the official or dropping the ball intentionally ends the play,” Pereira wrote on Twitter. “You are deemed to have given yourself up.”

 

Pretty obvious and straightforward to me.

 

Bills fans have a tough time psychologically on this one for sure.

 

 

By the way, I think such a poll here at a Buffalo Bills chatroom will come up with totally logical and unbiased responses.

 

 

So if you are a runner and want to down the ball for a field goal before time runs out or you get tackled, you can just drop the ball in the middle of the field?

[ProcessYaDigg]

To me, giving yourself up means to put a knee on the ground or just lay down.

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

Since when did they have to stop taking a knee on kickoffs?  Would have solved a lot of confusion if the rules stated if you give yourself up, take a knee!

[RoyBatty is alive]

Just now, Circlethewagon8404 said:

I don't like the notion of "common sense" prevailing.  There are rules for a reason.  If a ref doesn't know how or what to do in any given situation, refer to the black and white (rule book, not their stripes).  Just like here in the military, if we do exactly what instructions and publications say, then no one can tell us we're wrong.  They need to be consistent and the only way to do that is follow the rules.  It's that simple.  Now with that said, it should've been counted as an illegal forward lateral in the end zone, thus, awarding us a safety.

 

 

No common sense needs to be used MORE often.

 

Some of the worst NFL decisons have by by "the Rule".  Look at the tuck rule, it is in the book, like at Calvin Johnson rule, that is also in the book,  the Dez Bryant non-catch,,,,,,,,some of the most absurd rulings of all time but hey, they followed the rules.

[GoBills808]

2 minutes ago, Circlethewagon8404 said:

To me, giving yourself up means to put a knee on the ground or just lay down.

The NFL rulebook would tend to agree with you

[Sherlock Holmes]

You guys are right, it is pretty obvious... it was a safety

[RoyBatty is alive]

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

So if you are a runner and want to down the ball for a field goal before time runs out or you get tackled, you can just drop the ball in the middle of the field?

 

 

1) fielding a KO is nothing at all like running in the middle of the field 2) Makes no sense as the clock wouldn't stop anyway.

[GoBills808]

Just now, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

 

1) fielding a KO is nothing at all like running in the middle of the field 2) Makes no sense as the clock wouldn't stop anyway.

1) A return man fielding a kickoff is a runner much like a RB carrying the ball is a runner

 

2) If you are down the clock does stop

[ProcessYaDigg]

2 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

 

 

No common sense needs to be used MORE often.

 

Some of the worst NFL decisons have by by "the Rule".  Look at the tuck rule, it is in the book, like at Calvin Johnson rule, that is also in the book,  the Dez Bryant non-catch,,,,,,,,some of the most absurd rulings of all time but hey, they followed the rules.

I agree.  But that's the point, no one can argue with them on their decisions if they stick to the rule book.  We don't have to like or agree with their decisions.  Especially as fans, we always wants things to go our way, but refs can cover their own behinds if they make the right calls based on the rules.

[RoyBatty is alive]

All the ref had to do was catch the ball, just like is common in today NFL returners catch the ball and lob it to the ref. Had he done that none of us would give it a thought for a nanosecond.   But no Ref had to make a big deal about it.

 

It is is the rule book, play is over when players gives himself up.

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

1) A return man fielding a kickoff is a runner much like a RB carrying the ball is a runner

 

2) If you are down the clock does stop

 

1) no, If a retuner is outside the endzone, he is a runner like a RB, in the end zone he is not unless he makes a football move

2) no it doesnt, only if you are out of the field of play

[cage]

42 minutes ago, BuffaloBillies said:

I have a question for everyone who says he was "obviously" giving himself up.

 

(I know it wasn't), but what if it was a trick play by Houston... and they had another player come around and scoop up the ball he threw to the ground and ran it back (some distance or the whole way), because our KO team stopped playing.

 

If that happened, do you think they still would have called the ball dead for a touchback?

 

Rules are rules. He didn't follow protocol. Call should have stood as on field.

 

I also take it back to a pretty famous play several years ago when DeSean Jackson was about to score on a long TD against Cowboys and he dropped the ball at the 1 yard line, clearly before he crossed into the end zone.  He was untouched and clearly intended to score the TD.... NO Touchdown!  If the Cowboys had picked it up, it would have been their ball.

 

 

 

[RoyBatty is alive]

2 minutes ago, cage said:

 

I also take it back to a pretty famous play several years ago when DeSean Jackson was about to score on a long TD against Cowboys and he dropped the ball at the 1 yard line, clearly before he crossed into the end zone.  He was untouched and clearly intended to score the TD.... NO Touchdown!  If the Cowboys had picked it up, it would have been their ball.

 

 

 

 

 

There is NO comparison to dropping a ball in the field of play and a returner in the endzone lobbing the ball to a ref.  Get real.

[RoyBatty is alive]

 

 

No need to kneel

If a ball gets to the end zone and touches the ground, it’s an automatic touchback. There’s no need for a player to pick it up and kneel, or even catch a ball if it’s headed for the end zone and they don’t intend to return it.

This is a small time saver, but the goal is to blow a play dead earlier so that unnecessary collisions don’t happen. Under the previous rules, a player could take their time gathering a ball and kneeling while the coverage team and return team blockers still careened toward each other for no reason.

Edited March 10, 2020 by RoyBatty is alive

[Capco]

40 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Yes, even "intentional" grounding, intention doesn't matter.  

 

Correct.  Just think of all the times Brady throws the ball away by throwing it at a receiver's feet.  His "intent" is to ground the ball but he does it in a way that avoids an intentional grounding penalty being called.  

[Mike in Horseheads]

1 hour ago, GoBills808 said:

Please answer honestly and to the best of your abilities

This is a beautiful poll, everybody says so!

...I recollect that he never called a fair catch, he didn't kneel and he just let the ball bounce off him towards the ref who played `ole! The well coached Bills pounced on the ball and the ref called TD. Then a troop of trench coat men marched in and threatened him with a picture of his wife being held hostage. And yup, the Bills were screwed and Roger smiled and said FU Buffalo, build me a new palace.

[RoyBatty is alive]

Just now, Capco said:

 

Correct.  Just think of all the times Brady throws the ball away by throwing it at a receiver's feet.  His "intent" is to ground the ball but he does it in a way that avoids an intentional grounding penalty being called.  

 

 

When a player "gives himself UP' which is what it was ruled there is intention in that so yes intention does in fact matter.  Player had no intention  to return it, there is no debate about that, all he did was field it and politely lob it to the official.