Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Bad Officiating - Discuss


WheelsUp

Recommended Posts

57 minutes ago, TLEF316 said:

LOL. How do they possibly miss that call on Bradford last night.

Technically it should have been called because the Cowboys defenders hands did in fact make contact with Bradfords helmet, but do you honestly believe it was a aggregeous,or even a hard hit to Bradfords head? To me it was almost inadvertent and occurred after Bradford released the ball. 

 

Im obviously biased, but I hope the refs never make that call. Good no call imo.

Edited by STEADYMOBBIN 22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, STEADYMOBBIN 22 said:

Technically it should have been called because the Cowboys defenders hands did in fact make contact with Bradfords helmet, but do you honestly believe it was a aggregeous,or even a hard hit to Bradfords head? To me it was almost inadvertent and occurred after Bradford released the ball. 

 

Im obviously biased, but I hope the refs never make that call. Good no call imo.

I dont like the rule at all. I think it's stupid.

But it's the rule and I've seen elite qb's get that call (for even less contact ) enough times to know it's supposed to be called.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hooper31 said:

I disagree. I think expectations are so far off the charts that hyperbole rules the day. The constant barrage of instant replay has led to notion that the refs suck and that's the reality. I think they're being unfairly judged and held to impossible standards. 

At live game speed I completely understand having a missed call or incorrect call.  It's when there are reviewed plays and it seems like it's a call that 9/10 people would see one way but the ref reviewing the play sees it the other and it's obviously incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we are going to talk about the rule, yes terrible rule. The hit to the head did nothing to hurt Bradford and was a good FOOTBALL play, the rule is terrible and QB should not get this much protection.

That being said, it is a rule, and if you are going to call it, call it. You cant miss these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's going to be called in other games against all other QBs then it needed to be called last night.  I've never been a fan of the illegal blow to the head call just because a guys hands grazed his helmet but if Brady is getting the call then Bradford should get the call.  It's not that it was a blow to the head but it sure seemed like an obvious facemask call and I don't think anyone would argue that rule.

Looks to me that they missed three possible penalties on that one play, all which would have led to another play and second chance at scoring.  Hate to see games end that way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

If it's going to be called in other games against all other QBs then it needed to be called last night.  I've never been a fan of the illegal blow to the head call just because a guys hands grazed his helmet but if Brady is getting the call then Bradford should get the call.  It's not that it was a blow to the head but it sure seemed like an obvious facemask call and I don't think anyone would argue that rule.

Looks to me that they missed three possible penalties on that one play, all which would have led to another play and second chance at scoring.  Hate to see games end that way.

Cam says hi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wrigley said:

Cam says hi

I agree that Cam should have gotten some calls too.  Some were very obvious and others are in a gray area because of the amount he runs.  Some of the hits he takes are questionable.  There was nothing questionable about what happened to Bradford last night.  I'm not even sure what the purpose of mentioning Cam was, he has nothing to do with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I agree that Cam should have gotten some calls too.  Some were very obvious and others are in a gray area because of the amount he runs.  Some of the hits he takes are questionable.  There was nothing questionable about what happened to Bradford last night.  I'm not even sure what the purpose of mentioning Cam was, he has nothing to do with this.

Didn't you say "all other QBs"?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hawkeye21 said:

Yep, and Cam has gotten those calls before but there are a lot that have not been called against him.  The issue of not making those calls against Cam is part of the whole argument about refs missing calls.

And my point was it's not always called 

 

which is worse: a bad call, or a missed call? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hooper31 said:

I disagree. I think expectations are so far off the charts that hyperbole rules the day. The constant barrage of instant replay has led to notion that the refs suck and that's the reality. I think they're being unfairly judged and held to impossible standards. 

If this is the case, they need to make penalties challengeable/reviewable then.

And before you say, it's going to slow the game down, I don't really care. The league has already slowed the game down a ton with adding commercials everywhere they can. If the extra time taken will result in teams not getting screwed with calls, I'm cool with it. I'm tired of officiating playing a role in who wins and losses games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bucsfan5493 said:

If this is the case, they need to make penalties challengeable/reviewable then.

And before you say, it's going to slow the game down, I don't really care. The league has already slowed the game down a ton with adding commercials everywhere they can. If the extra time taken will result in teams not getting screwed with calls, I'm cool with it. I'm tired of officiating playing a role in who wins and losses games.

If they just handled all reviews during a commercial break then we wouldn't even notice the game slowing down.  Instead though, we get a review and watch 8 replays to then have the ref come back to tell us the opposite of what we all saw and then go to commercial.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish they could cut half of the commercials.  They only need to go to commercial during timeouts, half time, major injuries and maybe a couple other instances.  There are no needs for TV time outs at all.  One of the things I love about soccer is how there are not any commercial breaks during the game.  I wish every sport could be that way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That missed hands to the face/facemask last night was what I would consider both "game changing" and egregious. With so many eyes on it, how was that possibly missed?  No guarantee they would have converted the 2PAT, but they would have lived to fight another play. 

That's why I keep saying it again and again: make everything review-able. Take the criticism off the refs. Help them do their job - that was inside the last 2 mins. Theoretically that could go to booth review and they could get the call right, especially since it was sooooo so so so obvious. 

I'm just not seeing how it's a better look for the NFL to have that play end the game than it would be to get it right. As is, they let the refs swing in the wind, while millions watch the replay and question the integrity of the game. It's not fair to those refs, who called a pretty good game to that point, it's not fair to the teams who played their butts off, and it's not fair to the fans who want a clean product on the field. It's also not fair to me since I had Griffen and wanted overtime! :rant:

(ok, that last part was a joke)

Make everything reviewable - get the calls right and protect the refs. Make the game above reproach. It seems like a simple fix. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I wish they could cut half of the commercials.  They only need to go to commercial during timeouts, half time, major injuries and maybe a couple other instances.  There are no needs for TV time outs at all.  One of the things I love about soccer is how there are not any commercial breaks during the game.  I wish every sport could be that way.

I lived in Holland for about 2 years total....television in general is better because nekked bewbs, but specific to your point, they'll play a television show uninterrupted, then between shows they'll show 15 mins of commercials. So so so much better. Plus nekked bewbs.  :wub:

 

ETA: and I'm talking nekked bewbs on shampoo commercials, not just on shows/movies. :excited:

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I lived in Holland for about 2 years total....television in general is better because nekked bewbs, but specific to your point, they'll play a television show uninterrupted, then between shows they'll show 15 mins of commercials. So so so much better. Plus nekked bewbs.  :wub:

 

ETA: and I'm talking nekked bewbs on shampoo commercials, not just on shows/movies. :excited:

Sounds like a fantasy land.  I want to visit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bucsfan5493 said:

If this is the case, they need to make penalties challengeable/reviewable then.

And before you say, it's going to slow the game down, I don't really care.

I agree. I think all calls should be reviewable, but don't let that stop you from assuming you know what I think and speak for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I lived in Holland for about 2 years total....television in general is better because nekked bewbs, but specific to your point, they'll play a television show uninterrupted, then between shows they'll show 15 mins of commercials. So so so much better. Plus nekked bewbs.  :wub:

 

ETA: and I'm talking nekked bewbs on shampoo commercials, not just on shows/movies. :excited:

Is there any chance your name is Ludo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people forget that other countries care about pleasing people, here, they just want our money. And we give it to them without pause, instead of let them know they need to do better. We have something here many other countries dont have... American Greed, its different from regular greed. For that, we will never have TV shows uninterrupted, we have to pay for that. Its called HBO. My finest example of Corporate greed is that we have to pay for uninterrupted TV shows on top of paying to see those shows in the first place with regular cable/satellite. Pay for basic, sure, but there is always an upgrade. GREED.

Back to officiating though, over/under 1.5 roughing the passer calls in Seattle against Cam?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WheelsUp said:

Back to officiating though, over/under 1.5 roughing the passer calls in Seattle against Cam?

I'll take the over. 1 call is almost a given (so NFL can say "see, he gets his calls") might even be of the Bradford variety.

And I think there will be one that is of the no doubt variety.

Regarding the non-call on Thursday night, by rule, it should have been called. That being said, I don't like the rule. I would love to see defenses have more freedom to harass the QBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, davearm said:

What history is that?

"History" is self explanatory. 

But hey, you can start with the Chicago Black Sox when 1/3 of the team was in on the fix. 

Google will be better for you here. I suggest searching "sports scandals" or "corruption in sports".

You'll get lots of results. Usually scandals happen and uncover much more than the NBA - and the ref that got caught said it was widespread (and NBA fans of that era can attest) so the claim that they cleaned it up by catching one guy is laughably ridiculous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Did anyone ever hear an explanation about the ASJ TD being overturned?  I know the ruling was that he fumbled into the endzone, but how is that possible since he never lost the ball?  The ball moved a bit while he was going down near the pylon... only way the call makes any sense at all is if the ball touched the pylon while it was lose for that split second... was that the call? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Steeler said:

Did anyone ever hear an explanation about the ASJ TD being overturned?  I know the ruling was that he fumbled into the endzone, but how is that possible since he never lost the ball?  The ball moved a bit while he was going down near the pylon... only way the call makes any sense at all is if the ball touched the pylon while it was lose for that split second... was that the call? 

Yes, that’s the call. It was lose when he hit the pylon even though he had control when he hit the ground. 

Tex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Steeler said:

Did anyone ever hear an explanation about the ASJ TD being overturned?  I know the ruling was that he fumbled into the endzone, but how is that possible since he never lost the ball?  The ball moved a bit while he was going down near the pylon... only way the call makes any sense at all is if the ball touched the pylon while it was lose for that split second... was that the call? 

ball was clearly more than just "loose" when he hit the pylon. This is a case where it might well be hate the rule instead of the ref.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The angle from the end zone at 0:58 here shows the ball come out of ASJ's hands (also seen from the sideline view at 1:06). If the refs say he did not regain possession until he is already on the sideline, then they applied the rule correctly. That being said, it seems like a stretch to say that there was conclusive and irrefutable evidence to overturn the call on the field. I never liked that rule in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JetMaxx said:

I did t see that conclusively in the 152 replays I saw of it.

the ball loose at one point was in-disputable...the darn thing rolled over 180 degrees between his arms. The tough part to figure is when he got control back, and where was he on the field when he did so. And THATs the part most are arguing lacks indisputable evidence to overturn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of anyone's personal opinion on that call against the Jets, it doesn't belong in a discussion about worst calls. Worst rules perhaps, or most impact calls, but not worst calls.

 

But if we're going to complain about bad officiating, how about the crew from Thursday night? Philly was flagged ten times for over 100 yards. No truly outrageous calls, but several ticky tack close ones that could have gone either way or been ignored any other day. Meanwhile, Carolina got one flag for 1 yard? Carolina was NOT one foul clean on a night where the zebras were calling several marginal ones on the other team. More, a quick look back shows that same crew had been similarly UN-balanced against the Eagles the previous three times they officiated them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Didn't seem like a call that could've been overturned.  It's obvious the ball cam out but he has control of it again by the time he lands out of bounds.  I think they got screwed.

Technically, if the ball is loose before the player breaks the plane and it hits the pylon or the player doesn't regain control before being out of bounds it IS a fumble through the end zone.  Player doesn't have to lose the ball completely - just for that key moment.

I didn't see a great replay.  Did they show any good freeze frame shots during the game?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DropKick said:

Technically, if the ball is loose before the player breaks the plane and it hits the pylon or the player doesn't regain control before being out of bounds it IS a fumble through the end zone.  Player doesn't have to lose the ball completely - just for that key moment.

I didn't see a great replay.  Did they show any good freeze frame shots during the game?

 

Watched a couple shots and it looks like the Jets got hosed.

I'm going to try a different interpretation (total conjecture) to rationalize why the play was called as it was...  The ball is clearly loose as he approaches the end zone.  We think he regained control in bounds but that is tough to confirm with replay since his body shields the view.  He comes down on the pylon.  Since the last view of the ball was loose and they couldn't confirm recovery, they made the call the way they did...

Did the league make a statement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DropKick said:

Watched a couple shots and it looks like the Jets got hosed.

I'm going to try a different interpretation (total conjecture) to rationalize why the play was called as it was...  The ball is clearly loose as he approaches the end zone.  We think he regained control in bounds but that is tough to confirm with replay since his body shields the view.  He comes down on the pylon.  Since the last view of the ball was loose and they couldn't confirm recovery, they made the call the way they did...

Did the league make a statement?

The officials said it was an obvious call. Per the rules, once the ball became loose, ASJ had to regain possession of the ball AND reestablish himself on the field. Just like he was making a catch. He had to maintain control of the ball going to the ground. 

https://www.google.com/amp/patriotswire.usatoday.com/2017/10/15/referee-explains-controversial-confusing-touchback-in-patriots-win-over-jets/amp/

If people want to say there is no clear way to determine that on video, I won't say there is. Rather than give NE the ball, they should have fudged it and say he was out of bounds six inches short of the end zone if they had to say it was a fumble. 

Edited by Anarchy99
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

I thought it was an awful call, especially since it was called a TD on the field.   The original intent of IR was to reverse calls that were obviously incorrect -- I think the NFL sometimes forgets that.

This is the key part. I get the argument for why it would not be a TD, but I didn't see enough to REVERSE the call. Totally f-ed up that it was reversed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GreekFreak said:

Was it the ref that reversed the call or was it the suits in the NFL that are in charge of the replays?

Both. I believe the suits called it and the ref concurred. 

I still say it's a dumb rule, but it is pretty clear in the replays ASJ loses control of the ball before the goal line. At that point, there is nothing conclusive to show that he repossessed the ball and reestablished himself in the field of play (which is the rule). 

I think the issue with instant replay is what are the refs tasked to do when they see something on the replay that they didn't see live and the play continues. What burden of proof is there AFTER the wrong call has been identified. In this case, what is supposed to happen once they see ASJ lost control of the ball (when initially they were looking to see if he crossed the plane of the goal line).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...