ImageImage

ATL: Week 4

Moderators: paulpressey25, MickeyDavis, humanrefutation

User avatar
crkone
RealGM
Posts: 28,534
And1: 9,313
Joined: Aug 16, 2006

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#81 » by crkone » Tue Oct 6, 2015 1:22 pm

Weird ass rules. He probably would have just jumped on it if anyone actually knew the rule.

Code: Select all

o- - -  \o          __|
   o/   /|          vv`\
  /|     |              |
   |    / \_            |
  / \   |               |
 /  |                   |
User avatar
MikeIsGood
RealGM
Posts: 33,444
And1: 9,543
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: Vamos Rafa
     

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#82 » by MikeIsGood » Tue Oct 6, 2015 2:03 pm

Everyone is saying how crazy this is and no one knew the rule. Swear I knew it, and called it as soon as it happened. I don't mean this for a pat on the back, but I can't believe the response to this. Didn't this happen like 4 years ago?
User avatar
MikeIsGood
RealGM
Posts: 33,444
And1: 9,543
Joined: Jul 10, 2003
Location: Vamos Rafa
     

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#83 » by MikeIsGood » Tue Oct 6, 2015 2:08 pm

Turk Nowitzki wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/footballzebras/status/651234660408815616[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/footballzebras/status/651234975996608512[/tweet]


Hooray - I'm not alone :)
User avatar
Ron Swanson
RealGM
Posts: 22,301
And1: 23,309
Joined: May 15, 2013

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#84 » by Ron Swanson » Tue Oct 6, 2015 2:22 pm

It's also illegal to throw/bat the ball out of bounds for the sake of stopping the clock under 2 minutes. I distinctly remember Larry Centers being called for it in a game 10-15 years ago. It's been in the rule book forever. Blandino and the officials are getting crucified for this and rightfully so.

I just can't understand what it is about Century Link that causes the refs to horrendously botch crucial, sometimes game-deciding calls. There was a challenge that wasn't overturned last week against the Bears when it was painfully obvious on replay that the Seattle returner (Lockett?) fumbled the ball and Chicago recovered it inside SEA territory.
RRyder823
General Manager
Posts: 8,086
And1: 4,126
Joined: May 06, 2014
   

Re: RE: Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#85 » by RRyder823 » Tue Oct 6, 2015 2:46 pm

MikeIsGood wrote:Everyone is saying how crazy this is and no one knew the rule. Swear I knew it, and called it as soon as it happened. I don't mean this for a pat on the back, but I can't believe the response to this. Didn't this happen like 4 years ago?


I knew the rule also but you can't be shocked. How many people claimed to not understand the Calvin Johnson rule even though it had been beat to death just a few years ago? And I don't know..... The fact that EVERY team had that call go against them at some point last season and the fact that it's referred too as the FREAKIN CALVIN JOHNSON RULE.

Case in point I remember a variation of this rule from the Eagles game in the 2010 season. No not the playoff game. The first one. There was a muffed punt and we continued to "miss handle" it and swat it an extra 15 or so yards into the endzone where we recovered it whereas if the Refs had got it right we should have received a penalty from the point where we started doing it.

I remember that and I also remember this specific rule being called in similar situations also but you can't be suprised when others dont. People are dumb. They remember what they wanna remember and this rule doesn't come up enough to stick in the majority of people's memories.
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 97,846
And1: 34,654
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

Re: RE: Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#86 » by ReasonablySober » Tue Oct 6, 2015 3:05 pm

RRyder823 wrote:
MikeIsGood wrote:Everyone is saying how crazy this is and no one knew the rule. Swear I knew it, and called it as soon as it happened. I don't mean this for a pat on the back, but I can't believe the response to this. Didn't this happen like 4 years ago?


I knew the rule also but you can't be shocked. How many people claimed to not understand the Calvin Johnson rule even though it had been beat to death just a few years ago? And I don't know..... The fact that EVERY team had that call go against them at some point last season and the fact that it's referred too as the FREAKIN CALVIN JOHNSON RULE.

Case in point I remember a variation of this rule from the Eagles game in the 2010 season. No not the playoff game. The first one. There was a muffed punt and we continued to "miss handle" it and swat it an extra 15 or so yards into the endzone where we recovered it whereas if the Refs had got it right we should have received a penalty from the point where we started doing it.

I remember that and I also remember this specific rule being called in similar situations also but you can't be suprised when others dont. People are dumb. They remember what they wanna remember and this rule doesn't come up enough to stick in the majority of people's memories.


Nobody cares that the players or the announcers or the general public don't know about the rule. What everyone is (or should be) worked up about is the the goddamn officials didn't know about the rule, and it's their **** jobs to know it. It cost the Lions about a 75% chance at a win last night.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 34,430
And1: 4,141
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#87 » by Kerb Hohl » Tue Oct 6, 2015 3:07 pm

I knew the rule as it happened as well and felt like it wouldn't be called just as a touch foul away from the basket isn't called late in an NBA game. The ref probably didn't want to make the call, in Seattle, where the game was going to be over anyways if the ball just harmlessly bounced it is my feeling.
RRyder823
General Manager
Posts: 8,086
And1: 4,126
Joined: May 06, 2014
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#88 » by RRyder823 » Tue Oct 6, 2015 3:22 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:
RRyder823 wrote:
MikeIsGood wrote:Everyone is saying how crazy this is and no one knew the rule. Swear I knew it, and called it as soon as it happened. I don't mean this for a pat on the back, but I can't believe the response to this. Didn't this happen like 4 years ago?


I knew the rule also but you can't be shocked. How many people claimed to not understand the Calvin Johnson rule even though it had been beat to death just a few years ago? And I don't know..... The fact that EVERY team had that call go against them at some point last season and the fact that it's referred too as the FREAKIN CALVIN JOHNSON RULE.

Case in point I remember a variation of this rule from the Eagles game in the 2010 season. No not the playoff game. The first one. There was a muffed punt and we continued to "miss handle" it and swat it an extra 15 or so yards into the endzone where we recovered it whereas if the Refs had got it right we should have received a penalty from the point where we started doing it.

I remember that and I also remember this specific rule being called in similar situations also but you can't be suprised when others dont. People are dumb. They remember what they wanna remember and this rule doesn't come up enough to stick in the majority of people's memories.


Nobody cares that the players or the announcers or the general public don't know about the rule. What everyone is (or should be) worked up about is the the goddamn officials didn't know about the rule, and it's their **** jobs to know it. It cost the Lions about a 75% chance at a win last night.


I agree that's the real travesty.

Simply commenting how people tend to forget rules unless they've adversely effected their team in a huge way no matter what the situation is
User avatar
humanrefutation
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 30,351
And1: 13,869
Joined: Jun 05, 2006
       

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#89 » by humanrefutation » Tue Oct 6, 2015 4:00 pm

I had never heard of that rule. I've seen punters bat it out of the back of their end zones many times. I've seen it done on kickoffs. Never a flag. Never a penalty.

I know that the key here was the change of possession, but still, it's a dumb rule. The back judge should have caught it, for sure, though.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 34,430
And1: 4,141
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#90 » by Kerb Hohl » Tue Oct 6, 2015 4:03 pm

I'm pretty sure I saw an illegal batting call in a game either this week or last on RedZone.
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 110,797
And1: 26,283
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#91 » by trwi7 » Tue Oct 6, 2015 4:32 pm

Seattle fans are the 13th man at best with the way the refs blow Seattle at home.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
User avatar
humanrefutation
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 30,351
And1: 13,869
Joined: Jun 05, 2006
       

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#92 » by humanrefutation » Tue Oct 6, 2015 7:17 pm

By the way, **** THIS GUY for trying to make himself part of a story that had nothing to do with him. **** him.
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 20,544
And1: 1,324
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#93 » by El Duderino » Tue Oct 6, 2015 8:02 pm

GB_Packers wrote:The back judge felt it wasn't overt. Nothing to see here, carry on. They will issue a statement saying sorry probably tomorrow morning and that will be that.


II just don't believe that back judge. My money is on that he forgot the rule in the heat of that moment given it so rarely happens and later on once he realized that he forgot the rule and screwed up big time, he issued the statement he did to cover for himself the best he could.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 34,430
And1: 4,141
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#94 » by Kerb Hohl » Tue Oct 6, 2015 8:15 pm

El Duderino wrote:
GB_Packers wrote:The back judge felt it wasn't overt. Nothing to see here, carry on. They will issue a statement saying sorry probably tomorrow morning and that will be that.


II just don't believe that back judge. My money is on that he forgot the rule in the heat of that moment given it so rarely happens and later on once he realized that he forgot the rule and screwed up big time, he issued the statement he did to cover for himself the best he could.


It's either that or he didn't want to throw a flag on an (in all likelihood) inconsequential action in a hostile environment. The ball was going to bounce out of the endzone or he was easily going to grab it anyways.

It's like in basketball if with .5 left a guy bumps into somebody as the ball is harmlessly falling out of bounds to the team that is up by 2 points on the other side of the court.

Or, in a more likely scenario, if it is tied and there is contact on a rebound under the basket or very light contact (that would normally be called a foul) going up for the final shot, the ref doesn't want to decide the game at the FT line.
El Duderino
RealGM
Posts: 20,544
And1: 1,324
Joined: May 30, 2005
Location: Working on pad level

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#95 » by El Duderino » Tue Oct 6, 2015 8:23 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:
El Duderino wrote:
GB_Packers wrote:The back judge felt it wasn't overt. Nothing to see here, carry on. They will issue a statement saying sorry probably tomorrow morning and that will be that.


II just don't believe that back judge. My money is on that he forgot the rule in the heat of that moment given it so rarely happens and later on once he realized that he forgot the rule and screwed up big time, he issued the statement he did to cover for himself the best he could.


It's either that or he didn't want to throw a flag on an (in all likelihood) inconsequential action in a hostile environment. The ball was going to bounce out of the endzone or he was easily going to grab it anyways.

It's like in basketball if with .5 left a guy bumps into somebody as the ball is harmlessly falling out of bounds to the team that is up by 2 points on the other side of the court.

Or, in a more likely scenario, if it is tied and there is contact on a rebound under the basket or very light contact (that would normally be called a foul) going up for the final shot, the ref doesn't want to decide the game at the FT line.


I don't buy those analogies. This wasn't an inconsequential action. It was a very obvious infraction on a potential game deciding play, but an infraction which rarely ever happens, so i could easily see that he simply forgot about the rule at the absolute worst time.

Hey, i could be wrong, but it's my gut feeling on what really happened there.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 34,430
And1: 4,141
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#96 » by Kerb Hohl » Tue Oct 6, 2015 8:42 pm

I get the spirit of the rule and I've never been one of those people to ask "why does this rule exist?" because in many cases, the rule exists for a very obvious reason. The rule should exist and be called whenever fit.

In this case, Wright batting the ball meant nothing in a vacuum (assuming this penalty didn't exist). It's like a holding penalty at the 50 yard-line as a guy is crossing the goal-line. That may be a bit of an exaggeration, but you get the point: that game was over. The ball was going to bounce OOB or Wright could have just dove towards the ball, because at worst, he "accidentally" knocks the ball OOB for a touchback.

If the idea of a penalty is to punish a team for gaining an advantage...there was really no advantage gained here. Of course, that could be said about plenty of penalties called, which is not why I'm arguing this in general...but this ref is sitting in Seattle and this penalty is rarely called/used and is a complete "judgment" call anyways. It's never possible to actually prove somebody's intent anyways.
User avatar
trwi7
RealGM
Posts: 110,797
And1: 26,283
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: Aussie bias
         

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#97 » by trwi7 » Tue Oct 6, 2015 9:19 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote:It's either that or he didn't want to throw a flag on an (in all likelihood) inconsequential action in a hostile environment. The ball was going to bounce out of the endzone or he was easily going to grab it anyways.


Are we sure the ball was going out of the end zone? Because that ball slowed down to basically nothing on the last bounce and there's no guarantee it keeps going in the direction it was.

Yes, he could've easily caught it out of the air, but he didn't. You don't see a major league infielder standing two feet off the base on a force out and still have the umpire call him out just because "he could've easily touched the base."

The rules are the rules and the referees once again did a **** job enforcing them.
stellation wrote:What's the difference between Gery Woelful and this glass of mineral water? The mineral water actually has a source."


I Hate Manure wrote:We look to be awful next season without Beasley.
GB_Packers
Head Coach
Posts: 6,426
And1: 1,248
Joined: Sep 09, 2013

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#98 » by GB_Packers » Tue Oct 6, 2015 9:43 pm

The rule is you can't bat the ball out of the back of the end zone. The player on the opposing team did just that, should have been a flag and the Lions ball on the goal line. This "intent" crap goes out the window when you can clearly tell he meant to bat it out of the back of the end zone. It's mind boggling how refs continuously get this stuff wrong and then instead of just admitting they **** up, they fall back on "oh it was a judgement call". No, it wasn't. The rules are the rules, if they aren't going to be followed, take it out of the rule book then.

But even saying all of that, it took Chancellor punching out the ball inches from the goal line for them to beat a struggling Lions team at home where they have looked unbeatable the last few years. Their offense is in shambles. That OL is like having five Marshall Newhouse' out there and now four games in, they still struggle to get the ball to Graham. Go Cincy on Sunday, put them right back on the ropes at 2-3 please.
User avatar
rilamann
RealGM
Posts: 25,536
And1: 13,004
Joined: Jun 20, 2003
Location: Bobby!! Bobby!! Bobby!!
     

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#99 » by rilamann » Tue Oct 6, 2015 11:42 pm

Kerb Hohl wrote: The ball was going to bounce out of the endzone or he was easily going to grab it anyways.


Yeah,because footballs always take predictable bounces.The ball was going to take at least one more bounce in the end zone,that's why Wright batted it out.

And he probably could have grabbed it,but he didn't.He batted it which you're not allowed to do.
Giannis Antetokounmpo wrote:You're out here reffing like Marc Davis and ****
User avatar
rilamann
RealGM
Posts: 25,536
And1: 13,004
Joined: Jun 20, 2003
Location: Bobby!! Bobby!! Bobby!!
     

Re: ATL: Week 4 

Post#100 » by rilamann » Tue Oct 6, 2015 11:57 pm

IMO If a ''professional'' official misses that obvious of a call,especially at such a critical point in the game he needs to be fired on the spot.
Giannis Antetokounmpo wrote:You're out here reffing like Marc Davis and ****

Return to Green Bay Packers