Old Bear
Postdoc
Posts: 3992
Reg: 11-23-04
|
01-07-19 05:38 PM - Post#271722
In response to 13otto
The (double) Doink/Block hurt worse than the bad catch/fumble/call/rule!
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-07-19 09:25 PM - Post#271731
In response to Old Bear
turns out an Eagle just brushed the ball with his fingers so it was actually a blocked kick.
|
dperry
Postdoc
Posts: 2214
Loc: Houston, TX
Reg: 11-24-04
|
Re: Eagles
01-07-19 10:28 PM - Post#271736
In response to Streamers
I still think NY might have made that one up on the fly, but it was the correct outcome, IMHO, given that the platy was whistled and signaled incomplete.
Nope, it's in the special replay rules (which is a scary thing in and of itself)-- Screenshot
I don't get the rule on that play where the Bear completion was made, but because no one picked up the ball after the whistle blew, it was ruled an incompletion
No, the primary reason it was ruled an incompletion is because that's what the ref called in real time. (More on this later.) Given the changes in the rules, he obviously blew it; it should have been a catch, and then a fumble. (If I were fascist dictator of the world, the rule would be more like Palestra38's take, but there's no question that the rules as changed this year make that a catch.) That was mistake #1.
I can't tell if the guy who actually called it an incomplete blew his whistle immediately or not. I don't hear one until a few seconds later, but in fairness, it was loud, and he wasn't close to the sidelines, so the mikes may not have picked it up. If he didn't, that was mistake #2--if you're that sure it's an incomplete, you need to bring the play to a halt immediately. Mistake #3 was the guy on the sideline, who probably had a better look at it, not making the call.
Yes. It's a bad rule.
Indeed it is--it doesn't go far enough. The rule should be that if the ref has ruled an interception and is certain, he should blow the whistle immediately, and at that point, the only way the call can be reversed is if there is a clean catch and the receiver maintains possession until down by contact. A fumble makes the incomplete call irreversible. One of the fundamental principles of sports rules is that when the whistle blows (or in baseball, when "Time!" is called), the players need to stop as soon as is reasonably possible. We are already having too much trouble with people getting flagged for questionable roughings and targetings when play is proceeding--wait until it happens after the whistle because people are diving for the ball hoping that the replay will reverse things, or even worse, that someone commits a legitimate targeting in that situation and someone else gets hurt. Sometimes there is no way to correct an injustice without creating a worse injustice (and by the way, I think it would have been just as unfair if the Eagles had recovered the ball, given that the play was clearly being waved off and the Bears weren't going for it either.)
This play touches on my pet peeve about modern officiating (and it's not just football either, as the interminable reviews in the last two minutes of too many basketball games proves.) We are getting to the point where replay is being used as a crutch by the referees, and it should not be. They should be still training just as hard, trying to get the call right the first time and not relying on the replays to bail them out, particularly since in situations like this, sometimes you really can't fix it without screwing over the other side in the process.
On a tangent, why is it ever legal for a forward fumble to be advanced by any offensive player other than the one who dropped it? If it's recovered by anyone else or goes out of bounds, it should always go back to the spot of the fumble (unless the defense recovers and then coughs it back up, of course.) For one thing, that would allow you to get rid of touchbacks on fumbles out of the end zone, which strikes me as archaic.
Also, on the subject of "icing", I think college needs to adopt the pro rule that the same team can't call more than one timeout without a play intervening. I hate it when people call three time outs in a row late in the half, and Penn has been one of the worst offenders for a long time now.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!" |
|
dperry
Postdoc
Posts: 2214
Loc: Houston, TX
Reg: 11-24-04
|
Re: Eagles
01-07-19 10:37 PM - Post#271737
In response to dperry
Also, the NFL dodged a couple of bullets in the opposite direction at the end there. To begin with, they really need to have a drone flying way up high over the goal line looking straight down for plays like the Eagles' two-point conversion. I think he was short, and certainly the evidence we had was not conclusive, but a straight-down shot like they have over the goal in hockey would have been much better for this purpose (either that, or they need to figure out some way to have the ball activate something when it crosses the line.) Also, I'm not sure Tate had the ball in the end zone when he initially made the touchdown catch, and he definitely pulled it out for a second after the catch, but fortunately, he clearly pulled it back in again before he was tackled and thrown out of bounds; otherwise, we could have had a real brouhaha.
David Perry
Penn '92
"Hail, Alma Mater/Thy sons cheer thee now
To thee, Pennsylvania/All rivals must bow!!!" |
|
Charlie Fog
Masters Student
Posts: 586
Age: 55
Loc: Philly
Reg: 11-12-13
|
01-08-19 08:21 AM - Post#271745
In response to 10Q
Once the refs blew it dead they had no choice but to call it an incompletion. If they hadn't, the eagles would have recovered.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23360
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-19 08:53 AM - Post#271748
In response to Charlie Fog
But if someone had jumped on the ball after the whistle blew, wouldn't that have changed the ruling?
|
13otto
Masters Student
Posts: 779
Loc: Philadelphia, PA
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-08-19 10:18 AM - Post#271759
In response to 10Q
The way to avoid that scenario from happening is for the official to rule every similar questionable catch a completion, not blow his whistle, and let the fumble recovery play out. All turnovers are automatically reviewed so neither side has to risk losing a timeout to challenge. The additional reviews will be paid for by the advertisers. We move the start times of the late games back another 20 minutes to 4:45 pm to allow for the even longer games. In the long run, we'll actually get that time back. We won't be spending as many hours on this board reading, posting and arguing about a blown call/bad rule.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23360
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Eagles
01-08-19 10:26 AM - Post#271760
In response to 13otto
It's an idea, but the problem is that you will start with a presumption that there was a catch, even when the ref really thinks there wasn't. You would have to lower the bar for reversals. No more indisputable evidence standard. You'd have to go from beyond a reasonable doubt to a preponderance of the evidence.
|
jeromelh
Junior
Posts: 213
Age: 81
Reg: 03-30-17
|
01-08-19 10:47 AM - Post#271762
In response to 10Q
Yes it would have changed things. If an Eagle had grabbed the ball and run it into the end zone it would have been a touchdown. Of course the refs would have blown it dead, so I suspect that the recovering player would have stopped and given it to the ref. So where is the ball placed?? If the recovering player runs it into the end zone, what about the opposing players who make no effort to tackle him.
In short- What a mess!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23360
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-19 10:54 AM - Post#271763
In response to jeromelh
This is part of why I wish there was no replay system. It's a flaw. I liked it better when there was no replay.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4910
Reg: 02-04-06
|
01-08-19 06:10 PM - Post#271800
In response to 10Q
On the catch itself, at first I thought it had to be incomplete given the defender's hand in there before knocking the ball loose. But then I remembered some of those highlight plays where the receiver catches the ball with the defenders hand imprisoned against his chest under the ball, which are always ruled complete. So if you just look at the issue of control of the ball, the consensus that it was a catch seems right.
The replay-and-blown-dead issue is another thing. The existing rule seems like the least bad of the options to me.
|
TigerFan
PhD Student
Posts: 1885
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-19 10:37 PM - Post#271814
In response to SRP
Another complication: If an Eagles player had picked up the ball and run towards the Bears’ end zone after the ref called the pass incomplete, wouldn’t he have been vulnerable to a delay of game penalty or even an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty?
|
Ben Franklin
Masters Student
Posts: 652
Loc: Cleveland
Reg: 02-19-05
|
01-10-19 11:36 AM - Post#271945
In response to TigerFan
Who dat.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
01-10-19 12:24 PM - Post#271953
In response to Ben Franklin
Who dat not ready for what's coming...
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-19 12:30 PM - Post#271955
In response to Quakers03
More than anything, who doesn't want to see an Eagles-Cowboys NFC championship at the House of Jones?
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3584
Reg: 02-15-15
|
01-10-19 02:45 PM - Post#271972
In response to palestra38
Who don’t
|
Ben Franklin
Masters Student
Posts: 652
Loc: Cleveland
Reg: 02-19-05
|
01-11-19 04:47 PM - Post#272134
In response to Quakers03
Who dat not ready for what's coming...
Nick Foles.
|
Old Bear
Postdoc
Posts: 3992
Reg: 11-23-04
|
01-13-19 08:50 PM - Post#272491
In response to Ben Franklin
Got what they deserved for Doinking Da Bears.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-13-19 10:16 PM - Post#272496
In response to Old Bear
Alshon had a doink at the end there.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21193
Reg: 12-02-04
|
01-13-19 10:30 PM - Post#272497
In response to UPIA1968
Live by the (soon to be) ex-Bear, die by the ex-Bear.
|
