ADVERTISEMENT

Most BS of BS calls in Patiots Jets game

Runner fumbles the ball, recovers it, crosses endzone with control throughout the ground and it's called a touchback. Absolute insanity.

I think replay is good for sports. What I don't like about it is they don't use it to see if play was called correctly, they look to see if call can be overturned. The play can be called wrong but if their views don't show them a reason to overturn call, e play stands. At times to me it looks like the replay officials are going out of their way to protect the backs of yhe officials on the field.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Player2BNamedL8r
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.

His left knee comes down in bounds at a point where no one on the planet can confirm he had the ball or didn't have the ball.
The call should have stood and that is a horrible overturn.
Yes he fumbled while in the air but nothing "proves" he didn't regain possession when his left knee touches down in bounds. One knee shoulder arm equals two feet.
If you can't "prove" he did not have possession at that singular moment then it should have stood. The argument of looking at it as "prove" he did have possession because he already fumbled is not correct and flawed based on what replay is suppose to do because the call on the field was a TD. If that was called a touchback. Fine nothing proves he had possession of the ball when his knee hit the ground either.
 
Well NFL today or whatever, #212 on Direct TV showed an angle where the Jet TE regained control BEFORE he hit the pylon. This was a shot the NFL review people absolutely would have been able to use. TD! Period....they screwed up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LoyalandTrueLion
His left knee comes down in bounds at a point where no one on the planet can confirm he had the ball or didn't have the ball.
The call should have stood and that is a horrible overturn.
Yes he fumbled while in the air but nothing "proves" he didn't regain possession when his left knee touches down in bounds. One knee shoulder arm equals two feet.
If you can't "prove" he did not have possession at that singular moment then it should have stood. The argument of looking at it as "prove" he did have possession because he already fumbled is not correct and flawed based on what replay is suppose to do because the call on the field was a TD. If that was called a touchback. Fine nothing proves he had possession of the ball when his knee hit the ground either.

How can you fumble the ball into your own hands? I'm still waiting for an interpretation on that.

LdN
 
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.

Can you show me the fumble?

LdN
 
Well NFL today or whatever, #212 on Direct TV showed an angle where the Jet TE regained control BEFORE he hit the pylon. This was a shot the NFL review people absolutely would have been able to use. TD! Period....they screwed up.
The issue is that if he really did lose control, he'd have to regain it AND establish himself inbounds. Since it appears that he touches the pylon before he touches the ground, then he wouldn't be able to establish possession once again, and the call would be correct.

(I don't necessarily agree with the call as it's tough to use what I saw to overturn the initial ruling, but I can certainly see why they changed it).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TenerHallTerror
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT