Runner fumbles the ball, recovers it, crosses endzone with control throughout the ground and it's called a touchback. Absolute insanity.
Most BS of BS calls in Patiots Jets game
- Thread starter dwiz
- Start date
It is Tony Corenti's crew not Ed's. And the review and final decision comes from NY
Wait a minute. The call on the field was touchdown. My impression would be the blame belongs with the replay official(s). The NFL has officially found a way to ruin a great sport.
It's not like he fumbled it on the ground. He just temporarily juggled it then regained full control before hitting the pylon.
To make matters worse the call on the field was TD. There had to be irrefutable video evidence to say that he fumbled into the EZ. The video evidence was pretty clear that he had control when he hit the pylon.
The worst video reversal ever.
I was at the 2014 PSU/O$U game and it was the first game I ever saw where I thought game fixing might be present. This is the second. That was so egregious either the referees should be fired for absolute incompetence OR absolute corruption.
the overturn call comes from the league office and the head of officiating. Not those on the field.
One of the worst calls I've even seen, and the announcing crew seemed ok with it. This is like psu 2004-2009 replay officiating stuff, the irrefutable evidence thing, means "eh, maybe."
Edit: Fouts (?) said it was the worst call he had ever seen, at the end of the game.
Edit: Fouts (?) said it was the worst call he had ever seen, at the end of the game.
I have tried watching this game. I don't know whether it's the two teams playing or just my preference for college ball but now I am binge watching Big Bang Theory.
The people doing league review are referees. The point stands. And it would most likely be easier for a gambler to influence them than a whole on-field crew.
Retired referees. Not good enough to cut it on the field anymore, so they put them in charge of the most critical plays in every game every weekend.
Right now the game would be tied, with the Jets driving for the winning field goal.
Worst officiated NFL game I have seen in a long, long, very very long time. Maybe ever.
Worst officiated NFL game I have seen in a long, long, very very long time. Maybe ever.
No they are they are the pen pushers in their current state who write the rules and interpret them.
The current guy last reffed in 2012 replaced Dean Blandino is a disciple of his and he wasn't on the field
Your point doesn't stand because the guys on the field had nothing to do with overturning the call. The League over turned that.
So you guys can correct me if I am wrong...I thought it had to be "indisputable" video evidence...where if 100 guys were in a room, all 100 would have to agree that it was a fumble. What a crock...the worst call I have ever seen in an NFL game...but it pales in comparison to the OSU/PSU game when Hackenberg's interception was upheld. That video guy should be banned...
It's a distinction without a difference and changes nothing regarding my posts regarding corruption initiated by officials. I'm sorry if maybe you're dad is on the officiating crew, but you are just disagreeing for the sake of being disagreeable.
Too many tv talking heads not understanding the rules. He caught the ball and just before crossing the goal line the ball was stripped. he lost control of the ball. when he recovers his own fumble he STILL NEEDS to establish control of the ball IN BOUNDS. He didn't. He regained the control in mid-air and landed OOB across the goal line. Touch back.
EDIT: think about it this way. Its the same as catching a pass.
EDIT: think about it this way. Its the same as catching a pass.
So you obviously have a link that proves that he didnt have control of the ball when it hit the pylon, which means touchdown. Could you please provide that link...I am still trying to figure out what "Indisputable video evidence" means...
i never said that he didn't have control when he hit the pylon. what i said was that he didn't have control of the ball AND establish himself in bounds. Again, its the same as if he was catching a pass. Yes. he caught the ball and crossed the goal line, but he made the catch IN THE AIR and didn't touch the ground in play.
And it was INDISPUTABLE, correct? So that if 100 guys saw it they all would agree...
Unreal!! Ref must have had the Patriots on his Bookie sheet. Hopefully the league gives the Jets some butt Lube for the screwing they took. This should not happen.
Dude...the call on the field was TOUCHDOWN...show me INDISPUTABLE VIDEO EVIDENCE were it wasn't...if you can't STHU
i did see it. he never touched the ground in bounds after he reestablished control. I'll try this one more time:
Everyone agrees that the Jet caught the pass and then lost control of the ball. The only dispute is the recovery. If there is no indisputable video evidence of the Jet touching the ground IN BOUNDS after recovering his own fumble then the refs were forced to call it a touch back. You are asking the refs for Indisputable Video Evidence of the WRONG thing. They weren't reviewing a touchdown. They were reviewing a fumble recovery.
Everyone agrees that the Jet caught the pass and then lost control of the ball. The only dispute is the recovery. If there is no indisputable video evidence of the Jet touching the ground IN BOUNDS after recovering his own fumble then the refs were forced to call it a touch back. You are asking the refs for Indisputable Video Evidence of the WRONG thing. They weren't reviewing a touchdown. They were reviewing a fumble recovery.
The call on the field was TOUCHDOWN! Show me INDISPUTABLE VIDEO EVIDENCE where it WAS NOT A TOUCHDOWN 100% GUARANTEED! Man...you are thick
They reviewed because it was called a touchdown.
The review revealed "IVE" that the jet fumbled. At that point the review becomes about the recovery.
The review DID NOT reveal "IVE" that he touched the ground in bounds after he recovered his own fumble. This is why YOU need to show me "IVE" that he did.
I'm done arguing this with you since you are unwilling to follow a logical argument.
The review revealed "IVE" that the jet fumbled. At that point the review becomes about the recovery.
The review DID NOT reveal "IVE" that he touched the ground in bounds after he recovered his own fumble. This is why YOU need to show me "IVE" that he did.
I'm done arguing this with you since you are unwilling to follow a logical argument.
Is that really the rule? That he has to touch the ground with the ball? Because if it is, it’s ridiculous.
