TheKillerNacho Posted September 25, 2017 Author Share Posted September 25, 2017 28 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said: It's questionable if they could have gotten another play off to be honest. Not impossible, but no guarantee they would have been able to line up and get it off. While this is true, they were robbed the ability to try. Pundits have noted the Lions have done it in seven seconds in prior games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 I don't see what the issue would be here that if the review is referee-initiated and the call is overturned, why would there be a 10-second runoff if it would end the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas5737 Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 24 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said: While this is true, they were robbed the ability to try. Pundits have noted the Lions have done it in seven seconds in prior games. Yeah one show replayed a game from last year I believe and after a 27 yard completion the Lions got the next snap off in about 7.5 seconds from the time the receiver was whistled down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKillerNacho Posted September 25, 2017 Author Share Posted September 25, 2017 21 minutes ago, Darth Pees said: I don't see what the issue would be here that if the review is referee-initiated and the call is overturned, why would there be a 10-second runoff if it would end the game? The only issue would be that it could be unfair to the defense if there was no way they would've had enough time to get off a second play had it not been for the initial call of TD. This case there was definitely a chance the Lions could've gotten one more play off as there was 9 seconds on the clock. But as I said earlier, what if there was only two? In that case, it would be the refs giving an extra play to the Lions, which would be incredibly unfair to the Falcons, wouldn't you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 1 hour ago, MathMan said: Make everyone lay back down where they were, and then wind the clock This. Or you could do it standoff style. Everyone lines up back to back on the LOS. Ref sets the ball and blows the whistle which starts the clock. Players have to then turn and get set, WRs have to run out to get in formation ad go from there. altogether I don't think it's right to give them no chance to use that time. I can understand why the rule is there but the refs stopped the clock, Detroit shouldn't have been penalized for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 10 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said: The only issue would be that it could be unfair to the defense if there was no way they would've had enough time to get off a second play had it not been for the initial call of TD. This case there was definitely a chance the Lions could've gotten one more play off as there was 9 seconds on the clock. But as I said earlier, what if there was only two? In that case, it would be the refs giving an extra play to the Lions, which would be incredibly unfair to the Falcons, wouldn't you agree? Yeah I think I would agree with that, and that's a good point. What if the rule was tweaked to where if there's a 10 second runoff, it's a referee judgement call (I know that's not going to sit well with some folks, but I don't know how to structure a rule around what I'm about to say) of whether or not the team would've gotten to the line of the scrimmage and gotten a snap off before the time ran out. I think either way this kind of situations is a no-win situation for the offense or officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HashtagFTW Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 If they are going to call this down by contact, shouldn't they have set the 10 second runoff from this point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 12 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said: The only issue would be that it could be unfair to the defense if there was no way they would've had enough time to get off a second play had it not been for the initial call of TD. This case there was definitely a chance the Lions could've gotten one more play off as there was 9 seconds on the clock. But as I said earlier, what if there was only two? In that case, it would be the refs giving an extra play to the Lions, which would be incredibly unfair to the Falcons, wouldn't you agree? No one is saying automatically give the Lions an extra play. Just don't let the game end because the refs made a mistake. With 8 seconds left Detroit deserved a chance to use them to attempt to get a play off. If there was only 2 seconds left then you just end the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKillerNacho Posted September 25, 2017 Author Share Posted September 25, 2017 Just now, Darth Pees said: Yeah I think I would agree with that, and that's a good point. What if the rule was tweaked to where if there's a 10 second runoff, it's a referee judgement call (I know that's not going to sit well with some folks, but I don't know how to structure a rule around what I'm about to say) of whether or not the team would've gotten to the line of the scrimmage and gotten a snap off before the time ran out. I think either way this kind of situations is a no-win situation for the offense or officials. The other possibility that I think can work is changing it to a 5-second run-off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKillerNacho Posted September 25, 2017 Author Share Posted September 25, 2017 Just now, Bullet Club said: No one is saying automatically give the Lions an extra play. Just don't let the game end because the refs made a mistake. With 8 seconds left Detroit deserved a chance to use them to attempt to get a play off. If there was only 2 seconds left then you just end the game. You misunderstand - I'm not saying the rule shouldn't be changed. But rather, how should it be changed? I don't think removing the 10-second runoff alltogether is a particularly good idea due to my example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HashtagFTW Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 Just now, TheKillerNacho said: The other possibility that I think can work is changing it to a 5-second run-off. Definitely makes more sense. It would be one thing if it was a 30 yard pass and this happened. Obviously there wouldn't be enough time to get a play set and snapped in 10 seconds... but when we're talking about a goal line play when all of the players are pretty much set in the spot they need to be for a snap, that's more than enough time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 1 minute ago, TheKillerNacho said: You misunderstand - I'm not saying the rule shouldn't be changed. But rather, how should it be changed? I don't think removing the 10-second runoff alltogether is a particularly good idea due to my example. Don't allow the game to end on a run-off when the refs are the reason for stopping the clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theuntouchable Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, LionsFTW said: If they are going to call this down by contact, shouldn't they have set the 10 second runoff from this point? I do wonder why that hasn't been talked about more. I honestly don't think the refs checked how much time would have been left at the time his knee was down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKillerNacho Posted September 25, 2017 Author Share Posted September 25, 2017 4 minutes ago, Bullet Club said: Don't allow the game to end on a run-off when the refs are the reason for stopping the clock. Then I'm not understanding what your dismissal of what you were quoting is. If there was only two seconds left on the playclock and the refs stopped the clock, not having a runoff is equivocal to giving the Lions an extra play. That is the problem with removing the runoff completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mox Posted September 25, 2017 Share Posted September 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said: Then I'm not understanding what your dismissal of what you were quoting is. If there was only two seconds left on the playclock and the refs stopped the clock, not having a runoff is equivocal to giving the Lions an extra play. That is the problem with removing the runoff completely. No, the Lions don't get another play. They weren't getting a play off in 2 seconds. It's not removing the run-off completely, it's just an exclusion to the rule. Changing it to a 5 second run-off doesn't make sense because it still punishes a team for something that wasn't their fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.