WC: BUF@HOU

[Woz]

1 hour ago, Jakuvious said:

 So do you have an illegal forward pass and then a penalty on each team for too many men on the field? Does that all just offset for a re-kick?

Except refs are not allowed to retroactively call penalties (barring a review). Yes, refs can huddle to determine if a specific penalty occurred for instance to determine if the QB out of the pocket and thus a suspected intentional grounding occurred or not. If there had been an official review (as far as I know, the referee never looked at it, just talked with people), they would have focused on the question of whether it was a touchdown or not or if there was a penalty for an illegal forward pass. And there should have been a review since it was a scoring play.

The more I think about it, the more it should have been an illegal forward pass in the end zone (2 points awarded to Buffalo, Houston required to free kick). This is one of those times the refs should have spent a few minutes figuring out what exactly should have occurred instead of saying "oh, we knew what he meant."

2 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

How does non-player personnel on the field during a live ball get handled?

As for the cameramen, Rule 17, Section 1 ("Emergencies"), Article 1 ("Non-Player on Field"):

Quote

If any non-player, including photographers, reporters, employees, police or spectators, enters the field of play or end zones, and in the judgment of an official said party or parties interfere with the play, the Referee, after consulting the crew (13-1-7 and 19-1-3), shall enforce any such penalty or score as the interference warrants.

So, given the cameramen were downfield, they did not affect the play and thus can be ignored for this analysis.

[Jakuvious]

1 hour ago, Woz said:

Except refs are not allowed to retroactively call penalties (barring a review). Yes, refs can huddle to determine if a specific penalty occurred for instance to determine if the QB out of the pocket and thus a suspected intentional grounding occurred or not. If there had been an official review (as far as I know, the referee never looked at it, just talked with people), they would have focused on the question of whether it was a touchdown or not or if there was a penalty for an illegal forward pass. And there should have been a review since it was a scoring play.

The more I think about it, the more it should have been an illegal forward pass in the end zone (2 points awarded to Buffalo, Houston required to free kick). This is one of those times the refs should have spent a few minutes figuring out what exactly should have occurred instead of saying "oh, we knew what he meant."

As for the cameramen, Rule 17, Section 1 ("Emergencies"), Article 1 ("Non-Player on Field"):

So, given the cameramen were downfield, they did not affect the play and thus can be ignored for this analysis.

I'm not saying they should have retroactively called penalties. But I assume if the rest of the ref crew believed it was a live ball, they would've called those penalties. I'm just pointing out the absurdity you have if every aspect of that play was called by the letter of the law. You get an illegal forward pass resulting in a safety, but then a rekick on offsetting penalties as both teams have too many men on the field.

[Kmart128]

9 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

I'm not saying they should have retroactively called penalties. But I assume if the rest of the ref crew believed it was a live ball, they would've called those penalties. I'm just pointing out the absurdity you have if every aspect of that play was called by the letter of the law. You get an illegal forward pass resulting in a safety, but then a rekick on offsetting penalties as both teams have too many men on the field.

If this was the case id rather they just did this and get it right than the reasoning the gave. I could understand this. But refs could offer sideline warnings for entering the field to soon. They have the ability to give sideline warnings.

[Woz]

33 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

I'm not saying they should have retroactively called penalties. But I assume if the rest of the ref crew believed it was a live ball, they would've called those penalties. I'm just pointing out the absurdity you have if every aspect of that play was called by the letter of the law. You get an illegal forward pass resulting in a safety, but then a rekick on offsetting penalties as both teams have too many men on the field.

Except refs miss calls all the time.

[Jakuvious]

29 minutes ago, Woz said:

Except refs miss calls all the time.

This is a ridiculous response.

So you want half of it ruled by letter of law and half of it is okay because refs screw up.

[Woz]

49 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

This is a ridiculous response.

So you want half of it ruled by letter of law and half of it is okay because refs screw up.

You said that they could have called penalties, but they didn't. You say that if the crew thought the ball was live, they could have called penalties but they didn't. So, why not? I suggested they missed the call.

The kickoff, as a play, is one of the most boring plays around. Yes, most of everyone thought the play was over, but the ref who was closest involved didn't and neither did the coverage team. The fact that the other refs didn't react to the play is meaningless.

[Woz]

On 12/29/2019 at 10:18 PM, amazingandre said:

I predict this will be the smallest gameday thread of all the WC games

Just 54 pages bigger than the next second largest (and nearly 65 pages bigger than the other OT game).

But close!

[Kmart128]

So this has happened before. Not at the NFL level but in college... player never downs ball and just flips it to the official... it was ruled a TD in this situation.