ImageImageImageImage

OT: Patriots

Moderators: Parliament10, sully00

User avatar
GreenBloodedC
RealGM
Posts: 11,036
And1: 11,541
Joined: May 08, 2012

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#41 » by GreenBloodedC » Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:15 am

Unbelievable game marred by officiating but a win is a win.
Image
Smitty731
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 21,204
And1: 23,795
Joined: Feb 09, 2014
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#42 » by Smitty731 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:51 pm

Wes-J wrote:Great game marred by sketchy officiating unfortunately. Brady is the goat.

Awful call and non-call at the end. James caught the ball, made his move, crossed the plane, should of been game over.

Eli Rodgers was tackled by the defender on the deflection. Game over.

I don't know what is and isn't a catch anymore. Interpretation is whatever they want apparently.

Gronk is a punk. I respect Brady, don't hate on the dude.


You realize Smith-Schuster re-enacted the play where he knocked out Burfict with an illegal hit and then stood over him and taunted him, drawing a fine and suspension, right?

I'm not defending Gronk, but pot meet kettle.
User avatar
Bad-Thoma
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,170
And1: 3,677
Joined: Feb 22, 2006
Location: Still riding proud on the C's bandwagon

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#43 » by Bad-Thoma » Mon Dec 18, 2017 2:31 pm

I know people like to call this rule and the tuck rule stupid rules, even us Pats fans when we've benefited from them in a couple glaring instances, but I actually disagree on both counts (though there is always room for refinement). The reason the rules are written the way they are is to take away the subjective nature of the calls for the referees during an instant replay. The tuck rule in particular was made to simplify an officials decision in case of a replay, instead of trying to decide whether the quarterbacks arm was moving forward to pass and ball was knocked lose resulting in an incompletion or whether the his arm was moving forward to "tuck" the ball back in and it was knocked lose resulting in a fumble. In some cases it's more clear than others what is happening, i.e. Brady moving the ball forward to tuck it back in during the snow bowl, and in others it's not clear at all, so they design the rule in a way that makes it a clear, rules based decision for a referee rather than a subjective interpretation by the referee. In doing this they protect the integrity of the game by limiting opportunity for the officials to make game changing decisions based on imperfect human interpretation, particularly with the use of instant replay. It's easy for fans to point at a particular instance where the rule looks to be written poorly but across the body of work of the nfl there is always going to be some outliers. If there are too many outliers, they adapt the rule, it's a process.

All that said, this particular case isn't even arguable. James caught the ball on the way to the ground and the ball was jarred lose by the ground. If it happened anywhere else on the field or hadn't cost Pitt the game we wouldn't even be talking about it, but because people don't understand the order of operations necessary to establish a receiver becoming a runner before breaking the plane of the end zone creates an automatic dead ball situation it's got everyone in a huff.

That also brings to mind another example designed to take interpretation out of the minds of the refs and into the rule books, the crossing the plane of the end zone rule. When a runner extends the ball in an attempt to score it greatly increases the chance of the ball being knocked lose, and when this is happening in game changing moments it is critical that the call of when a runner is down and when the ball is fumbled be accurate. With the relatively high rate of occurrence of this play combined with the split second nature of trying to get into the end zone it would place a lot of pressure on the referees and also create a lot of undue scrutiny on the referees, so they simplified the whole thing with the dead ball upon crossing the plane rule. It's actually brilliant because it also makes it easier to score and higher scoring football appeals to a broader base of fans.
Ben-N1ce
RealGM
Posts: 13,167
And1: 9,353
Joined: Jul 18, 2009
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#44 » by Ben-N1ce » Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:40 pm

Megatron Dez Bryant and the Steelers tight end got screwed but that is the rule until they change it. It's currently not a catch and those get magnified because they are TD plays.
Cornbread
Senior
Posts: 625
And1: 623
Joined: Nov 15, 2015
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#45 » by Cornbread » Mon Dec 18, 2017 3:59 pm

Bad-Thoma wrote:I know people like to call this rule and the tuck rule stupid rules, even us Pats fans when we've benefited from them in a couple glaring instances, but I actually disagree on both counts (though there is always room for refinement). The reason the rules are written the way they are is to take away the subjective nature of the calls for the referees during an instant replay. The tuck rule in particular was made to simplify an officials decision in case of a replay, instead of trying to decide whether the quarterbacks arm was moving forward to pass and ball was knocked lose resulting in an incompletion or whether the his arm was moving forward to "tuck" the ball back in and it was knocked lose resulting in a fumble. In some cases it's more clear than others what is happening, i.e. Brady moving the ball forward to tuck it back in during the snow bowl, and in others it's not clear at all, so they design the rule in a way that makes it a clear, rules based decision for a referee rather than a subjective interpretation by the referee. In doing this they protect the integrity of the game by limiting opportunity for the officials to make game changing decisions based on imperfect human interpretation, particularly with the use of instant replay. It's easy for fans to point at a particular instance where the rule looks to be written poorly but across the body of work of the nfl there is always going to be some outliers. If there are too many outliers, they adapt the rule, it's a process.

All that said, this particular case isn't even arguable. James caught the ball on the way to the ground and the ball was jarred lose by the ground. If it happened anywhere else on the field or hadn't cost Pitt the game we wouldn't even be talking about it, but because people don't understand the order of operations necessary to establish a receiver becoming a runner before breaking the plane of the end zone creates an automatic dead ball situation it's got everyone in a huff.

That also brings to mind another example designed to take interpretation out of the minds of the refs and into the rule books, the crossing the plane of the end zone rule. When a runner extends the ball in an attempt to score it greatly increases the chance of the ball being knocked lose, and when this is happening in game changing moments it is critical that the call of when a runner is down and when the ball is fumbled be accurate. With the relatively high rate of occurrence of this play combined with the split second nature of trying to get into the end zone it would place a lot of pressure on the referees and also create a lot of undue scrutiny on the referees, so they simplified the whole thing with the dead ball upon crossing the plane rule. It's actually brilliant because it also makes it easier to score and higher scoring football appeals to a broader base of fans.


This is spot on. People forget what it was like 20 years ago when every ref had a different interpretation of a catch. This one was clear cut thanks to a rule that allows it to be clear cut.

Good rule. Good call. Go Pats. Stop crying.
Homerclease
RealGM
Posts: 24,005
And1: 21,824
Joined: Dec 09, 2015
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#46 » by Homerclease » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:00 pm

He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous
Wes-J
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 2,083
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
 

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#47 » by Wes-J » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:14 pm

Bad-Thoma wrote:I know people like to call this rule and the tuck rule stupid rules, even us Pats fans when we've benefited from them in a couple glaring instances, but I actually disagree on both counts (though there is always room for refinement). The reason the rules are written the way they are is to take away the subjective nature of the calls for the referees during an instant replay. The tuck rule in particular was made to simplify an officials decision in case of a replay, instead of trying to decide whether the quarterbacks arm was moving forward to pass and ball was knocked lose resulting in an incompletion or whether the his arm was moving forward to "tuck" the ball back in and it was knocked lose resulting in a fumble. In some cases it's more clear than others what is happening, i.e. Brady moving the ball forward to tuck it back in during the snow bowl, and in others it's not clear at all, so they design the rule in a way that makes it a clear, rules based decision for a referee rather than a subjective interpretation by the referee. In doing this they protect the integrity of the game by limiting opportunity for the officials to make game changing decisions based on imperfect human interpretation, particularly with the use of instant replay. It's easy for fans to point at a particular instance where the rule looks to be written poorly but across the body of work of the nfl there is always going to be some outliers. If there are too many outliers, they adapt the rule, it's a process.

All that said, this particular case isn't even arguable. James caught the ball on the way to the ground and the ball was jarred lose by the ground. If it happened anywhere else on the field or hadn't cost Pitt the game we wouldn't even be talking about it, but because people don't understand the order of operations necessary to establish a receiver becoming a runner before breaking the plane of the end zone creates an automatic dead ball situation it's got everyone in a huff.

That also brings to mind another example designed to take interpretation out of the minds of the refs and into the rule books, the crossing the plane of the end zone rule. When a runner extends the ball in an attempt to score it greatly increases the chance of the ball being knocked lose, and when this is happening in game changing moments it is critical that the call of when a runner is down and when the ball is fumbled be accurate. With the relatively high rate of occurrence of this play combined with the split second nature of trying to get into the end zone it would place a lot of pressure on the referees and also create a lot of undue scrutiny on the referees, so they simplified the whole thing with the dead ball upon crossing the plane rule. It's actually brilliant because it also makes it easier to score and higher scoring football appeals to a broader base of fans.


Uh no, that's not it. I get it. But thanks for the assumption.
Wes-J
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 2,083
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
 

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#48 » by Wes-J » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:20 pm

Smitty731 wrote:
Wes-J wrote:Great game marred by sketchy officiating unfortunately. Brady is the goat.

Awful call and non-call at the end. James caught the ball, made his move, crossed the plane, should of been game over.

Eli Rodgers was tackled by the defender on the deflection. Game over.

I don't know what is and isn't a catch anymore. Interpretation is whatever they want apparently.

Gronk is a punk. I respect Brady, don't hate on the dude.


You realize Smith-Schuster re-enacted the play where he knocked out Burfict with an illegal hit and then stood over him and taunted him, drawing a fine and suspension, right?

I'm not defending Gronk, but pot meet kettle.


JuJu Smith Shuster is a rookie being rookie, being immature, youngest player in the league in fact. Gronk has made a career of being an overgrown child putting it very nicely.

Smitty you're better than this, don't defend this POS. Brady has to keep him in line. Brady has my deepest respects for many reasons.
CeltsfaninDC
Veteran
Posts: 2,904
And1: 1,311
Joined: Oct 26, 2005
     

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#49 » by CeltsfaninDC » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:25 pm

Smitty731 wrote:
canman1971 wrote:Certainly wasn't a TD as the knee was down, but definitely should have been pass interference on the interception. But, so is life.


Knee had nothing to do with it. He wasn't touched and it isn't college. It was overruled because he didn't hang on to the ball as he hit the ground.

Also, there was no interference on the last Pitt pass. Thats absurd
CeltsfaninDC
Veteran
Posts: 2,904
And1: 1,311
Joined: Oct 26, 2005
     

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#50 » by CeltsfaninDC » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:28 pm

Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous

Absolutely not.....
He hadn't made the catch at that point so he couldn't have been a runner. He knocked the ball out of his own hand which is why it was never a catch.
Homerclease
RealGM
Posts: 24,005
And1: 21,824
Joined: Dec 09, 2015
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#51 » by Homerclease » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:38 pm

CeltsfaninDC wrote:
Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous

Absolutely not.....
He hadn't made the catch at that point so he couldn't have been a runner. He knocked the ball out of his own hand which is why it was never a catch.

Sure he had, he made the catch before he even stretched out to score
Smitty731
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 21,204
And1: 23,795
Joined: Feb 09, 2014
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#52 » by Smitty731 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 4:58 pm

Wes-J wrote:
Smitty731 wrote:
Wes-J wrote:Great game marred by sketchy officiating unfortunately. Brady is the goat.

Awful call and non-call at the end. James caught the ball, made his move, crossed the plane, should of been game over.

Eli Rodgers was tackled by the defender on the deflection. Game over.

I don't know what is and isn't a catch anymore. Interpretation is whatever they want apparently.

Gronk is a punk. I respect Brady, don't hate on the dude.


You realize Smith-Schuster re-enacted the play where he knocked out Burfict with an illegal hit and then stood over him and taunted him, drawing a fine and suspension, right?

I'm not defending Gronk, but pot meet kettle.


JuJu Smith Shuster is a rookie being rookie, being immature, youngest player in the league in fact. Gronk has made a career of being an overgrown child putting it very nicely.

Smitty you're better than this, don't defend this POS. Brady has to keep him in line. Brady has my deepest respects for many reasons.


C'mon man. I even finished the post with saying I'm not defending Gronk.

For Smith-Schuster, being immature is no excuse. He was fined and suspended for an illegal hit and then taunting a player while standing over him. In the same game where his own teammate might have had his career ended. And yet he re-enacted the very thing that got him fined and suspended. Yesterday Thomas Davis laid out Davante Adams in a similar way. Davis went to the bench and buried his head in his hands and looked like he was ready to walk off the field. Smith-Schuster chose to glorify what he did by incorporating it into a celebration.

I don't care how young you are, you have to know that isn't ok. I'm sure he'll be hearing from the league again. And it is a shame, because he's obviously a special talent as a player.
Smitty731
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 21,204
And1: 23,795
Joined: Feb 09, 2014
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#53 » by Smitty731 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:01 pm

Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous


While I agree with you that the rule is silly, it is different. They enforce it pretty consistently when you go over it over the years. Multiple shows talked about this. If you go to the ground as a receiver, at any point, you have to keep control of the ball.

Now, you can argue the rule, or interpretation, should be changed. That is perfectly fair and probably should be. But I get why it was overturned. Silly or not.
User avatar
Tai
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,874
And1: 2,540
Joined: Dec 03, 2009
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#54 » by Tai » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:06 pm

Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous


How does reaching out make you a runner? On top of that, he caught the ball in mid-air. He never was actually on his feet.

Look, I agree it's a rule that needs tweaking, but as it is, saying he became a runner in any way....what? How?
smartyz456 wrote:oh i am a laker fan for life

i'm just gonna be a warrior fan until lebron leaves the lakers

true laker fans don't root for lebron


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1728641
Cornbread
Senior
Posts: 625
And1: 623
Joined: Nov 15, 2015
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#55 » by Cornbread » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:08 pm

Tai wrote:
Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous


How does reaching out make you a runner? On top of that, he caught the ball in mid-air. He never was actually on his feet.

Look, I agree it's a rule that needs tweaking, but as it is, saying he became a runner in any way....what? How?


It doesn’t. Homerclease is just bitter. The rule literally says that you have to be upright to become a runner, which he clearly wasn’t.
Wes-J
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 2,083
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
 

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#56 » by Wes-J » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:14 pm

Smitty731 wrote:
Wes-J wrote:
Smitty731 wrote:
You realize Smith-Schuster re-enacted the play where he knocked out Burfict with an illegal hit and then stood over him and taunted him, drawing a fine and suspension, right?

I'm not defending Gronk, but pot meet kettle.


JuJu Smith Shuster is a rookie being rookie, being immature, youngest player in the league in fact. Gronk has made a career of being an overgrown child putting it very nicely.

Smitty you're better than this, don't defend this POS. Brady has to keep him in line. Brady has my deepest respects for many reasons.


C'mon man. I even finished the post with saying I'm not defending Gronk.

For Smith-Schuster, being immature is no excuse. He was fined and suspended for an illegal hit and then taunting a player while standing over him. In the same game where his own teammate might have had his career ended. And yet he re-enacted the very thing that got him fined and suspended. Yesterday Thomas Davis laid out Davante Adams in a similar way. Davis went to the bench and buried his head in his hands and looked like he was ready to walk off the field. Smith-Schuster chose to glorify what he did by incorporating it into a celebration.

I don't care how young you are, you have to know that isn't ok. I'm sure he'll be hearing from the league again. And it is a shame, because he's obviously a special talent as a player.


Well i wouldn't agree with the pot meet kettle. Shuster is a good kid actually, very mature, knows he did wrong. Don't be quick to judge him just yet, he still has time to grow up and I'm confident he'll learn from his mistake. He's very physical and was trying to stick up for his teammate but he went overboard and he knows it. At least he's got some dog in him.

Gronk is just a completely different animal. What he's been about on and off the field doesn't even compare. His vicious shot that landed him a suspension wasn't even within the context of the game, it was cowardly. He's made a lifetime of knucklehead decisions so whatever man, just think it's not fair to put the young man in the same discussion with this piece of work known as the Gronk.
Wes-J
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 2,083
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
 

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#57 » by Wes-J » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:17 pm

Tai wrote:
Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous


How does reaching out make you a runner? On top of that, he caught the ball in mid-air. He never was actually on his feet.

Look, I agree it's a rule that needs tweaking, but as it is, saying he became a runner in any way....what? How?


Ain't nobody cryin buddy but I think it's definitely a discussion worthy topic. This is not a clear cut thing that this biased forum is making it out to be.
Smitty731
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 21,204
And1: 23,795
Joined: Feb 09, 2014
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#58 » by Smitty731 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:26 pm

Wes-J wrote:
Smitty731 wrote:
Wes-J wrote:
JuJu Smith Shuster is a rookie being rookie, being immature, youngest player in the league in fact. Gronk has made a career of being an overgrown child putting it very nicely.

Smitty you're better than this, don't defend this POS. Brady has to keep him in line. Brady has my deepest respects for many reasons.


C'mon man. I even finished the post with saying I'm not defending Gronk.

For Smith-Schuster, being immature is no excuse. He was fined and suspended for an illegal hit and then taunting a player while standing over him. In the same game where his own teammate might have had his career ended. And yet he re-enacted the very thing that got him fined and suspended. Yesterday Thomas Davis laid out Davante Adams in a similar way. Davis went to the bench and buried his head in his hands and looked like he was ready to walk off the field. Smith-Schuster chose to glorify what he did by incorporating it into a celebration.

I don't care how young you are, you have to know that isn't ok. I'm sure he'll be hearing from the league again. And it is a shame, because he's obviously a special talent as a player.


Well i wouldn't agree with the pot meet kettle. Shuster is a good kid actually, very mature, knows he did wrong. Don't be quick to judge him just yet, he still has time to grow up and I'm confident he'll learn from his mistake. He's very physical and was trying to stick up for his teammate but he went overboard and he knows it. At least he's got some dog in him.

Gronk is just a completely different animal. What he's been about on and off the field doesn't even compare. His vicious shot that landed him a suspension wasn't even within the context of the game, it was cowardly. He's made a lifetime of knucklehead decisions so whatever man, just think it's not fair to put the young man in the same discussion with this piece of work known as the Gronk.


I'd be curious to see what you think the lifetime of knucklehead decisions are. He's one of the most active NFL players in terms of community involvement. He's never spent a dime of his NFL salary and has it all tied up in reportedly smart and safe investments. He's never been in trouble off the field. Sure, he parties. So does 90% of every professional sports league. But he's never crossed the line with it and gotten in trouble.

He may act like an overgrown child on the field with the way he celebrates, but who cares? If you don't like to see him celebrate, stop him.

As I said, there is no excuse for what he did in the Buffalo game. It was disgusting and he was penalized accordingly. But if we're going to let others off the hook for one bad action, he should be handled the same way.
Wes-J
Veteran
Posts: 2,556
And1: 2,083
Joined: Feb 19, 2012
 

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#59 » by Wes-J » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:26 pm

Smitty731 wrote:
Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous


While I agree with you that the rule is silly, it is different. They enforce it pretty consistently when you go over it over the years. Multiple shows talked about this. If you go to the ground as a receiver, at any point, you have to keep control of the ball.

Now, you can argue the rule, or interpretation, should be changed. That is perfectly fair and probably should be. But I get why it was overturned. Silly or not.


This is correct according to the letter of the rules....

But people who are disputing the call like myself are saying possession was established before the ground contact, making that a moot issue.

Caught the ball with two feet, not contacted by anyone, turned and extended. As soon as a fraction of that ball crosses that plane it should be a TD. Ground survival should be moot case---------------------------------doesn't matter if the ball bounces out the end zone at that point.

They said no catch at any point which is laughable.
Smitty731
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 21,204
And1: 23,795
Joined: Feb 09, 2014
       

Re: OT: Patriots 

Post#60 » by Smitty731 » Mon Dec 18, 2017 5:28 pm

Wes-J wrote:
Smitty731 wrote:
Homerclease wrote:He became a runner when he reached for the goal line. At that point he’s no different than an rb. He had established himself in the field of play. Ridiculous


While I agree with you that the rule is silly, it is different. They enforce it pretty consistently when you go over it over the years. Multiple shows talked about this. If you go to the ground as a receiver, at any point, you have to keep control of the ball.

Now, you can argue the rule, or interpretation, should be changed. That is perfectly fair and probably should be. But I get why it was overturned. Silly or not.


This is correct according to the letter of the rules....

But people who are disputing the call like myself are saying possession was established before the ground contact, making that a moot issue.

Caught the ball with two feet, not contacted by anyone, turned and extended. As soon as a fraction of that ball crosses that plane it should be a TD. Ground survival should be moot case---------------------------------doesn't matter if the ball bounces out the end zone at that point.

They said no catch at any point which is laughable.


All I am saying is that it was enforced consistently with how they have enforced it several times over recent years. All you can really ask for is consistency.

Return to New England Patriots