Uncle Grandpa
Footballguy
Just when I think I understand the distinction between a catch and non-catch, the NFL awards Golden Tate a touchdown. I give up.
Agreed but I just think the whole going to the ground thing is stupid.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
No, it doesn't.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
Except this wasn't a catch last week.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
lolDean Blandino said it was the right call because Tate wasn't going to the ground.
Isn't Dean head of officiating? Dude isn't going to throw the refs under the bus every time. Of course he's gonna back it upNo, it doesn't.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
Terrible call.
Terrible that he would defend it.
Possession was NEVER established.
Haven't heard his explanation, but saw the replay. Surprised if Blandino supported it.Dean Blandino said it was the right call because Tate wasn't going to the ground.
Exactly.Isn't Dean head of officiating? Dude isn't going to throw the refs under the bus every time. Of course he's gonna back it upNo, it doesn't.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
Terrible call.
Terrible that he would defend it.
Possession was NEVER established.
Totally agree, but this isn't a possibility if they're going to keep up with the "process" charade. Just too fast if you're going to keep up with this "process" garbage. It should be real-time reviews based on common sense, but common sense means thy have to get rid of the "process" crap.NO MORE SLOW MOTION!!!
Replay officials should ONLY be allowed to watch the plays in real time.
Plays look COMPLETELY different when they are slowed down.
or bothExactly.Isn't Dean head of officiating? Dude isn't going to throw the refs under the bus every time. Of course he's gonna back it upNo, it doesn't.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
Terrible call.
Terrible that he would defend it.
Possession was NEVER established.
He's either defending the call to "save face" or he's an idiot.
The red part is the problem. That isn't enough to "clearly become a runner". Pretty much every other review if a ball comes out before he's taken a step it hasn't been ruled a catch.Blandino verbatim explanation: "This is different than the plays we've been talking about, the Dez Bryant play or the Calvin Johnson play. This is not a receiver going to the ground. The issue here is did he become a runner before the ball came loose? Did he have control, both feet down, and then time enough to become a runner after the second foot is down? When you watch the play, the ball comes loose. He is taking his third step. The third step is almost on the ground when the ball comes out. He had demonstrated possession, had become a runner. One the ball breaks the plane of the goal line in possession of the runner, it is a touchdown and the play is over at that point."
Ohhh, so what you're saying is that even the rules committee and refs that enforce them don't understand the rules they create? Gotcha.The red part is the problem. That isn't enough to "clearly become a runner". Pretty much every other review if a ball comes out before he's taken a step it hasn't been ruled a catch.Blandino verbatim explanation: "This is different than the plays we've been talking about, the Dez Bryant play or the Calvin Johnson play. This is not a receiver going to the ground. The issue here is did he become a runner before the ball came loose? Did he have control, both feet down, and then time enough to become a runner after the second foot is down? When you watch the play, the ball comes loose. He is taking his third step. The third step is almost on the ground when the ball comes out. He had demonstrated possession, had become a runner. One the ball breaks the plane of the goal line in possession of the runner, it is a touchdown and the play is over at that point."
Not that I disagree, but good luck with that.I think they (Blandino and whoever else in NYC was involved in the review remotely) just made a bad call at the time and need to own up to it.
Actually the ref did explain it. Said Tate had 2 feet down. And becoming a runner. You couldn't hear it over the noiseThe worst part is not that they called it a touchdown. That was bad, but when you watch it in slow motion, you can think how someone, somewhere might think it was a TD.
What is inexcusable is the ref makes no attempt whatsoever to explain the call to the crowd. As a ref, you should be accountable to the fans, and in this case the ref failed to communicate his thinking in any way.
FTFYBlandino is like the DA of a police department. He'll always have their backs and make them look fantasticunless there is an indisputably bad call.
Detroit fan? I have Tate in my lineup today, but that wasn't a TD.Good call.
Two feet down. Runner
Over the goal line. TD
Didn't go to the ground.
Never had possession.Good call.
Two feet down. Runner
Over the goal line. TD
Didn't go to the ground.
And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Except this wasn't a catch last week.Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587
Yes, but here's the problem that the current call highlights. There's a distinction between going to the ground and standing up with regard to making a catch. That's asinine.cockroach said:And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Uncle Grandpa said:Except this wasn't a catch last week.Deamon said:Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587
I think that's a good thing *shrug*Yes, but here's the problem that the current call highlights. There's a distinction between going to the ground and standing up with regard to making a catch. That's asinine.cockroach said:And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Uncle Grandpa said:Except this wasn't a catch last week.Deamon said:Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587
Per the NFL, if Tate were somehow falling to the ground when the ball was stripped, it would be called incomplete. Yet he would have accomplished the exact same conditions he did throughout the actual play: control, both feet down, and time enough to become a runner after the second foot is down.
All replays should be reviewed by ME.Appreciate the rule conversation, but if the league doesn't have any idea...it's difficult to believe we're going to figure it out here.
Good luck though.
Do you also get to hear and rule on the appeals? If so, you may be on to something here.All replays should be reviewed by ME.Appreciate the rule conversation, but if the league doesn't have any idea...it's difficult to believe we're going to figure it out here.
Good luck though.
I promise to use common sense in lieu of poorly worded rules and overly complicated interpretations.
Agreed. We used to live in this world. The NFL decided that was not a good place to be.Can I assume that most of us want to see an NFL where both the Tate play and the Freeman play (linked above) are ruled as touchdowns? So the problem is not that this was ruled a catch...the problem is all of the similar plays that are not.
Except Dez took three steps, switched the ball to his other hand and then DOVE for the line.cockroach said:And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Uncle Grandpa said:Except this wasn't a catch last week.http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587Deamon said:Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
OH BULL####.Except Dez took three steps, switched the ball to his other hand and then DOVE for the line.cockroach said:And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Uncle Grandpa said:Except this wasn't a catch last week.http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587Deamon said:Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
That never happened.Except Dez took three steps, switched the ball to his other hand and then DOVE for the line.cockroach said:And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Uncle Grandpa said:Except this wasn't a catch last week.http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587Deamon said:Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
That never happened.Except Dez took three steps, switched the ball to his other hand and then DOVE for the line.cockroach said:And it shouldn't be, was going to the ground and lost the ball... very similar to the Dez no catch vs the Packers.Uncle Grandpa said:Except this wasn't a catch last week.http://deadspin.com/referees-rescind-perfectly-good-devonta-freeman-touchdo-1735949587Deamon said:Dean's explanation makes it seem legit.
meh....you need slo mo to determine foot in/out, knee or elbow down first, etc.spider321 said:NO MORE SLOW MOTION!!!
Replay officials should ONLY be allowed to watch the plays in real time.
Plays look COMPLETELY different when they are slowed down.