What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Detroit should have had the ball... (1 Viewer)

Ticky tack penalties have decided games before.

Maybe it is the SEA player who should have known the rule....therefore simply grabbing the ball and falling it.

DET got screwed out of 1st and Goal on the 6 inch line.

I have extreme confidence that if the refs made the correct call....DET would have somehow screwed up 1st and Goal on the 6 inch line and SEA would have still won the game.

Why the NFL doesn't have (for lack of better terminology) some "Rain Man" esque dude in NFL Central who knows the rulebook front, back and sideways and who can overrule the ruling on the field is beyond me. A multi-billion industry and caretakers of the integrity of the game on the field don't even know the rules??? SMH.....no SMDH.

 
fantasycurse42 said:
Is every Seahawks fan this dense? Is it so hard to say, "sure, we got a lucky break on a no call"?

I just don't understand, since the end result stays the same. Some of you guys are funny.
Click to expand...
They're desperately clinging to their last gasp of air of being a dominant team.

 
RBM said:
:lmao: at calling it a technicality.
Click to expand...
Um, what would you call it? If he falls on it, game over. If he accidentally knocks it out of bounds while trying to fall on it, game over. If he knocks the ball out of bounds on purpose, but in a sneaky, non-"overt" fashion, game over. Something that is legal to do in all ways except "overt" is pretty much the definition of a technicality. Again, I am just speaking as a fan of the game. Generally, I grow weary of Seahawks fans and feel bad for Detroit fans, but just as a guy watching football it would've been a shame to see any team team win/lose on a silly technicality.

 
Looked intentional but ball likely would have gone out anyway

Even if it was called Lions would have found a way to lose the game

Non issue...move on Lions fans

 
FF Ninja said:
RBM said:
:lmao: at calling it a technicality.
Click to expand...
Um, what would you call it? If he falls on it, game over. If he accidentally knocks it out of bounds while trying to fall on it, game over. If he knocks the ball out of bounds on purpose, but in a sneaky, non-"overt" fashion, game over. Something that is legal to do in all ways except "overt" is pretty much the definition of a technicality. Again, I am just speaking as a fan of the game. Generally, I grow weary of Seahawks fans and feel bad for Detroit fans, but just as a guy watching football it would've been a shame to see any team team win/lose on a silly technicality.
Click to expand...
Doesn't sound like you're a fan of the game. Sounds like you're a fan of certain rules of the game.

Technicalities happen all the time in sports.

 
FF Ninja said:
daveR said:
fantasycurse42 said:
daveR said:
Seriously??? You want the big break on a technicality? Kam made the play. The ball was heading out of bounds, regardless.

Grow a pair.
Click to expand...
No technicality at all. They flagrantly violated a rule directly in front of the ref. Nothing to do with growing a pair, it was Seattle who was bailed out by a stupid play directly in front of a clueless official.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's a technicality. If he had attempted to catch & carry the ball out, it's a touchback. If he had chested it out, it's a touchback. If he let's it go, it's a touchback. If he uses his head to knock it out, it's a touchback. Because he used his hand, you want the ball 6" from the goal line. You don't want football, you want legalistic BS.
Click to expand...
I wasn't rooting for any team, so this is my general stance, too. If the rule was known and made sense then the guy would've just grabbed it and the game would be over. I concede that yes, technically, a ticky tack penalty should have been called and Detroit probably wins the game on a technicality, but as a fan of the game, that's not really what you want to see.
Click to expand...
I was busy & didn't see any of the game. I saw this play reviewed on SportsCenter. I don't have any players on either team

Because calling the penalty would have had a huge impact on the game in a situation where it was unwarranted, I think the "no call" was the gutsy and proper thing for the ref to do.

 
3 pages on this? Lucky non-call for Seattle.

NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino: "We'll review all the angles," Blandino said on Monday Night Football. "On TV it looked like the Seahawks player intentionally hit the ball. That is a foul. The result of the penalty would give Detroit possession enforced at the spot of the fumble. With half the distance to the goal line, Detroit would have had a first down."

Wright admitted that it was an intentional act."I wanted to just knock it out of bounds and not try to catch it and fumble it," he said. " I was just trying to make a good play for my team.

 
NFL refs by and large are idiots. Of course they are going to miss some calls from time to time and we should cut them some slack for that but there's no excuse for not knowing the rules. You have to start firing some of these bums.

 
daveR said:
FF Ninja said:
daveR said:
fantasycurse42 said:
daveR said:
Seriously??? You want the big break on a technicality? Kam made the play. The ball was heading out of bounds, regardless.

Grow a pair.
Click to expand...
No technicality at all. They flagrantly violated a rule directly in front of the ref. Nothing to do with growing a pair, it was Seattle who was bailed out by a stupid play directly in front of a clueless official.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's a technicality. If he had attempted to catch & carry the ball out, it's a touchback. If he had chested it out, it's a touchback. If he let's it go, it's a touchback. If he uses his head to knock it out, it's a touchback. Because he used his hand, you want the ball 6" from the goal line. You don't want football, you want legalistic BS.
Click to expand...
I wasn't rooting for any team, so this is my general stance, too. If the rule was known and made sense then the guy would've just grabbed it and the game would be over. I concede that yes, technically, a ticky tack penalty should have been called and Detroit probably wins the game on a technicality, but as a fan of the game, that's not really what you want to see.
Click to expand...
I was busy & didn't see any of the game. I saw this play reviewed on SportsCenter. I don't have any players on either team

Because calling the penalty would have had a huge impact on the game in a situation where it was unwarranted, I think the "no call" was the gutsy and proper thing for the ref to do.
Click to expand...
Selective enforcement of the rules is gutsy? LOL

 
Thunderlips said:
Why the NFL doesn't have (for lack of better terminology) some "Rain Man" esque dude in NFL Central who knows the rulebook front, back and sideways and who can overrule the ruling on the field is beyond me. A multi-billion industry and caretakers of the integrity of the game on the field don't even know the rules??? SMH.....no SMDH.
Click to expand...
I just said something similar in another thread. Because of the officials not knowing the rules, the outcome of a game was reversed. That should never happen.

 
FF Ninja said:
RBM said:
:lmao: at calling it a technicality.
Click to expand...
Um, what would you call it? If he falls on it, game over. If he accidentally knocks it out of bounds while trying to fall on it, game over. If he knocks the ball out of bounds on purpose, but in a sneaky, non-"overt" fashion, game over. Something that is legal to do in all ways except "overt" is pretty much the definition of a technicality. Again, I am just speaking as a fan of the game. Generally, I grow weary of Seahawks fans and feel bad for Detroit fans, but just as a guy watching football it would've been a shame to see any team team win/lose on a silly technicality.
Click to expand...
He didn't do any of those things. There is rule against what he did...it doesn't matter what you call it. There is no grey area.

 
Hard to see anyone defending the refs. They missed a call that cost the Lions the game. There is no other way to see this or dance around it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No excuse for an nfl official not to know all the rules. It's even worse for a back judge not to know that particular rule, as he's the one most likely to have to call it.

Good rule/bad rule/what would have happened is totally irrelevant. That call has to made. Other rules that have no impact on the result of individual plays are enforced 100 times a week and impact the results of games.

 
read a few posts here, but judging from some posters, if there is a holding call off the ball, it shouldn't be call because "it wouldn't make any difference"?

 
The worst thing about this is that if the Lions go winless this year, it'll be tainted with an asterisk. It won't be pure like their last 0-16 season.

 
Need for a development league becoming more and more apparent. Someplace to send underperforming refs, and to train qbs and o-linemen.

 
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.

 
Jets fan with no dog in the hunt. Motion of the ball indicates that it wasn't destined to go immediately out of bounds. Pursuing Lion's player had a shot at it if Wright didn't cleanly cover it.

 
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
Why do you recognize the great play Chancellor made and not the terrible play Wright made?

This doesn't make any sense to me. It was within the same play. Players make great plays that are negated all the time.

 
TLEF316 said:
No excuse for an nfl official not to know all the rules. It's even worse for a back judge not to know that particular rule, as he's the one most likely to have to call it.

Good rule/bad rule/what would have happened is totally irrelevant. That call has to made. Other rules that have no impact on the result of individual plays are enforced 100 times a week and impact the results of games.
Click to expand...
The league after the fact is claiming that the ref knew the rule, and in his mind, he did not feel the SEA player hit the ball out of bounds intentionally. Since the play is not reviewable, his judgment and decision is final. That being said, it looked clear as day from every angle that the player hit the ball out of bounds with the sole intention of trying to hit the ball out of bounds (and he later said he intended to hit the ball out of bounds).

 
Thunderlips said:
FF Ninja said:
RBM said:
:lmao: at calling it a technicality.
Click to expand...
Um, what would you call it? If he falls on it, game over. If he accidentally knocks it out of bounds while trying to fall on it, game over. If he knocks the ball out of bounds on purpose, but in a sneaky, non-"overt" fashion, game over. Something that is legal to do in all ways except "overt" is pretty much the definition of a technicality. Again, I am just speaking as a fan of the game. Generally, I grow weary of Seahawks fans and feel bad for Detroit fans, but just as a guy watching football it would've been a shame to see any team team win/lose on a silly technicality.
Click to expand...
Doesn't sound like you're a fan of the game. Sounds like you're a fan of certain rules of the game.

Technicalities happen all the time in sports.
Click to expand...
How do you get that from what I said?? I'm a fan of intuitive rules that make sense for the game. For example, in my opinion, if a player has possession of a football and reaches across the goal line then fumbles the ball, it is a touchdown when it passes the goal line and that's all that matters. I don't like weird rules that don't make logical sense like the reversed touchdowns for Calvin, Dez, Eifert, etc. In the case of this play, just watching the game and not knowing the rules, the vast majority of fans would vote that the Seahawks won the game because that's what makes sense. If there is a silly rule that says somehow Detroit should have gotten the ball back then that's counter-intuitive and I'm not really upset about that outcome. They should probably vote out the rule like they did the tuck rule. I understand the desire for calls to be made correctly on both sides, but at the same time I don't like weird rules to decide the outcome of games.

thatguythere said:
FF Ninja said:
RBM said:
:lmao: at calling it a technicality.
Click to expand...
Um, what would you call it? If he falls on it, game over. If he accidentally knocks it out of bounds while trying to fall on it, game over. If he knocks the ball out of bounds on purpose, but in a sneaky, non-"overt" fashion, game over. Something that is legal to do in all ways except "overt" is pretty much the definition of a technicality. Again, I am just speaking as a fan of the game. Generally, I grow weary of Seahawks fans and feel bad for Detroit fans, but just as a guy watching football it would've been a shame to see any team team win/lose on a silly technicality.
Click to expand...
He didn't do any of those things. There is rule against what he did...it doesn't matter what you call it. There is no grey area.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point of the conversation. I wasn't saying there was grey area. I was explaining why I consider this rule a technicality - it is not well known and it doesn't make sense. The refs should've known the call and made the call, but as a fan the ruling would be counter intuitive and would leave a bad taste in the mouth (unless you're a fan of the team that benefited).

 
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:

 
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It wasn't a great play at all. It was trying to be a smart play but the player didn't know the rules and has admitted as much.

Why does everyone keep hovering around this?

 
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It is? if so, that's stupid as well. You recovered in the endzone, it's your ball. Doesn't matter that you stepped out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
TLEF316 said:
No excuse for an nfl official not to know all the rules. It's even worse for a back judge not to know that particular rule, as he's the one most likely to have to call it.

Good rule/bad rule/what would have happened is totally irrelevant. That call has to made. Other rules that have no impact on the result of individual plays are enforced 100 times a week and impact the results of games.
Click to expand...
The league after the fact is claiming that the ref knew the rule, and in his mind, he did not feel the SEA player hit the ball out of bounds intentionally. Since the play is not reviewable, his judgment and decision is final. That being said, it looked clear as day from every angle that the player hit the ball out of bounds with the sole intention of trying to hit the ball out of bounds (and he later said he intended to hit the ball out of bounds).
Click to expand...
As you say, it is clear from every angle that the player hit the ball out of bounds intentionally.

The ref had a clear view of it.

It's unlikely the ref did not know the rules.

IMO the most likely scenario is that the moment was too big for the ref and he lacked the guts to make the call given the game situation.

This appears a common problem. Refs err on the side of conservatism intuitively believing something will bail them out, either a coaches challenge, an automatic booth review, a referee calling for a caucus or whatever. Or maybe they respond to a player who complains.

In this case the linesman did not have that sort of lifeline and the call fell through the cracks. The rule is fairly arcane so there was no immediate crowd or other raucous reactions. So he falls back on the "judgment" excuse.

 
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.

 
lod01 said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It is? if so, that's stupid as well. You recovered in the endzone, it's your ball. Doesn't matter that you stepped out.
Click to expand...
To make it even crazier, if Wright had stepped out of bounds and then tapped the ball the instant he touches it, it becomes a dead ball because he's standing OOB.

 
Anarchy99 said:
TLEF316 said:
No excuse for an nfl official not to know all the rules. It's even worse for a back judge not to know that particular rule, as he's the one most likely to have to call it.

Good rule/bad rule/what would have happened is totally irrelevant. That call has to made. Other rules that have no impact on the result of individual plays are enforced 100 times a week and impact the results of games.
Click to expand...
The league after the fact is claiming that the ref knew the rule, and in his mind, he did not feel the SEA player hit the ball out of bounds intentionally. Since the play is not reviewable, his judgment and decision is final. That being said, it looked clear as day from every angle that the player hit the ball out of bounds with the sole intention of trying to hit the ball out of bounds (and he later said he intended to hit the ball out of bounds).
Click to expand...
Yeah I think we all know that's a cover you ### situation. Better to be incompetent on a "judgment call" (although as you said,the Seattle players intention was clear) than flat out not know about the rule.

No dog in the fight either way,but this is bad.

 
The rule exists so defending players can't hit balls out of the back of the endzone when they likely can't recover a fumble.

It's not a dumb rule.

 
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
Actually I think the rule that says a fumble out of the endzone is a touch back and gives it to the defense is kind of dumb. I think the defense shouldn't get the ball unless it was 4th down or the defense actually recovers the ball and if not the ball should be put on 1 and the offense keeps the ball.

But what I think should be the rule doesn't make a bot of difference. The rule states that an intentionally batted ball by the defense results in a 1st down and that is what should have happened in this case.

 
Anarchy99 said:
TLEF316 said:
No excuse for an nfl official not to know all the rules. It's even worse for a back judge not to know that particular rule, as he's the one most likely to have to call it.

Good rule/bad rule/what would have happened is totally irrelevant. That call has to made. Other rules that have no impact on the result of individual plays are enforced 100 times a week and impact the results of games.
Click to expand...
The league after the fact is claiming that the ref knew the rule, and in his mind, he did not feel the SEA player hit the ball out of bounds intentionally. Since the play is not reviewable, his judgment and decision is final. That being said, it looked clear as day from every angle that the player hit the ball out of bounds with the sole intention of trying to hit the ball out of bounds (and he later said he intended to hit the ball out of bounds).
Click to expand...
The league has absolutely no other choice than to say this. They can't say a team won a game because their officials didn't know the rules. If you leave it to a ref's discretion, they know every fan in the country (except Seahawks') knows it was batted out, but you can't argue with what an official thought he saw.

 
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JuniorNB said:
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??
Click to expand...
Let's be clear on one thing: this is the Lions. Do you really think it 100% reversed the outcome of the game? Or do you think it's possible for the Lions to be the Lions?

 
biju said:
JuniorNB said:
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??
Click to expand...
Let's be clear on one thing: this is the Lions. Do you really think it 100% reversed the outcome of the game? Or do you think it's possible for the Lions to be the Lions?
Click to expand...
First and goal from the 6 inch line? I'd say 99.98% chance they'd score.

Now if it were Seattle, I could see Carroll overthinking and throwing a pass into the crowded middle of the field.

 
biju said:
JuniorNB said:
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??
Click to expand...
Let's be clear on one thing: this is the Lions. Do you really think it 100% reversed the outcome of the game? Or do you think it's possible for the Lions to be the Lions?
Click to expand...
Scenario

Seattle WinExp

Megatron TD without fumble 15.7

Fumble with correctly called batting penalty 19.3%

Fumble with uncalled penalty, change of possession 89.5%

From Bill Barnwell. No. Not 100%.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
biju said:
JuniorNB said:
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??
Click to expand...
Let's be clear on one thing: this is the Lions. Do you really think it 100% reversed the outcome of the game? Or do you think it's possible for the Lions to be the Lions?
Click to expand...
Well in the case we will never know.

Look, I understand that refs are human and aren't perfect. But making it non-reviewable is stupid. The replay clearly shows the guy intentionally batting the ball. What is the point in having a replay when it can't overturn an obvious blown call?

 
JuniorNB said:
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??
Click to expand...
:fishing:

 
Godsbrother said:
biju said:
JuniorNB said:
George Jefferson Airplane said:
WhatDoIKnow said:
lod01 said:
So now we have the Holy Roller AND the Holy #### Roller.

Common sense says that there is no way the Lions even deserve the ball back. The Seahawks should not be punished for making a great play and batting the ball out of the end zone was actually a great play as was Chancellor's play.

Just another rule in the NFL that is flat out stupid. Of course, the guy should have grabbed the ball and run out of the back of the end zone.
Click to expand...
How? He grabs the ball and steps out, it's a touchback. He grabs the ball and goes down in the end zone, it's a touchback He tries to grab the ball and it goes out, it's a touchback. He intentionally bats it out, it's a penalty.

Player has admitted he didn't know the rule. Wilson said they got fortunate with the call. NFL has said the refs missed it. How is it a great play? :shrug:
Click to expand...
It was a great play IMO because he did would a smart football player would do by instinct to secure the win. The rule is dumb, maybe not as dumb as the Dez Bryant continuation rule, but dumb. The Seattle guy had no one within 3 yards of him and the ball was going out of bounds. Can't believe people care about this.
Click to expand...
You can't believe that people care that a ref not knowing the rules totally reversed the outcome of a game??
Click to expand...
Let's be clear on one thing: this is the Lions. Do you really think it 100% reversed the outcome of the game? Or do you think it's possible for the Lions to be the Lions?
Click to expand...
Well in the case we will never know.

Look, I understand that refs are human and aren't perfect. But making it non-reviewable is stupid. The replay clearly shows the guy intentionally batting the ball. What is the point in having a replay when it can't overturn an obvious blown call?
Click to expand...
Sure, but people saying the rule is the rule and should have been called, but then turning around and saying the fact that "it isn't reviewable is stupid" seems a little contradictory here.

 
GroveDiesel said:
zftcg said:
montana_grizzly_bears said:
VaTerp said:
montana_grizzly_bears said:
Aren't all turnovers looked at? This goes all the way to New York if it didnt' get looked at.
Click to expand...
The turnover is looked at but that penalty is not reviewable. That should be changed.
Click to expand...
The turnover would have been overruled though. That is the point I am trying to make they can call back the turnover and then call the penalty after the fact if it in the rulebook. At least I would hope.
Click to expand...
Not totally sure if this is the case, but isn't any penalty that depends on "intent" inherently a judgment call by the ref and therefore not reviewable? IOW, if the ref on the field ruled that Wright did not intentionally bat the ball, the replay official can't overturn it. It's like a blown PI call.

ETA: These comments by Blandino seem to support that interpretation.
Click to expand...
Of course the ref is going to claim he thought the ball was hit out inadvertantly. It not only gives himself a reason not to be punished by the NFL for a missed call, it gives the NFL cover for why the play wasn't reviewed.
Click to expand...
If the ref is actually saying that (and I'm not totally clear that he is), then my guess is that he's falling on his sword to protect his crew.

Consider these two scenarios:

1. Officiating crew has a complete brain fart, and even in their conference, no one remembers the illegal batting rule. (This is what I believe most likely happened)

2. Ref asks the back judge, "Was that an intentional bat?" BJ says no. Other refs defer to him because the play happened right in front of him.

From the perspective of the game call, it's irrelevant whether the BJ forgot the rule or made a dumb call. As soon as the refs awarded Seattle the ball, there was no way for the replay official to overturn the call.

Now, when the league grades the back judge this week, it's also mostly irrelevant. In that context, judgment calls are absolutely reviewable (officials get downgraded for blown PI calls all the time), so the back judge will be punished no matter what, although I have no idea if he receives a worse punishment for forgetting a rule than for exercising poor judgment.

BUT from the perspective of the rest of his crew, it is very important which scenario above is accurate. Because if no one spoke up, then they are all going to be downgraded for forgetting the rule. Therefore, the back judge might figure, "I'm screwed no matter what, so I might as well ensure the rest of my guys don't go down with me."

All that said, it's not entirely clear to me that the BJ is claiming that. As far as I know, he hasn't said anything publicly. The league might just be saying, "Because the BJ didn't affirmatively rule it an intentional bat, there was no way to review it." That's different from him actually saying he thought it was unintentional.

Regardless, my guess is that the whole crew does get punished, and the BJ takes the brunt of it.

 
In the last 2 minutes of game isn't there another weird rule where only the guy who fumbled can recover the fumble?

Hawks got lucky, and it is a stupid rule. Just like the stupid things that determine a catch.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ministry of Pain
Did anyone in Redraft pair Justin Fields with Anthony Richardson? What are your current options as you move forward?
Replies
10
Views
670
tickle
tickle
T
Travdogg's 3 round mock draft
2
Replies
77
Views
2K
travdogg
T
Capella
*Capella’s Soon-to-Be Extremely Wrong Over/Under predictions 2023 bay-bee* 🦄 🙏🏈💸
Replies
24
Views
925
Pip's Invitation
Pip's Invitation

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top