It is currently Fri Nov 16, 2018 8:35 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1332
I imagine each person will see what they want to see. I have not seen this angle previously.

What I think it shows conclusively is that ignoring the clause about irrefutable evidence created an inconclusive decision that is very refutable.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9148
I think they called it correctly according to the letter of the stupid rule


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1332
Meaning you are 100% certain that his fingers are not under the ball holding it above the ground.

This is most likely one of the last frames before the left hand starts heading back towards the ball. It is so obvious that they made the huge assumption the ball is on the ground or that the ground helped him control the ball. Why go through the processing power of wondering, assuming, parsing, magnifying, zooming, pivoting, triangulating, wordsmitihing....just confirm it as called on the field and deneuter the whole controversy. Anything else, and you are not serving the best interests of the shield!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 9185
What a bonehead. Hold on to the GD ball.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
Me too- which is why I'm pushing for the stupid rule to be amended so reaching out/stretching out to make a play if the player has made initial contact with the ground ought to be enough to establish the catch.

If a player can make the stretch while maintaining control, that clearly indicates a catch has been made. It's simply common sense.

Oh, and Mr. Knows Everything About Football Bill Belichick made a ridiculously stupid statement in support of the rule as currently written.
Quote:
"Well, I think that's really a conversation for people like Al [Riveron] and the league and so forth. But, there's always been a philosophy in the league and it's gone back several decades of philosophically whether you want to have a catch and a fumble or an incomplete pass, and the philosophy has always been incomplete pass. Otherwise, you'd have a million catches and fumbles. I agree with that," Belichick said.


Um...no, Mr. Belichick, you would not have "a million catches and fumbles".

First, plays like Jesse James' and Dez Bryant's, as high profile as they are, simply don't happen all that much. Creating rules for rare occurrences is how over-officiating happens.

Second, Mr. Belichick, there's this little rule that reads "THE GROUND CAN'T CAUSE A FUMBLE"! So that narrows down possible fumble plays to those plays where the ball is swatted away as it's being reached out. But those ALREADY EXIST on running plays, so WHO CARES?

_________________
“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: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
LakecrestSteeler wrote:
Meaning you are 100% certain that his fingers are not under the ball holding it above the ground.

This is most likely one of the last frames before the left hand starts heading back towards the ball. It is so obvious that they made the huge assumption the ball is on the ground or that the ground helped him control the ball. Why go through the processing power of wondering, assuming, parsing, magnifying, zooming, pivoting, triangulating, wordsmitihing....just confirm it as called on the field and deneuter the whole controversy. Anything else, and you are not serving the best interests of the shield!


Unless you believe as Beth does that the NFL scripts outcomes for money and other reasons.

If a lot of money was out on the Steelers, or big crooked money was on the Patriots, then you can make a circumstantial case for them wanting to assure the Pats covered the 2.5 point spread.

Except the Steelers had a dozen chances to put this game away and didn't. Such conspiracy theories fail for this reason because too much is out of control.

_________________
“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: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1332
Another irritating historical note is that the touchdown has its roots in rugby and early football with the actual touching down of the ball determining where you kick the try. Imagine that; setting the ball on the ground and letting go.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:55 pm
Posts: 1862
I don't think it should have been overturned based on this, but I do believe you can reasonably assume that the ball is, in fact, on the ground.

Of course "reasonably assume" isn't the standard for overturning calls. But at the end of the day, I think it was the right call based on the rules in place.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 11617
As I watch that play, JJ catches it and starts to bring it in....knee down.....untouched he then extends the ball over the GL.

That's a TD. Surviving the ground - if we're to apply any common sense at all - was never intended to conjoin a dive (a running action) after the catch, nor to nullify a clearly completed catch because he stumbled for several steps.

A rule intended to clarify and take subjectivity out that fails to be either consistent or clear is obviously a horrible rule that needs to go. The solution is actually worse than the problem it was supposed to fix.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 9185
And all he had to do was secure the ball, untouched, going to the ground. Sigh.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:06 am
Posts: 9148
if the roles were reversed and that was Gronk..you guys know you'd be losing your shit saying that ball 100% hit the ground.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 3781
LakecrestSteeler wrote:
Meaning you are 100% certain that his fingers are not under the ball holding it above the ground.

This is most likely one of the last frames before the left hand starts heading back towards the ball. It is so obvious that they made the huge assumption the ball is on the ground or that the ground helped him control the ball. Why go through the processing power of wondering, assuming, parsing, magnifying, zooming, pivoting, triangulating, wordsmitihing....just confirm it as called on the field and deneuter the whole controversy. Anything else, and you are not serving the best interests of the shield!


This is why they should get rid of replay, even with all the views, all the frames, all to slow mo and HD in the world, after talking about it for a week there are still doubts. What a total ruination of what was once a fun sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:20 am
Posts: 3781
GreekSteel wrote:
if the roles were reversed and that was Gronk..you guys know you'd be losing your shit saying that ball 100% hit the ground.


I wouldn't I'd be complaining about the real enemy.... REPLAY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
Kodiak wrote:
As I watch that play, JJ catches it and starts to bring it in....knee down.....untouched he then extends the ball over the GL.

That's a TD. Surviving the ground - if we're to apply any common sense at all - was never intended to conjoin a dive (a running action) after the catch, nor to nullify a clearly completed catch because he stumbled for several steps.

A rule intended to clarify and take subjectivity out that fails to be either consistent or clear is obviously a horrible rule that needs to go. The solution is actually worse than the problem it was supposed to fix.


And the problem was rare to begin with. Probably one catch in 50 or so ends in this manner.

You don't make a rule to deal with rare occurrences, or else you get over-officiating.

Like someone on TV said though, the time to remember this and get angry is in February, when the competition committee gets together to review the rules.

_________________
“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: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 11:10 am
Posts: 1332
Jeemie wrote:
LakecrestSteeler wrote:
Meaning you are 100% certain that his fingers are not under the ball holding it above the ground.

This is most likely one of the last frames before the left hand starts heading back towards the ball. It is so obvious that they made the huge assumption the ball is on the ground or that the ground helped him control the ball. Why go through the processing power of wondering, assuming, parsing, magnifying, zooming, pivoting, triangulating, wordsmitihing....just confirm it as called on the field and deneuter the whole controversy. Anything else, and you are not serving the best interests of the shield!


Unless you believe as Beth does that the NFL scripts outcomes for money and other reasons.

If a lot of money was out on the Steelers, or big crooked money was on the Patriots, then you can make a circumstantial case for them wanting to assure the Pats covered the 2.5 point spread.

Except the Steelers had a dozen chances to put this game away and didn't. Such conspiracy theories fail for this reason because too much is out of control.


I don’t buy into that garbage. Statistics, money and profit bring the spreads in tight. The house is getting a percent on the money bet. What do they care about who wins. All they care about is that it is nearly 50% bet on one team and 50% bet on the other. The spreads ensure it is as close to 50/50 as possible. If it is not, then you just have to ensure you have a business process that ensures you end up on the wrong side only 50% of the time.

I think the reviewing ref automatically jumped to the catch rule and went down the rabbit hole and forgot to reference the irrefutable clause before delivering the verdict because he was down the rabbit hole way too long. He shit the bed because of time constraints. He was in scarcity mode was unable to have broad vision of the entirety of the situation. Tunnel vision took him to the catch rule.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:22 pm
Posts: 264
They could have interpreted it as a catch as the rules are written. The "going to the ground" rule invokes only if James doesn't get two feet down, or any other body part than the hands... that way "going to the ground" invokes if he's diving to make a catch and his hands hit the ground with the ball first.

Otherwise once Jame's knee hits - and he's fulfilled the second part of the rule which turns him into a runner (the extension would do that), then it's an easy call.

The problem isn't the rule - its the stupid application of the rule and the overuse of "going to the ground" when they ALREADY have the remedy written into the defining catch rule.

Only two explanations - they want to influence the game and pick and choose... or they are lawyers trying too hard to confuse people and seem smart.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 1:22 am
Posts: 9185
Having competent coaches would help too. KC beat NE in Foxboro scoring 21 points in the fourth quarter.

What do we do? Haley shoves the playbook up Tomlins asshole and we lose, again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:13 pm
Posts: 4024
Wow, I'm sold. Here are some other moments that happened differently upon further review:

Look at this photo, Holmes never got both feet down!

Image

Is it too late to give back that Lombardi? And look, JFK wasn't actually shot either!

Image

Probably down on some tropical island with Tupac and the kid from the Munsters.

_________________
SteelThrillsseeker wrote:
Dad showed up after work and according to her the entire hospital hears my dad yell you are not naming our son Hoss.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 16543
GreekSteel wrote:
if the roles were reversed and that was Gronk..you guys know you'd be losing your shit saying that ball 100% hit the ground.

and we'd be doing that because... THEY WOULD HAVE RULED IT A TD. Book it.

_________________
VASteelerGuy wrote:
These refs suck


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Picture is worth a 1000 words?
PostPosted: Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 9:34 pm
Posts: 23382
Orangesteel wrote:
Having competent coaches would help too. KC beat NE in Foxboro scoring 21 points in the fourth quarter.

What do we do? Haley shoves the playbook up Tomlins asshole and we lose, again.


I’m beginning to lean towards the idea it’s Tomlin telling Haley to call it that way, and not the reverse.

Tomlin has been managing games this way since his second year in the league...since before Haley got here.

If we’re leading late...even if only by one score...we call off the dogs. We only get aggressive when we need to...or in the occasional totally random weird spot...probably when his gut growls.

It’s the way he is, I think.

_________________
“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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], swissvale72 and 29 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