Boston Globe articles

swissvale72 · **Joined:** Tue Aug 05, 2014 9:52 pm **Posts:** 7243

What were the Patriots going to do without their best play this season...the Riveron Reversal.

Shit! Forgot to post the link for that one....it's by Chris Gasper.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/patri ... story.html

BethlehemSteel · **Joined:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 7:07 am **Posts:** 8350

swissvale72 wrote:

What were the Patriots going to do without their best play this season...the Riveron Reversal.

I'd say they got one turned back on them with the play to #30, the ertz play was perfectly called as 3 steps and a runner, broke plane, TD

Louis Lipps Service · **Joined:** Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:55 pm **Posts:** 1595

BethlehemSteel wrote:

swissvale72 wrote:

What were the Patriots going to do without their best play this season...the Riveron Reversal.

I'd say they got one turned back on them with the play to #30, the ertz play was perfectly called as 3 steps and a runner, broke plane, TD

I was absolutely shocked that TD was upheld. I personally didn't think he maintained possession (ball was rolling around in his forearm as he went out of bounds). Now, if they actually stuck to their own definition of what should be considered "clear and obvious visual evidence", then maybe it wasn't enough to overturn it.

But we've all seen them overturn calls on much, much less.

Orangesteel · **Joined:** Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am **Posts:** 8182

Agreed Lipps. Kind of ironic that two plays last night that the Pats have been milking all season basically went against them in the biggest of all games. Justice, perhaps.

COR-TEN · **Joined:** Thu Jul 10, 2014 3:08 pm **Posts:** 6086

Louis Lipps Service wrote:

BethlehemSteel wrote:

swissvale72 wrote:

What were the Patriots going to do without their best play this season...the Riveron Reversal.

I'd say they got one turned back on them with the play to #30, the ertz play was perfectly called as 3 steps and a runner, broke plane, TD

I was absolutely shocked that TD was upheld. I personally didn't think he maintained possession (ball was rolling around in his forearm as he went out of bounds). Now, if they actually stuck to their own definition of what should be considered "clear and obvious visual evidence", then maybe it wasn't enough to overturn it.

But we've all seen them overturn calls on much, much less.

I was watching end of the game with my partner, and told her that the call would be a defining moment for the NFL. If the TD was reversed, it would accelerate the downfall of the NFL. For all to see. In the biggest game of the season. It was a catch and a TD, whatever the fuck the "rules" say.

Jeemie · **Joined:** Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm **Posts:** 22786

Louis Lipps Service wrote:

BethlehemSteel wrote:

swissvale72 wrote:

What were the Patriots going to do without their best play this season...the Riveron Reversal.

I'd say they got one turned back on them with the play to #30, the ertz play was perfectly called as 3 steps and a runner, broke plane, TD

I was absolutely shocked that TD was upheld. I personally didn't think he maintained possession (ball was rolling around in his forearm as he went out of bounds). Now, if they actually stuck to their own definition of what should be considered "clear and obvious visual evidence", then maybe it wasn't enough to overturn it.

But we've all seen them overturn calls on much, much less.

Roger Goodell wants the rule changed next year.

I think it was clear he ordered Alberto Riveron that under no circumstances could he allow the bad PR on the controversy that would be generated over a reversed TD rear it's ugly head.

So he ordered Riveron to stop looking for miniscule reasons to overturn calls on the field.

I also think the refs...known to be a flag-happy bunch, especially eager to throw DPI flags...were ordered to keep their flags in their pockets.

Thus we got hardly any penalties called and also the rare anomaly of zero holding calls and yet only one sack.

Orangesteel · **Joined:** Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am **Posts:** 8182

^

Exactly. The NFL was at a crossroads; what kind of product are you putting out there? Are you really going to overturn two phenomenal football plays because of a technicality that even the damn league doesn’t fully understand? If so, what are we even watching? Is it a sport anymore?

jebrick · **Joined:** Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:57 pm **Posts:** 3032

Jeemie wrote:

Roger Goodell wants the rule changed next year.

I think it was clear he ordered Alberto Riveron that under no circumstances could he allow the bad PR on the controversy that would be generated over a reversed TD rear it's ugly head.

So he ordered Riveron to stop looking for miniscule reasons to overturn calls on the field.

I also think the refs...known to be a flag-happy bunch, especially eager to throw DPI flags...were ordered to keep their flags in their pockets.

Thus we got hardly any penalties called and also the rare anomaly of zero holding calls and yet only one sack.

you mean he had to have indisputable proof!!!

Orangesteel · **Joined:** Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am **Posts:** 8182

ESPN article has one penalty on the Pats; but there were really two; false start on Gronk and offsides on a Eagles FG that was declined.

8, count em, EIGHT penalties called on NE the entire playoffs. EIGHT that were accepted, declined or offset.

seabs926 · **Joined:** Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:43 am **Posts:** 221

Orangesteel wrote:

ESPN article has one penalty on the Pats; but there were really two; false start on Gronk and offsides on a Eagles FG that was declined.

8, count em, EIGHT penalties called on NE the entire playoffs. EIGHT that were accepted, declined or offset.

How many of those were during the play as well? I imagine most were pre-snap.

I believe I heard that the false start in the Super Bowl was the only penalty on the Pats' offense the entire post season.

Boston Globe articles

Who is online