Woz Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 24 minutes ago, kingseanjohn said: He fumbled or at worst, illegal forward pass. Interesting. That would have taken place in the endzone, and thus would have been a safety in that case, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, mse326 said: So you are gonna ignore my last sentence. Show me in the rule book where it says you can hold as long as you are inside the shoulders? Show me in the rule book where it says the tackle is allowed to off the line of scrimmage as long as his head is in line with the waist of the center? In all those examples a precedent has been set. I'm not sure a precedent had been set prior. I've never seen a signal, catch and no knee. It wouldn't stand out to me so maybe it has happened. But I always recall the signal happens where a guy let's it bounce in the end zone. In my heart, I don't think it should have been a TD because the intent was clearly there but I see the backlash if it's not in the rules AND there hasn't been a precedent. If there has been a precedent there should be no complaint. Edited January 5, 2020 by LeotheLion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 (edited) wrong thread Edited January 5, 2020 by Malfatron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, Woz said: Interesting. That would have taken place in the endzone, and thus would have been a safety in that case, no? But he was never out so I don't think he can get a safety. He has to put the ball into the endzone for a safety here the kick did that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 1 minute ago, LeotheLion said: In all those examples a precedent has been set. I'm not sure a precedent had been set prior. I've never seen a signal, catch and no knee. It wouldn't stand out to me so maybe it has happened. In my heart, I don't think it should have been a TD because the intent was clearly there but I see the backlash if it's not in the rules AND there hasn't been a precedent. If there has been a precedent there should be no complaint. Do you think Peireira is just making up that that is a thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 5 minutes ago, marshawn lynch said: These are same people who dont even know what a catch is... and the same people that said Jesse James catch against New England was incomplete. Officials are literally idiots and all protect one another from bad calls so they dont look bad to the public eye. I mean if you are going just always disregard refs then I don't even know why you are watching the game. And Peireira has disagreed with calls plenty of times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeotheLion Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Just now, mse326 said: Do you think Peireira is just making up that that is a thing? I don't think he's intentionally lying, no. But I watch a ton of football and don't recall seeing it. It's such an insignificant play that maybe he's misremembering. I agree with you that it doesn't take place on highlight reels but I would like to see a sequence in the same manner where it was ruled a touchback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soggust Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 6 minutes ago, mse326 said: The NFL Officials and Mike Peireira confirming aren't enough for you to say that is an established thing? The NFL Officials twitter didn't say it was an established thing, only that he had given himself up. Pereira is a good argument, but it's certainly possible that he is officiating this on the fly as he, likewise, offers no examples as proof (doesn't even claim that it gets called "all the time", just states it as though its a rule). I suppose agree to disagree, but seems like a very subjective ruling outside of the defined rulebook, at the very least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malfatron Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 On 12/29/2019 at 9:18 PM, amazingandre said: I predict this will be the smallest gameday thread of all the WC games Not with this kind of game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmart128 Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 So why wasnt the ruled a TB for giving youself up. Gillislee gave himself up by not trying to recover the ball!!! And yes i am being sacastic. Rules are rules and its clear the refs decided to let one slide Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 10 minutes ago, mse326 said: Do you think Peireira is just making up that that is a thing? I think Peireira is covering for old friends. 4 minutes ago, marshawn lynch said: So why wasnt the ruled a TB for giving youself up. Gillislee gave himself up by not trying to recover the ball!!! And yes i am being sacastic. Rules are rules and its clear the refs decided to let one slide Because this landed in the field of play, akin to recovering an onside kick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amazingandre Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 4 minutes ago, marshawn lynch said: So why wasnt the ruled a TB for giving youself up. Gillislee gave himself up by not trying to recover the ball!!! And yes i am being sacastic. Rules are rules and its clear the refs decided to let one slide The difference is the ball became live when it hit the ground in that game. It never touched the ground today. He signaled he was not taking the ball out and gave himself up as he flipped the ball to the ref. If you don't see the difference then it's a pointless conversation 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, amazingandre said: He signaled he was not taking the ball out and gave himself up as he flipped the ball to the ref. He signaled to his teammates he wasn't taking the ball out. That is not a legitimate signal to the refs. The focus on the returner starts around the 1:20 mark. He doesn't make any signal that would count as a fair catch. He takes a couple steps forward before he flips the ball forward (so he arguably does make an effort to advance, albeit lackadaisically). Counter to the description of the ref, there is no "common sense" exclusion in the rulebook. There also is no "backup refs can overrule the on-the-field refs" rule that I can find either. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 3 minutes ago, Woz said: Counter to the description of the ref, there is no "common sense" exclusion in the rulebook. Not going to try to join this discussion, but I'll say that if any sports league needs a "common sense" rule explicitly written out, we should probably stop watching and/or talking about said sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y*so*blu Posted January 5, 2020 Share Posted January 5, 2020 Houston didn't start to come back until I put my Oilers hat on, so really this is all thanks to me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.