Every TD is reviewed (1 Viewer)

[flooredyas]

Sorry if this has been brought up, if so merge it.

WHY was Sproles TD vs. Chicago not overruled, as he clearly stepped out of bounds at the 1 yard line? Are teams supposed to challenge the call, or just know that the play will be reviewed. This one certainly wasn't.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Wasn't really clear IMO.

 

[gigantor]

Blown call, or non call, or review, or non review.

who knows but someone screwed up big time

 

[aschleder]

i don't know exactly what happened, but i can tell you with certainty that coaches are not supposed to challenge the call. hue jackson learned that the hard way when he received a 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for throwing the challenge flag after a touchdown. scoring plays CANNOT be challenged.

 

[flooredyas]

Wasn't really clear IMO.

Having Redzone I got to see it 2-3 times and it was very clear that he stepped OB. The announcers said that it would be reversed as well. The next thing you see is the X-point being kicked w/o the refs calling for a review. This was absolutely blown.

 

[gigantor]

pics of foot clearly out of bounds

Sproles

 

[LittlePhatty]

In one game I was watching (can't remember which one) the announcer said something like every scoring play is automatically checked to see if a review is needed. He implied that not all scores are fully reviewed, but that there is a first-level call made by someone to say yes or no, whether they think it needs to be reviewed. I really don't know how it works, but that's how the announcer explained it.

 

[jbz]

add it to Mark Ingram's total please

 

[LawFitz]

I thought several TDs were blown by the review officials:

Sproles

Hernandez

FJax goal line

Moore hail mary

This new replay system sux.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

pics of foot clearly out of bounds

Sproles

Kind of looks close, he has small feet, he's only like 5-5, OK...yeah kind of a bad call but when the play happened it looked like a TD.

 

[JHuber77]

I thought several TDs were blown by the review officials:SprolesHernandezFJax goal lineMoore hail maryDon't forget about the potential Finley touchdownThis new replay system sux.

 

[gigantor]

pics of foot clearly out of bounds

Sproles

Kind of looks close, he has small feet, he's only like 5-5, OK...yeah kind of a bad call but when the play happened it looked like a TD.

Oh I agree with you that when it happened it looked like a TD. I think the confusion is how this automatic scoring replay system works. I was under the impression every score is now reviewed, but that must be incorrect.

 

[atcdav]

Blown call, or non call, or review, or non review.

who knows but someone screwed up big time

Blame Lovie, he only challenges when it is obvious he will lose the challenge

 

[LargeMouthBass]

Yeah that sucked. Definitely shouldn't have been a TD either by Brees or Sproles. You can't do anything about it now but I'm gonna get pissed if I lose by 5 points...

 

[LittlePhatty]

"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play."

Sounds like there are two levels.

The first level is almost the same type of judgement call the coaches would have made in the past - "does it need to be reviewed in the monitor, or is it obvious that the ruling on the field was good"? And that's where the mistakes were made. On some of the plays mentioned, if the replay official had called for an in-monitor review, the plays probably would have been overturned.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Talking about it right now

 

[Novice2]

Whats the ''we didn't do anything wrong here'' NFL mouthpiece saying?

 

[phillybirds]

It's still an incredibly close call.

You could still argue that the back of his foot might still be slightly off the ground.

Heel might be up very slightly.

Sproles owner here (nice waiver wire pickup in my PPR redraft).

 

[Novice2]

It's still an incredibly close call.

Isn't that the point of replay? If it is close take another look at it. Whoever was in charge of looking at TD's in the NO should be demoted to packing up the cameras.

 

[Short Corner]

It's still an incredibly close call. You could still argue that the back of his foot might still be slightly off the ground. Heel might be up very slightly. Sproles owner here (nice waiver wire pickup in my PPR redraft).

The last thing we want here is the incredibly close ones to be reviewed.

 

[phillybirds]

It's still an incredibly close call.

Isn't that the point of replay? If it is close take another look at it. Whoever was in charge of looking at TD's in the NO should be demoted to packing up the cameras.

Agreed!!It deserved another look. I was just saying I'm not sure it would have been overturned...but heck yeah, if that's not one to look at twice then what is.

 

[phillybirds]

It's still an incredibly close call. You could still argue that the back of his foot might still be slightly off the ground. Heel might be up very slightly. Sproles owner here (nice waiver wire pickup in my PPR redraft).

The last thing we want here is the incredibly close ones to be reviewed.

I hate when that happens.

 

[r0llin_game]

I could have sworn on RZ channel they said that Oakland got penalized for challenging a TD. Any truth to that or did I mishear it?

 

[placebo]

My only guess is they don't bother reviewing uncontested runs into the endzone, and the Sproles play was lumped into that category. Like there would be no point reviewing the bomb to Devery Henderson from earlier in the game for example. There were two officials right on top of that play so you think they would have noticed how close he was to the sidelines.

 

[phillybirds]

My only guess is they don't bother reviewing uncontested runs into the endzone, and the Sproles play was lumped into that category.

That could be. In my opinion it's gotten ridiculous how a player can just jump and wave the ball somewhere near the endzone and get a TD. But I know the league loves it. I can't imagine the league wants every one of those plays challenged.

 

[belljr]

"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play."

Sounds like there are two levels.

The first level is almost the same type of judgement call the coaches would have made in the past - "does it need to be reviewed in the monitor, or is it obvious that the ruling on the field was good"? And that's where the mistakes were made. On some of the plays mentioned, if the replay official had called for an in-monitor review, the plays probably would have been overturned.

That's how all replays have worked when under 2 minutes etc, they just added it to all scoring plays now.

 

[RUSF18]

"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play."

Sounds like there are two levels.

The first level is almost the same type of judgement call the coaches would have made in the past - "does it need to be reviewed in the monitor, or is it obvious that the ruling on the field was good"? And that's where the mistakes were made. On some of the plays mentioned, if the replay official had called for an in-monitor review, the plays probably would have been overturned.

That's how all replays have worked when under 2 minutes etc, they just added it to all scoring plays now.

I don't remember all scoring plays under 2 minutes automatically being reviewed. It definitely had to come from the booth if it was questionable, but don't recall it being the same rule.

 

[Warrior]

No point in fully reviewing. I'm sure they could tell from watching it a couple of times quickly that it would be inconclusive. His toe was in, it's impossible to tell whether his heel was down or in the air.

I'd wager 10 to 1 that every person in here that's complaining played against Sproles or had Ingram on their team this week.

 

[RUSF18]

No point in fully reviewing. I'm sure they could tell from watching it a couple of times quickly that it would be inconclusive. His toe was in, it's impossible to tell whether his heel was down or in the air.I'd wager 10 to 1 that every person in here that's complaining played against Sproles or had Ingram on their team this week.

What I found surprising was that when I was watching on Red Zone, the commentator even said he stepped OOB as it was happening.

 

[Joseph]

I could have sworn on RZ channel they said that Oakland got penalized for challenging a TD. Any truth to that or did I mishear it?

Yes, that happened. I believe they called it a delay of game for attempting to challenge a scoring play.Oddly, they also called for a field review of an extra point in that game.

 

[joffer]

No point in fully reviewing. I'm sure they could tell from watching it a couple of times quickly that it would be inconclusive. His toe was in, it's impossible to tell whether his heel was down or in the air.I'd wager 10 to 1 that every person in here that's complaining played against Sproles or had Ingram on their team this week.

you'd be wrong. his foot was out

 

[belljr]

"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play."

Sounds like there are two levels.

The first level is almost the same type of judgement call the coaches would have made in the past - "does it need to be reviewed in the monitor, or is it obvious that the ruling on the field was good"? And that's where the mistakes were made. On some of the plays mentioned, if the replay official had called for an in-monitor review, the plays probably would have been overturned.

That's how all replays have worked when under 2 minutes etc, they just added it to all scoring plays now.

I don't remember all scoring plays under 2 minutes automatically being reviewed. It definitely had to come from the booth if it was questionable, but don't recall it being the same rule.

No. The "old" way was coaches can't challenge under 2 minutes. That is initiated from the booth. They now took the same approach for ALL scoring plays. So basically now the the same process for reviews under 2 minutes is now used for all scoring plays. Nothing has changed in the process on how booth initiated replays worked. They just added all scoring plays.Just read that they tried to buzz down to the official but it didn't work

 

[RUSF18]

"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play."

Sounds like there are two levels.

The first level is almost the same type of judgement call the coaches would have made in the past - "does it need to be reviewed in the monitor, or is it obvious that the ruling on the field was good"? And that's where the mistakes were made. On some of the plays mentioned, if the replay official had called for an in-monitor review, the plays probably would have been overturned.

That's how all replays have worked when under 2 minutes etc, they just added it to all scoring plays now.

I don't remember all scoring plays under 2 minutes automatically being reviewed. It definitely had to come from the booth if it was questionable, but don't recall it being the same rule.

No. The "old" way was coaches can't challenge under 2 minutes. That is initiated from the booth. They now took the same approach for ALL scoring plays. So basically now the the same process for reviews under 2 minutes is now used for all scoring plays. Nothing has changed in the process on how booth initiated replays worked. They just added all scoring plays.Just read that they tried to buzz down to the official but it didn't work

Maybe I'm not being clear...under the "old" way, if any play was under question in the last two minutes (touchdown, runner out of bounds, fumble, etc), the booth would buzz down to the ref and it would be reviewed. Now, questionable or not (did he cross, was a foot out of bounds, etc) every single scoring play is supposed to be reviewed by the booth prior to buzzing down. There is a difference.

 

[ATC1]

Maybe it would have been reversed or maybe not. However, there should be better consistency across the league. If Tony Gonzalez TD catch last night was reviewed, the Sproles TD should have been. I was in the car last night listening to the ATL game on the radio when Roddy White caught his TD pass. They said he might have stepped OB during his route, but it was never reviewed.

 

[belljr]

"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play."

Sounds like there are two levels.

The first level is almost the same type of judgement call the coaches would have made in the past - "does it need to be reviewed in the monitor, or is it obvious that the ruling on the field was good"? And that's where the mistakes were made. On some of the plays mentioned, if the replay official had called for an in-monitor review, the plays probably would have been overturned.

That's how all replays have worked when under 2 minutes etc, they just added it to all scoring plays now.

I don't remember all scoring plays under 2 minutes automatically being reviewed. It definitely had to come from the booth if it was questionable, but don't recall it being the same rule.

No. The "old" way was coaches can't challenge under 2 minutes. That is initiated from the booth. They now took the same approach for ALL scoring plays. So basically now the the same process for reviews under 2 minutes is now used for all scoring plays. Nothing has changed in the process on how booth initiated replays worked. They just added all scoring plays.Just read that they tried to buzz down to the official but it didn't work

Maybe I'm not being clear...under the "old" way, if any play was under question in the last two minutes (touchdown, runner out of bounds, fumble, etc), the booth would buzz down to the ref and it would be reviewed. Now, questionable or not (did he cross, was a foot out of bounds, etc) every single scoring play is supposed to be reviewed by the booth prior to buzzing down. There is a difference.

Maybe it's me but that's what I thought I said. The booth buzzes down to the ref. The process itself of reviewing these plays is no different if it's under 2:00 minutes or a scoring play. The replay booth views the plays whether under 2:00 minutes (original system), they also viewed it and determined whether to buzz down (Kurt Warner fumble in SB was booth reviewed, for example) and now all scoring plays (new). The booth only buzzed down under 2 minutes if the replay official deemed it needed to be reviewed.Just now they do all the scoring plays and determine whether to buzz down or not. There is really no difference in the process, they just added the scoring plays to it.

ETA: Trying to clear up my rambling.

The old way also had a booth review, they just never talked about it. The booth didn't just buzz down, they reviewed the play first. Same system for scores.

 

[pantagrapher]

Maybe it would have been reversed or maybe not. However, there should be better consistency across the league. If Tony Gonzalez TD catch last night was reviewed, the Sproles TD should have been. I was in the car last night listening to the ATL game on the radio when Roddy White caught his TD pass. They said he might have stepped OB during his route, but it was never reviewed.

They said the same thing during the telecast, but replay showed White was never really close to stepping out before making the catch. That said, I'm was surprised they didn't even take a second look the Sproles TD. I can sort of see how some would consider the video inconclusive, but I think it would have been overturned.

 

[Breesisdaman]

It was a blown call. The officials were terrible for both teams yesterday IMO. It would be better if they would just stay out of the way IMO. The roughing the passer call was even worse IMO because instead of Chicago having to punt it gave them a new set of downs and an opportunity to score, which they did. At least with the sproles call he stepped out at the 2 yard line so you figure the Saints would have scored anyway blown call or not. No excuse for the refs though. Its getting ridiculous.

 

[Joseph]

Maybe it would have been reversed or maybe not. However, there should be better consistency across the league. If Tony Gonzalez TD catch last night was reviewed, the Sproles TD should have been. I was in the car last night listening to the ATL game on the radio when Roddy White caught his TD pass. They said he might have stepped OB during his route, but it was never reviewed.

My understanding of this "new" process was that the booth would review it first, in a way that's supposed to be seamless to a viewer of the game, and if there's a question on their part they buzz the field to do a formal review. I think in that case you mentioned, its likely that the booth took a quick look before the teams lined up for the PAT, decided the play was fine and didn't tag it for review.

 

[JHuber77]

This game wasn't the only one they blew calls on. I seem to recall a TD being called back because the receiver (Finley, Calvin Johnson 2010, and I believe Jacoby Ford 2009) fell to the ground after he had posession of the ball in the end zone. So this is what puzzles me. They let offensive players dive into the endzone and if it breaks the plane they get the touchdown, BUT if an offensive player catches the ball IN the endzone and has possession but falls to the ground after maintaining said posession and the ball pops out, it is not ruled a touchdown but an incomplete catch?

NFL needs to get this right. Review every touchdown or not at all. There are plenty of teams that were in very close games, as this could totally alter the standings and potentially affect the postseason if division games were involved.

All of these rule changes should be on a trial basis during the preseason to see whether or not they work effectively. If they work, implement them starting week 1 regular season. NFL teams have shown that they need little time for preparation for changes (ie lockout).

 

[Pnishthm]

No point in fully reviewing. I'm sure they could tell from watching it a couple of times quickly that it would be inconclusive. His toe was in, it's impossible to tell whether his heel was down or in the air.I'd wager 10 to 1 that every person in here that's complaining played against Sproles or had Ingram on their team this week.

You would lose a lot of money on that one. I am a Saints fan and I own Brees and wanted the TD but Sproles was out clearly.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I have both Brees and Sproles in multiple leagues, but Sproles was clearly out at the 1. I didn't think it was even debatable and was shocked when it wasn't even reviewed.

The Hernandez play was a TD. The ball wasn't knocked out until after he had went to the ground with the catch.

 

[Mello]

It's completely asinine if they are penalizing teams for challenging scoring plays. If a coach feels that a play should be reviewed, he should be able to challenge it and blow a TO if he's wrong. How is either reversing the call or using a timeout "delay of game"?

 

[ThePittbully]

Maybe it would have been reversed or maybe not. However, there should be better consistency across the league. If Tony Gonzalez TD catch last night was reviewed, the Sproles TD should have been. I was in the car last night listening to the ATL game on the radio when Roddy White caught his TD pass. They said he might have stepped OB during his route, but it was never reviewed.

This is exactly what I was thinking during the Falcons game last night. That Gonzalez play was clearly a TD, even in real time it was pretty obvious, yet they reviewed it. The Sproles play on the other hand was really close to the line, and when slowed down it was obviously not a TD so where was the review on that.And I'm a Saints fan/Brees owner

 

[duckie]

Picked this up on Peter King's MMQB - sounds like they may have tried to review but had tech difficulties?

"After the game, I heard Spyskma actually tried to signal down to the field, but the communications system failed."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/09/19/week2/index.html#ixzz1YQ96Hhgz

I also found his suggestion for a solution humorous...sounds like a gladiator waiting for the thumbs up or thumbs down. ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!!!

 

[Stinkin Ref]

pretty simple really....

if they are going to review all scoring plays...thats what needs to happen....and if the "buzzing down" "didn't work" in this situation then they need to fix that.....and the way you do that is that NO MATTER WHAT, the referee waits for permission from the people upstairs to proceed with the extra point.....there are no "no brainer" scoring plays...

"not hearing anything" should not mean proceed with the extra point....

they need to just make it clear to teams that there will be a "delay" between the scoring play and the extra point, no matter what.....teams and fans will get used to it....if it slows the game down, so be it....don't do chit half ###...

oh and Green's TD in the Bengal game should have required a review and it should have taken a long time.....and I hate Denver

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I could have sworn on RZ channel they said that Oakland got penalized for challenging a TD. Any truth to that or did I mishear it?

Yes, that happened. I believe they called it a delay of game for attempting to challenge a scoring play.Oddly, they also called for a field review of an extra point in that game.

It was actually a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Assessed on the kickoff.

 

[bryhamm]

This game wasn't the only one they blew calls on. I seem to recall a TD being called back because the receiver (Finley, Calvin Johnson 2010, and I believe Jacoby Ford 2009) fell to the ground after he had posession of the ball in the end zone. So this is what puzzles me. They let offensive players dive into the endzone and if it breaks the plane they get the touchdown, BUT if an offensive player catches the ball IN the endzone and has possession but falls to the ground after maintaining said posession and the ball pops out, it is not ruled a touchdown but an incomplete catch?

NFL needs to get this right. Review every touchdown or not at all. There are plenty of teams that were in very close games, as this could totally alter the standings and potentially affect the postseason if division games were involved.

All of these rule changes should be on a trial basis during the preseason to see whether or not they work effectively. If they work, implement them starting week 1 regular season. NFL teams have shown that they need little time for preparation for changes (ie lockout).

This gets into the whole debate about when is possession established. If a person is running with the ball and launches themselves toward the goal line, possession was established a while ago and all he has to do is break the plane of the GL. With a leaping catch into the end zone, the rule is that in order to ESTABLISH possession the rule is that the receiver has to maintain the catch through the fall to the ground. You can argue about whether it should be included, but the rule includes that aspect. Thus, the underlined part is misleading because there was no possession established according to the rule.

 

[bonesman]

I thought several TDs were blown by the review officials:SprolesHernandezFJax goal lineMoore hail maryThis new replay system sux.

I agree on all those... especially the Fjax TD. Didn't even look like the ball crossed the plane AFTER the knee hit.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

I have both Brees and Sproles in multiple leagues, but Sproles was clearly out at the 1. I didn't think it was even debatable and was shocked when it wasn't even reviewed. The Hernandez play was a TD. The ball wasn't knocked out until after he had went to the ground with the catch.

It was a shock. And a joke the way it was, or wasn't handled. Are you reviewing the scoring plays, or not? Shouldn't be tough. The on the field officials jumped the gun on this?

 

[Limp Ditka]

Talking about it right now

With who, one of the cashiers?