Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Chiefs-Seahawks - SNF anyone?


Recommended Posts

Just now, Henry Ford said:

Yes, well, that’s why they ultimately upheld it I would imagine. 

I assumed that's what they called as it was pretty obvious and they screwed up the review stuff. I was in and out of the room so didn't get to hear what all was going on with that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wildcat said:

That wasn’t the challenge.  Reid was challenging when the PI occurred in relation to the tip.  You can’t review the PI to determine when as then you are determine the mind of the ref that called it. 

A tipped ball challenge always involves review of when the contact was initiated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

A tipped ball challenge always involves review of when the contact was initiated. 

I’m not sure.  I get what you are saying and I’m not saying you are wrong.  But what you are doing then in this case is determining when the PI occurred, which is the determination of the back judge.  How do we know when he was making the call in his mind?  In your example, it should have been neagated and it wasn’t 

Edited by Wildcat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Wildcat said:

I’m not sure.  I get what you are saying and I’m not saying you are wrong.  But what you are doing then in this case is determining when the PI occurred, which is the determination of the back judge.  How do we know when he was making the call in his mind?

Honestly, I think that’s why they stuck with the PI call.  If any contact incidental to the PI call happens before the tip, it stands.  The real hit happened after but there was physical contact before so it stands. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

Honestly, I think that’s why they stuck with the PI call.  If any contact incidental to the PI call happens before the tip, it stands.  The real hit happened after but there was physical contact before so it stands. 

Ok. I guess I can see then.  It appeared that they were reviewing when PI occurred, but what you said makes sense.  They just did a poor job of explaining 

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

Just now, Wildcat said:

Ok. I guess I can see then.  It appeared that they were reviewing when PI occurred, but what you said makes sense.  They just did a poor job of explaining 

Oh, absolutely. They always do a terrible job of explaining.  I find it helps to turn off the sound. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Long Ball Larry said:

Why is Ron Parker sitting?

He's been extremely bad recently so the coaching staff may just be done with him. Kinda surprising that he's totally inactive, though. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The General said:

The DB was pulling on Baldwin as he was going into his break. Well before ball was released. I assumed that was the call.

No it was PI.  Hence my confusion LOL.  Not really confused but just trying to straighten it out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My expert analysis is that Sammy Watkins' 48 million dollars would've been better spent on some defensive players.

  • Like 4
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...