It is currently Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:19 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:55 pm
Posts: 682
Still Lit wrote:
Why does a 4 to 1 ratio make no sense? Because we hate the Pats?

It makes no sense if you look at the game and see that there is no significant defense in the way each teams players are going about their business but the penalties still always seem to favor the Pats.

I completely agree with your earlier post about the irony of the Jags bitching about PI calls after mugging Brown last week with no calls going against them. That may be the point though - they were able to play rough D against every other team in the league with no calls but against the Pasts the flags come out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9095
Stillerz Bar wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Why does a 4 to 1 ratio make no sense? Because we hate the Pats?

It makes no sense if you look at the game and see that there is no significant defense in the way each teams players are going about their business but the penalties still always seem to favor the Pats.

I completely agree with your earlier post about the irony of the Jags bitching about PI calls after mugging Brown last week with no calls going against them. That may be the point though - they were able to play rough D against every other team in the league with no calls but against the Pasts the flags come out.



Yup and I and im sure others here predicted as much.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9669
Stillerz Bar wrote:
Still Lit wrote:
Why does a 4 to 1 ratio make no sense? Because we hate the Pats?

It makes no sense if you look at the game and see that there is no significant defense in the way each teams players are going about their business but the penalties still always seem to favor the Pats.

I completely agree with your earlier post about the irony of the Jags bitching about PI calls after mugging Brown last week with no calls going against them. That may be the point though - they were able to play rough D against every other team in the league with no calls but against the Pasts the flags come out.


I don't watch Pats unless they play Steelers or are in the playoffs.

I am suspicious that Pats simply get calls.

One reason opposing defenses might get more calls is because the Pats offense is so damn good.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:24 am
Posts: 3010
Still Lit wrote:
Lifelongsteel wrote:
Both "Patriots are more disciplined" and "they are getting star treatment from refs" can be true at the same time. I believe they are both true.

I don't believe the NFL is playing favorites with the Pats. I do think that individual refs give the Pats a little of the LeBron James treatment. Ask for a penalty - get a penalty.


I'm sure there is much tape of Tom squealing at refs for flags and not getting them, though.


Certainly. And like LeBron, when he doesn't get a call he's apoplectic.

Look. I'm not a conspiracy guy. But it's hard not to notice the number of calls that have gone the Pats way just in the last 5-6 games. They lose the Steelers game if the refs use the proper interpretation of "indisputable evidence" on the James play. They lose the Jags game if they don't blow the whistle on the Myles Jack recovery. Add to that the penalty disparities. Not sure what to make of it.

Oh, and it's now really the only way to poke Pats fans, who are now a 10 on the all time insufferability scale

_________________
#IDrinkandIKnowThings


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Mile Jack fumble should have been a TD, however the refs blew it down.

He was not touched down. This is the biggest fuck up call in the game and gives Jax a 17 pt 4th q lead.

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm
Posts: 3142
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Mile Jack fumble should have been a TD, however the refs blew it down.

He was not touched down. This is the biggest fuck up call in the game and gives Jax a 17 pt 4th q lead.


Because he was down. He was touching Lewis when he took the ball away.

_________________
To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection.
- Henri Poincaré


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9095
jebrick wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Mile Jack fumble should have been a TD, however the refs blew it down.

He was not touched down. This is the biggest fuck up call in the game and gives Jax a 17 pt 4th q lead.


Because he was down. He was touching Lewis when he took the ball away.




No video confirmed he was not being touched when Jack got possession of the ball. That play never shoulda been whistled dead, especially since the live call by the ref was a fumble, shoulda let it play out then review entire play.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 1:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
jebrick wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Mile Jack fumble should have been a TD, however the refs blew it down.

He was not touched down. This is the biggest fuck up call in the game and gives Jax a 17 pt 4th q lead.


Because he was down. He was touching Lewis when he took the ball away.


I don't think that is the rule, he was clear when he got full possession. His teammates were shouting at him to get up and run

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 6322
jebrick wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Mile Jack fumble should have been a TD, however the refs blew it down.

He was not touched down. This is the biggest fuck up call in the game and gives Jax a 17 pt 4th q lead.


Because he was down. He was touching Lewis when he took the ball away.
That's how I saw it.

The Lebron or Jordon comparisons are inaccurate, if you ask me. Those are two guys that can change the outcome of a game all by themselves. Throwing the ball to a rookie or a no name receiver and getting a DPI call is calling it on the no name receiver, not the superstar. The calls are going to the "organization," not one superstar player. Like the lack of a flag for a crack back block, or the time keeper leaving an additional three seconds after the clock hit zero, or no calls on the pats o line or defensive secondary. I saw a few questionable calls that if it were going the other way, they would have been called. And were.

I never thought the NFL was rigged, just guided, or nudged in one direction or another. Good teams need to play great to overcome other good teams with history. But the appearance of impropriety with Goodell spending playoff weekend with Kraft, or the refs calling the game have a connection with the pats organization simply has horrible optics. It just looks like someone is putting their finger on the scale. On top of the skewed penalty statistics. It just doesn't smell right. And now they aren't even apologizing for it. They are going through mental gymnastics to justify the "correct" calls even though they contradict themselves constantly.

_________________
"I wish Fraudlin would get testicular cancer and die after he watches me anally penetrate his wife."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:52 pm
Posts: 470
May have been a legitimate call, but the PI call in the fourth quarter that flipped the field for NE sure happened at a convenient time. Gave them a short field on their next possession to score what turned out to be the winning TD. Without that, JAX would have stopped them. Probably run clock. Maybe scored again.

That’s one way they help NE. Making calls go their way at key moments (like the touchdown overturned in our regular season matchup). When you can keep it close, as they always can, one gift in the fourth quarter will win it for them 90 percent of the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
now it's a story

Quote:
Posted by Michael David Smith on January 22, 2018, 9:26 AM EST

Jaguars linebacker Myles Jack made a sensational play in the AFC Championship Game when he ran down Patriots running back Dion Lewis, forced a fumble and recovered it. But did the officials rob Jack of an even more sensational play?

After recovering the ball on the ground, Jack got up and started sprinting down the field, appearing to have a clear path to the end zone. The officials immediately blew the play dead, however, ruling Jack down by contact as soon as he recovered.

The question is whether Jack actually had made contact with Lewis after he recovered the fumble. And replays indicate that he may not have: Jack was still grasping for the ball as he rolled over and away from Lewis and didn’t appear to have possession of the ball until he was free of Lewis and not near any other Patriots. Jack clearly didn’t think he was down, which is why he got up and started sprinting for what could have been a touchdown.

The play was reviewed, but only as to the question of whether it was a fumble and whether the Jaguars recovered. It clearly was a fumble and Jack clearly did recover. But there could be no review of whether Jack was down by contact after recovering the ball because the officials had blown the play dead. Once a play is blown dead, nothing that happens after that can be changed in instant replay.

If the officials had allowed the play to continue, Jack may very well have run for a touchdown that would have given the Jaguars a 27-10 lead with less than 14 minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. It’s possible the Patriots still could have come back and won, but it would have been a whole lot harder if they were behind by three possessions instead of two.

The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay.

“The ruling on the field was a fumble, recovered by the defense. Because a whistle was blown, there could be no advance of the fumble, and that ended the play,” NFL spokesman Michael Signora told PFT via email. “Replay was used to determine if in fact it was a fumble and/or if the player was down by contact, but no advance of the fumble could be added at this point. The officials are instructed to officiate as to what they see on the field, not to replay.”


This play was blown dead, and it may have cost the Jaguars a touchdown that could have been the difference between a loss and a trip to the Super Bowl.


the error is the officials affording the Pats an out here by blowing the whistle and taking the points off the board.

We have seen this manipulation time and time again

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:18 pm
Posts: 4680
Location: Sunny Delaware (but the murdery part)
GreekSteel wrote:
jebrick wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
Mile Jack fumble should have been a TD, however the refs blew it down.

He was not touched down. This is the biggest fuck up call in the game and gives Jax a 17 pt 4th q lead.


Because he was down. He was touching Lewis when he took the ball away.




No video confirmed he was not being touched when Jack got possession of the ball. That play never shoulda been whistled dead, especially since the live call by the ref was a fumble, shoulda let it play out then review entire play.


The "let it play out then review the entire play" is the correct way to use replay. No reason whatsoever for the ref to blow the whistle there, regardless of what you think the outcome is. Let the players play, sort it out afterwards.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23264
BethlehemSteel wrote:
now it's a story

Quote:
Posted by Michael David Smith on January 22, 2018, 9:26 AM EST

Jaguars linebacker Myles Jack made a sensational play in the AFC Championship Game when he ran down Patriots running back Dion Lewis, forced a fumble and recovered it. But did the officials rob Jack of an even more sensational play?

After recovering the ball on the ground, Jack got up and started sprinting down the field, appearing to have a clear path to the end zone. The officials immediately blew the play dead, however, ruling Jack down by contact as soon as he recovered.

The question is whether Jack actually had made contact with Lewis after he recovered the fumble. And replays indicate that he may not have: Jack was still grasping for the ball as he rolled over and away from Lewis and didn’t appear to have possession of the ball until he was free of Lewis and not near any other Patriots. Jack clearly didn’t think he was down, which is why he got up and started sprinting for what could have been a touchdown.

The play was reviewed, but only as to the question of whether it was a fumble and whether the Jaguars recovered. It clearly was a fumble and Jack clearly did recover. But there could be no review of whether Jack was down by contact after recovering the ball because the officials had blown the play dead. Once a play is blown dead, nothing that happens after that can be changed in instant replay.

If the officials had allowed the play to continue, Jack may very well have run for a touchdown that would have given the Jaguars a 27-10 lead with less than 14 minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. It’s possible the Patriots still could have come back and won, but it would have been a whole lot harder if they were behind by three possessions instead of two.

The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay.

“The ruling on the field was a fumble, recovered by the defense. Because a whistle was blown, there could be no advance of the fumble, and that ended the play,” NFL spokesman Michael Signora told PFT via email. “Replay was used to determine if in fact it was a fumble and/or if the player was down by contact, but no advance of the fumble could be added at this point. The officials are instructed to officiate as to what they see on the field, not to replay.”


This play was blown dead, and it may have cost the Jaguars a touchdown that could have been the difference between a loss and a trip to the Super Bowl.


the error is the officials affording the Pats an out here by blowing the whistle and taking the points off the board.

We have seen this manipulation time and time again


When the whistle blew, the official in question had no way of knowing he was preventing a long gainer and maybe a touchdown, so stop it. Jack was still in the process of getting up and starting to run when the whistle blew, so the official obviously decided to blow it when Jack was still on the ground.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am
Posts: 8350
Jeemie wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
now it's a story

Quote:
Posted by Michael David Smith on January 22, 2018, 9:26 AM EST

Jaguars linebacker Myles Jack made a sensational play in the AFC Championship Game when he ran down Patriots running back Dion Lewis, forced a fumble and recovered it. But did the officials rob Jack of an even more sensational play?

After recovering the ball on the ground, Jack got up and started sprinting down the field, appearing to have a clear path to the end zone. The officials immediately blew the play dead, however, ruling Jack down by contact as soon as he recovered.

The question is whether Jack actually had made contact with Lewis after he recovered the fumble. And replays indicate that he may not have: Jack was still grasping for the ball as he rolled over and away from Lewis and didn’t appear to have possession of the ball until he was free of Lewis and not near any other Patriots. Jack clearly didn’t think he was down, which is why he got up and started sprinting for what could have been a touchdown.

The play was reviewed, but only as to the question of whether it was a fumble and whether the Jaguars recovered. It clearly was a fumble and Jack clearly did recover. But there could be no review of whether Jack was down by contact after recovering the ball because the officials had blown the play dead. Once a play is blown dead, nothing that happens after that can be changed in instant replay.

If the officials had allowed the play to continue, Jack may very well have run for a touchdown that would have given the Jaguars a 27-10 lead with less than 14 minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. It’s possible the Patriots still could have come back and won, but it would have been a whole lot harder if they were behind by three possessions instead of two.

The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay.

“The ruling on the field was a fumble, recovered by the defense. Because a whistle was blown, there could be no advance of the fumble, and that ended the play,” NFL spokesman Michael Signora told PFT via email. “Replay was used to determine if in fact it was a fumble and/or if the player was down by contact, but no advance of the fumble could be added at this point. The officials are instructed to officiate as to what they see on the field, not to replay.”


This play was blown dead, and it may have cost the Jaguars a touchdown that could have been the difference between a loss and a trip to the Super Bowl.


the error is the officials affording the Pats an out here by blowing the whistle and taking the points off the board.

We have seen this manipulation time and time again


When the whistle blew, the official in question had no way of knowing he was preventing a long gainer and maybe a touchdown, so stop it. Jack was still in the process of getting up and starting to run when the whistle blew, so the official obviously decided to blow it when Jack was still on the ground.


That's my point Jeemie, you stated it too before replying to my reference. This is blatent mistake ad nauseum.

_________________
ImageImage
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11317
I think the replay is inconclusive, despite common sense telling you that you can't rip the ball away like that AND not also be down by contact. I suppose it's technically possible, but c'mon.

I think that play should have been blown dead. I don't agree that replay is a replacement for officiating with common sense live - you can never win, because if you let the play "play out" then you end-up with very questionable calls standing because replay couldn't conclusively overturn it.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9095
totally conclusive by replay...get your eyes checked due... :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23264
The point, Beth, is the official saw he was down by contact, and so blew the whistle.

That’s right in your post- officials are taught to call what they see.

_________________
“A set of several simple rules leads to complex, intelligent behavior. While a set of complex rules often leads to dumb and primitive behavior.”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:18 pm
Posts: 11319
Jeemie wrote:
BethlehemSteel wrote:
now it's a story

Quote:
Posted by Michael David Smith on January 22, 2018, 9:26 AM EST

Jaguars linebacker Myles Jack made a sensational play in the AFC Championship Game when he ran down Patriots running back Dion Lewis, forced a fumble and recovered it. But did the officials rob Jack of an even more sensational play?

After recovering the ball on the ground, Jack got up and started sprinting down the field, appearing to have a clear path to the end zone. The officials immediately blew the play dead, however, ruling Jack down by contact as soon as he recovered.

The question is whether Jack actually had made contact with Lewis after he recovered the fumble. And replays indicate that he may not have: Jack was still grasping for the ball as he rolled over and away from Lewis and didn’t appear to have possession of the ball until he was free of Lewis and not near any other Patriots. Jack clearly didn’t think he was down, which is why he got up and started sprinting for what could have been a touchdown.

The play was reviewed, but only as to the question of whether it was a fumble and whether the Jaguars recovered. It clearly was a fumble and Jack clearly did recover. But there could be no review of whether Jack was down by contact after recovering the ball because the officials had blown the play dead. Once a play is blown dead, nothing that happens after that can be changed in instant replay.

If the officials had allowed the play to continue, Jack may very well have run for a touchdown that would have given the Jaguars a 27-10 lead with less than 14 minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. It’s possible the Patriots still could have come back and won, but it would have been a whole lot harder if they were behind by three possessions instead of two.

The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay.

“The ruling on the field was a fumble, recovered by the defense. Because a whistle was blown, there could be no advance of the fumble, and that ended the play,” NFL spokesman Michael Signora told PFT via email. “Replay was used to determine if in fact it was a fumble and/or if the player was down by contact, but no advance of the fumble could be added at this point. The officials are instructed to officiate as to what they see on the field, not to replay.”


This play was blown dead, and it may have cost the Jaguars a touchdown that could have been the difference between a loss and a trip to the Super Bowl.


the error is the officials affording the Pats an out here by blowing the whistle and taking the points off the board.

We have seen this manipulation time and time again


When the whistle blew, the official in question had no way of knowing he was preventing a long gainer and maybe a touchdown, so stop it. Jack was still in the process of getting up and starting to run when the whistle blew, so the official obviously decided to blow it when Jack was still on the ground.


Yeah, probably just a coincidence.

_________________
86n96 wrote:
Been checked to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:22 pm
Posts: 232
To the non believers...

Officiating is always inconsistent... especially with all the gray areas in the rulebook...

the number of times the Patriots are benefited from that inconsistency is ironically very consistent.

Last week it was good defense on Antonio Brown
This week it's a PI call for two fairly large chunks of yards when the Patriots need them.

Jacksonville didn't change the way they've played all year... the only difference is who they were playing.

This is the same story over and over again - and it always benefits the Patriots.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9669
ToddHaleysNineIron wrote:
To the non believers...

Officiating is always inconsistent... especially with all the gray areas in the rulebook...

the number of times the Patriots are benefited from that inconsistency is ironically very consistent.

Last week it was good defense on Antonio Brown
This week it's a PI call for two fairly large chunks of yards when the Patriots need them.

Jacksonville didn't change the way they've played all year... the only difference is who they were playing.

This is the same story over and over again - and it always benefits the Patriots.


I wonder Jax is not on average penalized about as much as they were vs Pats.

I mean, maybe they were abnormally under penalized vs Steelers.

Every game every team gets away with shit.

People just hate the Pats.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 11:54 pm
Posts: 2222
BethlehemSteel wrote:
now it's a story

Quote:
Posted by Michael David Smith on January 22, 2018, 9:26 AM EST

Jaguars linebacker Myles Jack made a sensational play in the AFC Championship Game when he ran down Patriots running back Dion Lewis, forced a fumble and recovered it. But did the officials rob Jack of an even more sensational play?

After recovering the ball on the ground, Jack got up and started sprinting down the field, appearing to have a clear path to the end zone. The officials immediately blew the play dead, however, ruling Jack down by contact as soon as he recovered.

The question is whether Jack actually had made contact with Lewis after he recovered the fumble. And replays indicate that he may not have: Jack was still grasping for the ball as he rolled over and away from Lewis and didn’t appear to have possession of the ball until he was free of Lewis and not near any other Patriots. Jack clearly didn’t think he was down, which is why he got up and started sprinting for what could have been a touchdown.

The play was reviewed, but only as to the question of whether it was a fumble and whether the Jaguars recovered. It clearly was a fumble and Jack clearly did recover. But there could be no review of whether Jack was down by contact after recovering the ball because the officials had blown the play dead. Once a play is blown dead, nothing that happens after that can be changed in instant replay.

If the officials had allowed the play to continue, Jack may very well have run for a touchdown that would have given the Jaguars a 27-10 lead with less than 14 minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. It’s possible the Patriots still could have come back and won, but it would have been a whole lot harder if they were behind by three possessions instead of two.

The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay.

“The ruling on the field was a fumble, recovered by the defense. Because a whistle was blown, there could be no advance of the fumble, and that ended the play,” NFL spokesman Michael Signora told PFT via email. “Replay was used to determine if in fact it was a fumble and/or if the player was down by contact, but no advance of the fumble could be added at this point. The officials are instructed to officiate as to what they see on the field, not to replay.”


This play was blown dead, and it may have cost the Jaguars a touchdown that could have been the difference between a loss and a trip to the Super Bowl.


the error is the officials affording the Pats an out here by blowing the whistle and taking the points off the board.

We have seen this manipulation time and time again


I brought this up live. Was clear to me he was not down by contact.

When in doubt, the correct decision is to let the play run. When the play is conclusively finished, make the cal you believe to be correct. This, here the Ref should’ve allowed the ply to continue and then determine Jack was down by contact. This enables the error to be corrected on replay while also establishing the right burden of proof.

My above suggested standard applies only to calls where the refs isn’t sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:55 pm
Posts: 682
Zeke5123 wrote:
I brought this up live. Was clear to me he was not down by contact.

When in doubt, the correct decision is to let the play run. When the play is conclusively finished, make the cal you believe to be correct. This, here the Ref should’ve allowed the ply to continue and then determine Jack was down by contact. This enables the error to be corrected on replay while also establishing the right burden of proof.

My above suggested standard applies only to calls where the refs isn’t sure.

Correct - no one is saying he shouldn’t make the call of down by contact if that’s what he thinks it is. What he shouldn’t do though is blow the whistle because at that point there is not a way to correct it if it is wrong. Once the play reaches its conclusion the whistle should be blown and then the ref makes the call. Since it is a turnover everyone already knows it will be reviewed. The problem is that once the whistle is blown it doesn't matter what is correct, the play is dead no matter what.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:31 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2014 12:48 pm
Posts: 1457
Still Lit wrote:
ToddHaleysNineIron wrote:
To the non believers...

Officiating is always inconsistent... especially with all the gray areas in the rulebook...

the number of times the Patriots are benefited from that inconsistency is ironically very consistent.

Last week it was good defense on Antonio Brown
This week it's a PI call for two fairly large chunks of yards when the Patriots need them.

Jacksonville didn't change the way they've played all year... the only difference is who they were playing.

This is the same story over and over again - and it always benefits the Patriots.


I wonder Jax is not on average penalized about as much as they were vs Pats.

I mean, maybe they were abnormally under penalized vs Steelers.

Every game every team gets away with shit.

People just hate the Pats.

Lit, while I respect much of what you bring here, you may want to reconsider defending the Pats so much....and here's why. First, you've stated you never watch the Pats unless they're playing the Steelers. So, you see them play once a year maybe, but yet you vehemently deny that they refs help them out. There's a lot of folks here that watch a lot of other football games/tapes of much of the NFL (myself included). Over and over again, they actually see the refs helping the Pats with calls/non-calls with their own two eyes, yet you seem to think it's okay to vehemently take the opposing position even though you are severely ignorant about the subject due to your lack of investing the time to study it.

I personally enjoy watching (studying) a lot of NFL football which I feel helps me watch the Steelers without black and gold glasses. And, because of that, I can tell you (imo) without a doubt the Pats get more help from the refs than any team I can think of. Now, am I an expert on the subject? No, but at least I'm highly educated on it due to the time I have invested. I guess it's possible you could also be posting the way you are just to get a rise out of some folks. If that's the case, to each his own, I guess.

Just my (educated) two cents...carry on.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 9669
DP39 wrote:
Lit, while I respect much of what you bring here, you may want to reconsider defending the Pats so much....and here's why. First, you've stated you never watch the Pats unless they're playing the Steelers. So, you see them play once a year maybe, but yet you vehemently deny that they refs help them out. There's a lot of folks here that watch a lot of other football games/tapes of much of the NFL (myself included). Over and over again, they actually see the refs helping the Pats with calls/non-calls with their own two eyes, yet you seem to think it's okay to vehemently take the opposing position even though you are severely ignorant about the subject due to your lack of investing the time to study it.

I personally enjoy watching (studying) a lot of NFL football which I feel helps me watch the Steelers without black and gold glasses. And, because of that, I can tell you (imo) without a doubt the Pats get more help from the refs than any team I can think of. Now, am I an expert on the subject? No, but at least I'm highly educated on it due to the time I have invested. I guess it's possible you could also be posting the way you are just to get a rise out of some folks. If that's the case, to each his own, I guess.

Just my (educated) two cents...carry on.


To be clear, I'm not trolling and not defending the Pats.

I don't care about the Pats.

I can't stand conspiracy BS and that's what I'm attacking.

I may very well be wrong about the officiating. It is true that I do not care enough to spend a lot of time looking into it. I admit all this.

_________________
TB wrote:
Breaking news: Tom Brady is also better than Ben Roethlisberger. Jerry Rice is better than Antonio Brown. Your mom is a bigger slut than my mom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Boomer addresses the elephant in the room
PostPosted: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 11:57 pm
Posts: 153
I don’t think our receivers sell DPIs well enough.[/quote]

Prime candidate for Deep Thoughts


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DP39, Google [Bot], Havoc, spOtz, StillerInCT and 26 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group