Jump to content

The interception call...


Tolstoy

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Tolstoy said:

I thought it was an egregious call as well. Then I asked myself: what is the alternative? Remember that the Rams player had possession of the ball on the ground. So we have three options, maybe 4:

 

(1) Incomplete pass. Impossible. The ball never hit the ground.

(2) Kroft catch. Impossible. He didn't have possession at the end of the play.

(3) Catch and fumble? Impossible. Kroft didn't have possession long enough, and didn't make a "football move," whatever that is.

(4) Interception. As absurd as it is (since the Rams player didn't catch the darn ball), it seems more reasonable than the alternatives!

 

Am I mistaken here? I do prefer to blast the refs, but in this case they may not have had another call they could have made.

2- it was a catch. It's not impossible.

1 hour ago, Tolstoy said:

I thought it was an egregious call as well. Then I asked myself: what is the alternative? Remember that the Rams player had possession of the ball on the ground. So we have three options, maybe 4:

 

(1) Incomplete pass. Impossible. The ball never hit the ground.

(2) Kroft catch. Impossible. He didn't have possession at the end of the play.

(3) Catch and fumble? Impossible. Kroft didn't have possession long enough, and didn't make a "football move," whatever that is.

(4) Interception. As absurd as it is (since the Rams player didn't catch the darn ball), it seems more reasonable than the alternatives!

 

Am I mistaken here? I do prefer to blast the refs, but in this case they may not have had another call they could have made.

How can you say Kroft didn't have possession, yet say the defender did?

54 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Let's not forget even if it was ruled a catch, the offensive pass interference on Kroft brings it all back. It would've been I think 1st and 28 on the Bills 11. Either way the play changed the momentum of the whole game. 

weak OPI call as well.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tolstoy said:

I thought it was an egregious call as well. Then I asked myself: what is the alternative? Remember that the Rams player had possession of the ball on the ground. So we have three options, maybe 4:

 

(1) Incomplete pass. Impossible. The ball never hit the ground.

(2) Kroft catch. Impossible. He didn't have possession at the end of the play.

(3) Catch and fumble? Impossible. Kroft didn't have possession long enough, and didn't make a "football move," whatever that is.

(4) Interception. As absurd as it is (since the Rams player didn't catch the darn ball), it seems more reasonable than the alternatives!

 

Am I mistaken here? I do prefer to blast the refs, but in this case they may not have had another call they could have made.

Ferreira in the booth as prior head of officials  said it was an erroneous call.  No other Option.  He hit the ground with his butt as he had the ball.  Cstch with possible offensive interference is only correct call. And offensive pi was a hard sell imho. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stank_Nasty said:

He had the ball in his possession as he hit the ground and at worst it was a tie on the ground. Tie goes to the offense. This is an easy and obvious call. Don’t get it twisted 

 

never have i ever seen the refs give a tie ball to the defense. its stated in the rule book its the offenses ball. 

 

Kroft was even down by contact when he initially made the catch and fell down

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

Simple.

 

Couldn't believe the call wasn't reversed.

You are right BUT it seems that the league will go out of their way to never reverse an on field call, even if it was 99 44/100% Bull Sh*t!  To call an after the play wrestling match an interception is absurd!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MJS said:

Kroft DID have possession of the ball. He caught it and as he went to the ground the defender grabbed it. While they were both on the ground (when the play should have been dead) the defender slightly wrestled it away, but Kroft eventually took it back. At worst it was a tie, which by rule should be a Kroft catch.

I have watched the video a dozen times now, and I think I agree with this post. At worst it seems to be a tie. That said, the primary mistake was made by the crew on the field. Once they made the incorrect call, the video reviewers needed sufficient video evidence that Kroft maintained possession all the way to the ground, and I am not sure we can see that from the video. It doesn't really matter, since the Bills won (thankfully), but it does go to show you don't want to leave things in the hands of the referees. They are doing their best, but they make mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like this was one of those plays where the ref wasn't sure so they made the call that would be an automatic review. It baffles me that NY didn't overturn it. Couldn't prove Kroft maintained posesion???? You also couldn't prove he ever lost it or that the other guy had it. 

 

It does kind of feel like the NFL wants a relevant team in LA kind of call. 

 

3-0. Buffalo against the world!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer here is simple, but many may not wanna hear it.

 

Refs knew it was a catch. They wanted to change the direction of the game and they succeeded by ruling it a turnover. 

 

It damn near cost us the game, and it is absolutely inexcusable to have not overturned it on review, but the league has always gotten away with whatever they do, so it gets swept under the rug and excused as an error or mistake when there's no way that could be the case...we are not that stupid.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

 

 

Wow their own video at the end shows he clearly maintained control and possession through the process.  He hit the ground with his arm around the ball and gripped by his hand and then the defender started to snag at it.  Even the penalty to me was a little weak.  I wont argue it because it was a push off but still pretty weak.  Interception it is most definitely not.

Edited by Scott7975
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The moment Kroft's back touches the ground, he has possession of the ball & is in contact with the defender- he's down by contact. Even if it's dual possession when he hits the ground (which it's not), it's an undisputable catch. The defender wrestling the ball away is moot, because he's already down. Horribly blown call.

 

Props to team for overcoming this BS, every other Bills team from the last 25 years or so, would've been buried by it.

Edited by 947
  • Like (+1) 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL can try to justify this if they want, but the smarter move would have been to admit the mistake. Just wait and see what a can of worms this opens up for the rest of the season. Every completed catch can now result in the defender trying to wrestle it away on the ground before the ref can verify the "completion of the catch" process? Oh this should be fun to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you listened to Mike Pereira (spelling? no clue) explain it was that Kroft clearly had possession on the way down and that it wasn't until the two players hit the ground, at which point the play is dead since Kroft had possession and obviously down by contact, that LA took the ball away from Kroft that makes it a complete pass and the OPI call re-setting the play. Made total sense once you can hear an expert explain it and he said he had no idea how they can call it an INT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You couldn't even argue that they didn't have enough video evidence to overturn the call of INT on the field. It was just a garbage call that should have been overturned, and it makes me feel totally fine with the crap PI call that basically sealed the game for the Bills. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:


 

I have not seen one shot where the defender had possession of the ball.  
 

I see Kroft make a catch and go down on his knees - the defender at hat point doesn’t have the ball.

 

I see Kroft fall on top of the defender and the 2 of them fighting for the ball, but in no shot can they show the defender with sole possession of the ball.

 

This was an easy play that the Refs blew and NY was to stupid and rigid to accept it was a blown call on the field and call it correctly.

 

As horrible of a call as seemed on the field, I understand not being able to overturn a play where you literally can't see who has possession. There has to be a conclusive view that Kroft never lost possession.

 

At the same time, it is at least possible that Kroft did lose possession right before he was down. That angle doesn't exist in replay, the camera would need to be overhead of them to see definitively. 

1637388753_ScreenShot2020-09-28at7_05_27AM.thumb.jpg.dc5130bf6bb9578f75355c197e282b09.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:

As predicted, all of the highlight packages are ignoring this and only focusing on the (correct) PI call at the end of the game. GMFB even said 31 other fan bases are mad about the PI call and it wasn't PI... give me a damn break.

 

This is a trend that I hope continues! LOL 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote from last the DB “And here is Johnson's take: "I was post middle. I was coming from the weak side. I think I could have run over and just plucked it, but for some reason, I stopped because thought it was going to a tip. It was a push off. I tried to wrestle with him all the way from the ground and they gave me the ball."” wrestler all the way to the ground (e.g. Kroft had it) .. and the refs “gave it to me” . Given tie goes to receiver ... bad call!

https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/nfl-explains-why-controversial-interception-was-not-overturned/article_3144b798-00fc-11eb-b691-d383bab887e8.html

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doc said:

Did they get rid of the “tie goes to the offensive player” rule as well over the off-season, like they did the Calvin Johnson rule?  If not, then it smacks of game fixing.

 

No they have not changed that rule

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/

 

If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "pick". My wife hadn't sworn out loud that I had heard in like 10 years. yesterday was, I think, it's the first time she ever swore in front of our kids. I was furious too but even I turned around with the bug eyes.

 

What a bunch of crap that call was.

Edited by Golden*Wheels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

 

No they have not changed that rule

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/

 

If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.


I didn’t think so but wasn’t sure after learning the Calvin Johnson rule had quietly been eliminated over the off-season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Doc said:


I didn’t think so but wasn’t sure after learning the Calvin Johnson rule had quietly been eliminated over the off-season.

 

I was worried they were going to review the DPI call at the end of the game. Then I learned that pass interference is no longer reviewable. Pretty funny that they tried it out for a year and then scrapped it b/c they were too cowardly to actually overturn bad calls. They'll probably re-instate it after another rams vs saints fiasco 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, chknwing334 said:

Kroft and the defender both had possession at the end of the play. That is supposed to go to the receiver. 

Kroft has the ball in his hands when his but hit the ground. Plays over... at the time Kroft shut the ground the defender maybe had a hand on the ball. Not until the play was clearly over did the defender grab the ball with 2 hands... it’s not even a tie.

 

Why that every single person who watched the replay felt it was a catch, not an interception or even a tie.... but the refs couldn’t figure it out bothers me the most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...