Officials reviewed and overturned a non-reviewable play when Allen was ruled out of bounds at the 9 prior to throwing the ball away.

[Big Turk]

So the head of review in the NFL doesn't even know what is reviewable and what isn't?? It was a league initiated review inside of 2 minutes.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl-reviewed-non-reviewable-ruling-171349172.html

[Process]

How does this happen, lol. 

[sullim4]

This is getting a lot of attention in officiating circles.  It's a major administrative error -- misapplication of the rules is usually a death sentence for a playoff assignment for an official.

 

Al Riveron's only role as SVP of officiating is replay.  I would expect him to be the fall guy here, and I would not be at all surprised of Walt Anderson takes over the replay duties next season.

[Doc]

There are a lot of plays that should be reviewable.  That's one.

 

That being said, if it gets Riveron fired, great.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Doc

[Big Turk]

1 minute ago, sullim4 said:

This is getting a lot of attention in officiating circles.  It's a major administrative error -- misapplication of the rules is usually a death sentence for a playoff assignment for an official.

 

Al Riveron's only role as SVP of officiating is replay.  I would expect him to be the fall guy here, and I would not be at all surprised of Walt Anderson takes over the replay duties next season.

 

However, the real problem is, why isn't it??  It is pretty obvious this is usually going to be an open and shut case on replay review, so why would this be something that isn't reviewable and how is it any different than when McDermott challenged that Hill was out of bounds on his 16 yard gain that would have been a 31 yard gain?

[RoyBatty is alive]

Is this a shock? No not a tall.

 

Just like last year versus the Texans in the playoffs on that 2nd half kickoff..., even IF it isnt explicitly spelled out in the rule books the NFL will make the decision they think is "more fair". 

 

I have no problem with last years decision on the kickoff and no problem with them reviewing a situation that was "not re-viewable" according to the rule book. In the playoffs they can concentrate and use more common sense as opposed to just relying on the rule book.

[dave mcbride]

Whatever the stupid rule is, the decision to overturn it was obviously correct. 

[Scott7975]

Interesting.  I thought for sure it was a reviewable play because most everything is when it comes to plays "governed by the boundary lines."  So I looked in the rule book and it is not.  The rule book specifically states this...

 

Quote

Item 3. Passer Out of Bounds Before Throwing Pass. A ruling that a player stepped out of bounds before throwing a pass is not reviewable to determine if he was inbounds when he threw the pass.

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2020-nfl-rulebook/#article-5.-plays-governed-by-the-boundary-lines

[JerseyBills]

26 minutes ago, Doc said:

There are a lot of plays that should be reviewable.  That's one.

 

That being said, if it gets Riveron fired, great.

Shoot. That helmet to helmet at the goal line,  which was fumbled and a touch back on CLE should have been reviewable 

 

If that did and obviously gets overturned,  we're probably going to the SB, I believe we beat Cle at home. 

 

Why not make any call reviewable? Why put restrictions? If the officials missed a call , shouldn't matter what the call was..

[BillsFanSD]

Man, it would be a shame if Al Riveron got fired.

[mannc]

Also, I'm not sure why it wasn't intentional grounding, even if Allen had not gone out of bounds.  There clearly was no receiver in the area and the ball did not go past the LOS. 

[The Jokeman]

6 minutes ago, mannc said:

Also, I'm not sure why it wasn't intentional grounding, even if Allen had not gone out of bounds.  There clearly was no receiver in the area and the ball did not go past the LOS. 

Because the initial ruling he was out of bounds so the pass doesn't "count" So yes he was called in bounds on the replay reversal,  an official can't throw flags seen on a replay. 

Edited January 25, 2021 by The Jokeman

[dave mcbride]

27 minutes ago, mannc said:

Also, I'm not sure why it wasn't intentional grounding, even if Allen had not gone out of bounds.  There clearly was no receiver in the area and the ball did not go past the LOS. 

It actually went a good five yards beyond the LOS. I watched it a couple of times to make sure.

[DrDawkinstein]

25 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Because the initial ruling he was out of bounds so the pass doesn't "count" So yes he was called in bounds on the replay reversal,  an official can't throw flags seen on a replay. 

 

Maybe that's why they deemed that type of play as non-reviewable? 🤷‍♂️

 

But who effin knows when it comes to the NFL and "rules". They can't even define a catch.

[Livinginthepast]

30 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

Shoot. That helmet to helmet at the goal line,  which was fumbled and a touch back on CLE should have been reviewable 

 

If that did and obviously gets overturned,  we're probably going to the SB, I believe we beat Cle at home. 

 

Why not make any call reviewable? Why put restrictions? If the officials missed a call , shouldn't matter what the call was..

I agree but the big problem is that these officials are so bad at their jobs it would be non stop reviews to make up for their incompetence. I have repeatedly argued on here that coaches should be able to challenge one bad officials call per game. That would certainly keep the officials more on their toes to make the right call. Like you said if Cleveland gets that call they might have won. And the helmet to helmet hit was so blatant even at real speed, the official had to be blind not to see it!!

[Ethan in Cleveland]

Everything should be reviewable. The helmet to helmet could have changed the outcome of the KC Cleveland game. The missed punch by Jones. Officials can't see everything. Get the call right should be the goal.

Just now, Livinginthepast said:

I agree but the big problem is that these officials are so bad at their jobs it would be non stop reviews to make up for their incompetence. I have repeatedly argued on here that coaches should be able to challenge one bad officials call per game. That would certainly keep the officials more on their toes to make the right call. Like you said if Cleveland gets that call they might have won. And the helmet to helmet hit was so blatant even at real speed, the official had to be blind not to see it!!

I don't think it's as easy as you state. That official had to watch the out of bounds line the pylon and the ball. In a fraction of a second. That is why replay was added. There is too much to process in fractions of seconds.

[Livinginthepast]

1 minute ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Everything should be reviewable. The helmet to helmet could have changed the outcome of the KC Cleveland game. The missed punch by Jones. Officials can't see everything. Get the call right should be the goal.

The officials had to have seen the Jones punch. He knocked the Bills lineman down with it. They just chose to overlook it which is ridiculous. It should have been an automatic ejection.

[The Jokeman]

6 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

Maybe that's why they deemed that type of play as non-reviewable? 🤷‍♂️

 

But who effin knows when it comes to the NFL and "rules". They can't even define a catch.

I don't know but to me any objective call to me should be reviewable.

2 minutes ago, Livinginthepast said:

The officials had to have seen the Jones punch. He knocked the Bills lineman down with it. They just chose to overlook it which is ridiculous. It should have been an automatic ejection.

The eyes in the sky saw it and clues in the on the field refs to give a team a warning or two before pulling out the flags.

Edited January 25, 2021 by The Jokeman

[Livinginthepast]

3 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Everything should be reviewable. The helmet to helmet could have changed the outcome of the KC Cleveland game. The missed punch by Jones. Officials can't see everything. Get the call right should be the goal.

I don't think it's as easy as you state. That official had to watch the out of bounds line the pylon and the ball. In a fraction of a second. That is why replay was added. There is too much to process in fractions of seconds.

I thought the same thing but when I watched the replay the official is in a good position and you can see the Cleveland player's head take a serious turn after the hit. Also there would have been the unmistakable popping sound of the helmets hitting. Just like the Saints Rams game in 2018 in almost the same position. 

[ComeInPeace]

1 hour ago, Scott7975 said:

Interesting.  I thought for sure it was a reviewable play because most everything is when it comes to plays "governed by the boundary lines."  So I looked in the rule book and it is not.  The rule book specifically states this...

 

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/2020-nfl-rulebook/#article-5.-plays-governed-by-the-boundary-lines

You can understand why it isn't reviewable though. If a QB is ruled to step out of bounds and the whistle is blown, but somehow completes the pass, you can't award a completion after the whistle has been blown. The defense may have stopped playing when they heard the whistle. 

 

It's the same for a player being ruled out of bounds while running with the ball. You can't review it and then award him yards after the whistle was blown. The exception is as it pertains to first down or goal line, the player can be awarded up to 2 steps on review as it pertains to a first down or touchdown.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by ComeInPeace

[buffaloboyinATL]

1 hour ago, sullim4 said:

This is getting a lot of attention in officiating circles.  It's a major administrative error -- misapplication of the rules is usually a death sentence for a playoff assignment for an official.

 

Al Riveron's only role as SVP of officiating is replay.  I would expect him to be the fall guy here, and I would not be at all surprised of Walt Anderson takes over the replay duties next season.

If true, something good would actually come from our game after all.  

[Doc Brown]

Validation.  I just sent this link out to everybody who thought I was crazy at the party last night.  I said how the heck is that reviewable if Allen would've thrown a touchdown pass but the whistle blew?

[folz]

26 minutes ago, Livinginthepast said:

The officials had to have seen the Jones punch. He knocked the Bills lineman down with it. They just chose to overlook it which is ridiculous. It should have been an automatic ejection.

 

They obviously didn't want to have to eject a star player that early in the game. No way they missed it, it was so out in the open.

 

Also, in the spirit of the game, why isn't that reviewable? I understand that you do not want to start awarding all penalties due to review, because that could open up a huge can of worms. But if an action is deemed bad enough for immediate ejection according to the rules (to keep the game safe and in control---and for PR reasons), then shouldn't the league want that player out of the game and therefore allow say throwing a punch or similar to be reviewable for ejection (even if they don't award the penalty as well). I'm pretty sure that they review that stuff in the NBA (was it an incidental elbow or hand or did he purposely tag the guy). Just asking.

 

There are a lot of issues with the NFL's replay system. Al Riveron being the #1 problem. But a close second is what should and shouldn't be reviewable. When an egregious error has been made, it should be correctable. Not bound by a whistle, or a rule. Otherwise, why have replay. Either go back to the call on the field always stands or try to actually fix the bad calls/non-calls. There has to be a way to make horrible calls right without opening the game up to tons of reviews and game stoppage.

Edited January 25, 2021 by folz

[ComeInPeace]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

Validation.  I just sent this link out to everybody who thought I was crazy at the party last night.  I said how the heck is that reviewable if Allen would've thrown a touchdown pass but the whistle blew?

It may be too nuanced, but the ability to negate lost yards would make sense. I could see why they may change the rule to allow the reversal of the yards lost and changing the pass to an incompletion, but not allow a completed pass to be awarded.

 

That might then create issues where you would have to be able to review intentional grounding in that situation

[Livinginthepast]

14 minutes ago, folz said:

 

They obviously didn't want to have to eject a star player that early in the game. No way they missed it, it was so out in the open.

 

Also, in the spirit of the game, why isn't that reviewable? I understand that you do not want to start awarding all penalties due to review, because that could open up a huge can of worms. But if an action is deemed bad enough for immediate ejection according to the rules (to keep the game safe and in control---and for PR reasons), then shouldn't the league want that player out of the game and therefore allow say throwing a punch or similar to be reviewable for ejection (even if they don't award the penalty as well). I'm pretty sure that they review that stuff in the NBA (was it an incidental elbow or hand or did he purposely tag the guy). Just asking.

 

There are a lot of issues with the NFL's replay system. Al Riveron being the #1 problem. But a close second is what should and shouldn't be reviewable. When an egregious error has been made, it should be correctable. Not bound by a whistle, or a rule. Otherwise, why have replay. Either go back to the call on the field always stands or try to actually fix the bad calls/non-calls. There has to be a way to make horrible calls right without opening the game up to tons of reviews and game stoppage.

Wow looking at it again. It is so flagrant and I doubt Feliciano would fake falling down so it had to have been hard. But here is a question, had Feliciano stayed down and made more of a meal out of it, would the refs have reviewed the incident by replay? Is that kind of issue reviewable? I also wonder why Jones snapped like that at all? Its a pretty dumb thing to do, why so mad?

 

Chris Jones Throws a Punch at Feliciano & Refs Didn't See It | Chiefs vs Bills - YouTube

 

Not sure why Youtube link isnt working?

[Doc Brown]

1 minute ago, ComeInPeace said:

It may be too nuanced, but the ability to negate lost yards would make sense. I could see why they may change the rule to allow the reversal of the yards lost and changing the pass to an incompletion, but not allow a completed pass to be awarded.

 

That might then create issues where you would have to be able to review intentional grounding in that situation

That's a good tweak of the rules that they should consider.  Intentional grounding is another area they should look at.

[Freddie's Dead]

They owed us one, incompetent iceholes.

[Livinginthepast]

 

Apparently punching people is a regular thing for Chris Jones! And he was ejected for it 3 years ago. Another odd coincidence, the guy who scored the TD before the PAT that Jones was tossed? TJ Yeldon!

Hopefully the link works

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWkjjck76nQ

Edited January 26, 2021 by Livinginthepast

[MJS]

I don't get it. They review whether or not a player stepped out of bounds when making a reception. That can be overturned and deemed a catch. What's the difference? They aren't allowed to review whether or not a QB stepped out of bounds?

[djp14150]

8 hours ago, Big Turk said:

So the head of review in the NFL doesn't even know what is reviewable and what isn't?? It was a league initiated review inside of 2 minutes.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl-reviewed-non-reviewable-ruling-171349172.html

 

false

 

any play a coach can challenge must be eligible to be reviewed under 2 minutes when they can’t challenge.

[reddogblitz]

7 hours ago, folz said:

There are a lot of issues with the NFL's replay system. Al Riveron being the #1 problem. But a close second is what should and shouldn't be reviewable. When an egregious error has been made, it should be correctable. Not bound by a whistle, or a rule. Otherwise, why have replay. Either go back to the call on the field always stands or try to actually fix the bad calls/non-calls. There has to be a way to make horrible calls right without opening the game up to tons of reviews and game stoppage.

 

I vote for this.  With the fancy technology and rules and they still get it wrong on a regular basis.  

 

Do you really think they can fix it to make it always right and fair?  I don't.

 

And the frame by frame nonsense has to stop.  

 

Give me 15 minutes back and I'll live with the calls on the field.

 

If they are going to keep it though I would suggest that obvious personal fouls like face masking and helmet to helmet hits in the interest of player safety.

Edited January 26, 2021 by reddogblitz

[Big Turk]

3 hours ago, djp14150 said:

 

false

 

any play a coach can challenge must be eligible to be reviewed under 2 minutes when they can’t challenge.

 

A coach can't challenge it. That's the point. It is not challengeable under replay rules.

[Motorin']

Giving us the 9 yards doesn't come close to making up for not ejecting Chris Jones. 

[Thurman#1]

14 hours ago, Big Turk said:

So the head of review in the NFL doesn't even know what is reviewable and what isn't?? It was a league initiated review inside of 2 minutes.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl-reviewed-non-reviewable-ruling-171349172.html

 

 

No reason necessarily to think he didn't know.

 

Two possibilities:

 

1) He didn't know, or

 

2) He knew, and did it anyway, figuring it was better to serve the spirit of the rules rather than the letter.

 

They do this every once in a while, like on the play last year where we kicked it off and the returner tossed it towards the ref without officially giving up the play. IMO it made sense to go with the spirit of the game both times.

[timekills17]

14 hours ago, Livinginthepast said:

The officials had to have seen the Jones punch. He knocked the Bills lineman down with it. They just chose to overlook it which is ridiculous. It should have been an automatic ejection.

 

Arguably Josh should have been ejected for intentionally throwing the ball at a player's head as well.

While I think the first had more malicious intent, I doubt either were meant to hurt the opposing player and both were momentary frustration actions in a game that requires people to be at an above-normal focus and intensity.

 

I.E. While it's difficult to determine where to draw the line, I don't think either warranted an ejection as neither was likely intended to not would cause injury.

But if you're going to do it for the first (Jones slap), you probably need to do it for the second (Allen ball throw.)

[Big Turk]

2 hours ago, timekills17 said:

 

Arguably Josh should have been ejected for intentionally throwing the ball at a player's head as well.

While I think the first had more malicious intent, I doubt either were meant to hurt the opposing player and both were momentary frustration actions in a game that requires people to be at an above-normal focus and intensity.

 

I.E. While it's difficult to determine where to draw the line, I don't think either warranted an ejection as neither was likely intended to not would cause injury.

But if you're going to do it for the first (Jones slap), you probably need to do it for the second (Allen ball throw.)

 

The first is open and shut. If you throw a punch there is no room for interpretation it is an automatic personal foul and disqualification by rule.

[Boxcar]

18 hours ago, Big Turk said:

So the head of review in the NFL doesn't even know what is reviewable and what isn't?? It was a league initiated review inside of 2 minutes.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl-reviewed-non-reviewable-ruling-171349172.html

Seems more like an issue with NFL's archaic rules on what can or can't be reviewed than Al Riveron tbh. Bottom line, they got the call correct, so who cares if it was technically reviewable or not?

[timekills17]

1 minute ago, Big Turk said:

 

The first is open and shut. If you throw a punch there is no room for interpretation it is an automatic personal foul and disqualification by rule.

 

If there is any flexibility/subjectivity/room for interpretation it's in whether or not they throw the flag. If thrown - it's a punch and gone.

How many times have you seen pushing and shoving and a helmet or facemask get hit in a post-tackle scuffle? 

 

Not arguing this specific time as it was a clearly observable and identifiable single person on a single person. But given the general refrain on flags in the postseason for all manner of events that drew penalties during the regular season, I submit this may not have been missed but (maybe snap) decided that it didn't warrant a flag.

[Big Turk]

4 minutes ago, timekills17 said:

 

If there is any flexibility/subjectivity/room for interpretation it's in whether or not they throw the flag. If thrown - it's a punch and gone.

How many times have you seen pushing and shoving and a helmet or facemask get hit in a post-tackle scuffle? 

 

Not arguing this specific time as it was a clearly observable and identifiable single person on a single person. But given the general refrain on flags in the postseason for all manner of events that drew penalties during the regular season, I submit this may not have been missed but (maybe snap) decided that it didn't warrant a flag.

 

Pushing and shoving is different. Once you throw a punch with a closed fist the room for interpretation is gone.

7 minutes ago, Boxcar said:

Seems more like an issue with NFL's archaic rules on what can or can't be reviewed than Al Riveron tbh. Bottom line, they got the call correct, so who cares if it was technically reviewable or not?

 

Because now it opens up a whole big can of worms...what if Mahomes is ruled out of bounds in the Super Bowl on a play but throws a TD? What if the ref blew the whistle?

[nkreed]

7 minutes ago, timekills17 said:

 

If there is any flexibility/subjectivity/room for interpretation it's in whether or not they throw the flag. If thrown - it's a punch and gone.

How many times have you seen pushing and shoving and a helmet or facemask get hit in a post-tackle scuffle? 

 

Not arguing this specific time as it was a clearly observable and identifiable single person on a single person. But given the general refrain on flags in the postseason for all manner of events that drew penalties during the regular season, I submit this may not have been missed but (maybe snap) decided that it didn't warrant a flag.

The question I have on this is why can NY help the officials when they are looking at a brawl "to get it right" but can't signal an obvious punch?

 

I was yelling at my TV to signal to the officials that the punch was thrown. I am pretty confident they have the ability to signal this infraction. Does anyone have the official rules pertaining to the fight protocol. Obviously not that it matters cause NY gets these wrong over and over again.