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.

Yahoo scoring error? (1 Viewer)

Sweetness_34

Footballguy
I saw the Sea-SF game and I am 100% sure the Sea D scored a TD....the MFL leagues show it that way too. But Yahoo does not show a TD for the Seahawks right now.....anyone know why? And how do we correct it? :D

 
That happens from time to time. It's usually corrected sometime during the next day. I have the Saints D/Spec Teams and they have still not credited them with their Punt return TD yet.

 
Like he said, they normally correct it the next day.....yahoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! :shrug:

 
I thought I saw it pop up on my Stattracker, but it's not showing up on my scoresheet....thankfully, I didn't need it, but I would hope it would get fixed....

 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.

 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
So if an offensive player fumbles it, and then another offensive player recovers it, does the D get the FR points?
 
ScottNorwood said:
mad sweeney said:
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
:thumbdown:This is no different than one defensive player lateraling to another defensive player. In fact, the original defensive player never really had control of the ball and if San Francisco had challenged the call it probably would have been ruled as a single recovery by Terrill.
 
For me SEA D got the points for the TD yesterday, and the overnight stat changes took away the TD for today. This could be a disaster for me if Patrick Crayton outproduces LJ Smith by more than five points.

 
But MFL shows the Seattle D to have a TD.

Seahawks, Seattle SEA Def

vs 49ers Sun 4:05 p.m. ET 6.0

1 Defensive/Special Teams TDs

3.0 1 Fumble Recoveries (from Opponent)

8.0 8 Sacked a QB

17.0 Subtotal

 
Don't all these systems pull their scoring from the same NFL official database? If yes, why is MFL giving Sea the TD and yahoo is not....very bizarre.

 
Yes rtsports.com credited Seattle D for the touchdown also.

Had the same issue last night where Yahoo gave Seattle D the points for the TD last night and then took it away this morning. Yahoo has yet to reply regarding this matter.

 
Yes rtsports.com credited Seattle D for the touchdown also.

Had the same issue last night where Yahoo gave Seattle D the points for the TD last night and then took it away this morning. Yahoo has yet to reply regarding this matter.
How do you ask Yahoo?
You don't. They are free leagues, and you get what you pay for.
:stirspot: Not true: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/football/general.html

Fill out whatever question you have here, they are usually quick to respond.

 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.

 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
Every other site has it as a defensive TD, the gamebook at NFL.com has it as a defensive TD. The only thing I ask for is consistency, if it's not a DEF TD then it should not be a DEF TD on any fantasy football software, if it is then it is. I don't like the "It isn't at yahoo, but it is at MFL, cbs,fox, espn, fanball".
 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
Every other site has it as a defensive TD, the gamebook at NFL.com has it as a defensive TD. The only thing I ask for is consistency, if it's not a DEF TD then it should not be a DEF TD on any fantasy football software, if it is then it is. I don't like the "It isn't at yahoo, but it is at MFL, cbs,fox, espn, fanball".
Yahoo is being consistent with how they've scored it in the past. Can't bag on Yahoo for being inconsistent when they are. Trufant lost possession of the ball, it's no longer a defensive TD. IMO, the other sites are wrong unless they have specific rules for this type of situation.
 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
Every other site has it as a defensive TD, the gamebook at NFL.com has it as a defensive TD. The only thing I ask for is consistency, if it's not a DEF TD then it should not be a DEF TD on any fantasy football software, if it is then it is. I don't like the "It isn't at yahoo, but it is at MFL, cbs,fox, espn, fanball".
Yahoo is being consistent with how they've scored it in the past. Can't bag on Yahoo for being inconsistent when they are. Trufant lost possession of the ball, it's no longer a defensive TD. IMO, the other sites are wrong unless they have specific rules for this type of situation.
Why is yahoo making this call? NFL makes the call and NFL calls it a D TD.
 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
Every other site has it as a defensive TD, the gamebook at NFL.com has it as a defensive TD. The only thing I ask for is consistency, if it's not a DEF TD then it should not be a DEF TD on any fantasy football software, if it is then it is. I don't like the "It isn't at yahoo, but it is at MFL, cbs,fox, espn, fanball".
Yahoo is being consistent with how they've scored it in the past. Can't bag on Yahoo for being inconsistent when they are. Trufant lost possession of the ball, it's no longer a defensive TD. IMO, the other sites are wrong unless they have specific rules for this type of situation.
Does Trufant not play defense anymore? I know they are thin at WR but last I checked he played Defense for Seattle which was on the field when the TD was scored. Has anyone heard back from yahoo about this?
 
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
Every other site has it as a defensive TD, the gamebook at NFL.com has it as a defensive TD. The only thing I ask for is consistency, if it's not a DEF TD then it should not be a DEF TD on any fantasy football software, if it is then it is. I don't like the "It isn't at yahoo, but it is at MFL, cbs,fox, espn, fanball".
Yahoo is being consistent with how they've scored it in the past. Can't bag on Yahoo for being inconsistent when they are. Trufant lost possession of the ball, it's no longer a defensive TD. IMO, the other sites are wrong unless they have specific rules for this type of situation.
Does Trufant not play defense anymore? I know they are thin at WR but last I checked he played Defense for Seattle which was on the field when the TD was scored. Has anyone heard back from yahoo about this?
Eh, it's not about a players' position. Their logic is probably that defensive play ended when Trufant fumbled. After that point, the recovery was an advancement, not attributed to the defense.
 
This is the response I got:

I appreciate your inquiry with regards to league scoring.We are working with our data provider on this play. Normally a doublefumble negates points as the fumble recovery and ensuing TD have to takeplace after a change of possession. Since there was no change ofpossession on the second fumble recovery it may negate the points.Please keep in mind the commissioner of a Private PLUS league canmanually award points if they disagree with the official decision.The NFL forwards us stat corrections every week on Wednesday night, weapply them Thursday morning. At that time if you do not see a correctionyou can manually award the points via your commissioner tools.
 
Yahoo updated its scoring, to include a defensive touchdown by Seattle.
I am not feeling optimistic about them reversing it, mostly because they had it "correct" originally and then changed it to how it is now. They'll probably respond about how Terrell technically wasn't on defense because it was just a fumble advancement for a TD, or something equally ridiculous.
Not ridiculous, accurate. Trufant had the ball and then fumbled it. It is no longer a defensive TD because the same team that fumbled it scored. FF and stats are very technical and detail oriented and this is the correct call. It also has had precedence with it happening every once in a while. Whether you agree with it or not, it's right and it's how they've handled it in the past.
:lol:
 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
:hifive: This is no different than one defensive player lateraling to another defensive player. In fact, the original defensive player never really had control of the ball and if San Francisco had challenged the call it probably would have been ruled as a single recovery by Terrill.
You're going to "own" me in the same thread where you posted this, which is blatantly false? Like you have anything to do with a stat change? I simply was replying how yahoo had scored similar circumstances in the past using the logic they used then. Yahoo has changed their stance on it, no biggie. Don't need to take it seriously when you don't even know how the play went down.
 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
:X This is no different than one defensive player lateraling to another defensive player. In fact, the original defensive player never really had control of the ball and if San Francisco had challenged the call it probably would have been ruled as a single recovery by Terrill.
You're going to "own" me in the same thread where you posted this, which is blatantly false? Like you have anything to do with a stat change? I simply was replying how yahoo had scored similar circumstances in the past using the logic they used then. Yahoo has changed their stance on it, no biggie. Don't need to take it seriously when you don't even know how the play went down.
I know exactly how the play went down, and I stand by my original statement. Trufant was bobbling that ball for 4 yards and a replay might have established that he never had possession. But that's really beside the point, which is that you pulled facts out of your butt that don't exist.You claim that Yahoo has changed their stance -- okay then, back it up with proof. Until you do, you've been :bag:

 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
:hey: This is no different than one defensive player lateraling to another defensive player. In fact, the original defensive player never really had control of the ball and if San Francisco had challenged the call it probably would have been ruled as a single recovery by Terrill.
You're going to "own" me in the same thread where you posted this, which is blatantly false? Like you have anything to do with a stat change? I simply was replying how yahoo had scored similar circumstances in the past using the logic they used then. Yahoo has changed their stance on it, no biggie. Don't need to take it seriously when you don't even know how the play went down.
I know exactly how the play went down, and I stand by my original statement. Trufant was bobbling that ball for 4 yards and a replay might have established that he never had possession. But that's really beside the point, which is that you pulled facts out of your butt that don't exist.You claim that Yahoo has changed their stance -- okay then, back it up with proof. Until you do, you've been :rant:
I would respond but since this is the dumbest "owned" I've ever seen I'll just leave you with your grandiose feelings of superiority based on absolutely nothing. Bye bye.
 
It probably won't be counted as a D TD because Trufant recovered the fumble thus giving Sea possession and then he fumbled it. Terrill picked it up and rumbled in. When Terrill recovered it the Seahawks were the "offense" and it no longer was a defensive recovery but an offensive recovery and the only TD given out is to the individual player that scored. Additionally the D is charged the negative points for losing the fumble. Pretty sure that's how Yahoo has handled it in the past.
Oh that would be horribly weak if that's the case
;) This is no different than one defensive player lateraling to another defensive player. In fact, the original defensive player never really had control of the ball and if San Francisco had challenged the call it probably would have been ruled as a single recovery by Terrill.
You're going to "own" me in the same thread where you posted this, which is blatantly false? Like you have anything to do with a stat change? I simply was replying how yahoo had scored similar circumstances in the past using the logic they used then. Yahoo has changed their stance on it, no biggie. Don't need to take it seriously when you don't even know how the play went down.
I know exactly how the play went down, and I stand by my original statement. Trufant was bobbling that ball for 4 yards and a replay might have established that he never had possession. But that's really beside the point, which is that you pulled facts out of your butt that don't exist.You claim that Yahoo has changed their stance -- okay then, back it up with proof. Until you do, you've been :own3d:
I would respond but since this is the dumbest "owned" I've ever seen I'll just leave you with your grandiose feelings of superiority based on absolutely nothing. Bye bye.
:own3d: :lol:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top