Lets Talk the end of Lions/Falcons

[Spartacus]

2 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

It's not that the rule exists.  It's that the incorrect call on the field ended the game, while a correct call wouldn't have.  That has to be an issue for the NFL and fans of the NFL alike.

I totally understand being upset at the way the game ended but I also understand why the rule exists. I think going forward instead of messing with the rules any more than they already are that teams have to be more aware that this has a possibility to occur. I don't think changes can really occur that don't either punish the offense, punish the defense, or deal with a judgement call (HATE HATE HATE judgment calls by refs). I think as a lions fan you have every right to be upset with the way the game ends. As a Packers and Badgers fan i've been there more than I would like but I just think the best case is for coaches to be aware that a runoff is a possibility and take the chance that something like this could occur and game plan around it. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

50 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

I totally understand being upset at the way the game ended but I also understand why the rule exists. I think going forward instead of messing with the rules any more than they already are that teams have to be more aware that this has a possibility to occur. I don't think changes can really occur that don't either punish the offense, punish the defense, or deal with a judgement call (HATE HATE HATE judgment calls by refs). I think as a lions fan you have every right to be upset with the way the game ends. As a Packers and Badgers fan i've been there more than I would like but I just think the best case is for coaches to be aware that a runoff is a possibility and take the chance that something like this could occur and game plan around it. 

I don't disagree with managing the runoff.  Coaches need to do that.  If the call was made correctly on the field, and the game ended as a result, I wouldn't have an issue with any of it.  Manage the runoff, it's a known rule.

This isn't just about the runoff.  It's that an incorrect call by the ref caused the runoff to occur.  A mistake by the officials shouldn't punish the offense and end a game.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

And I'm not mad about the outcome.  We shouldn't have been that close.  We got outplayed for the majority of the game, and only got close because Ryan was forced into a few mistakes.  It's not the outcome.  It's the fact that an incorrect call on the field ended a football game.  That should be a huge concern for the league.

[incognito_man]

4 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I don't disagree with managing the runoff.  Coaches need to do that.  If the call was made correctly on the field, and the game ended as a result, I wouldn't have an issue with any of it.  Manage the runoff, it's a known rule.

This isn't just about the runoff.  It's that an incorrect call by the ref caused the runoff to occur.  A mistake by the officials shouldn't punish the offense and end a game.

Ugh. The time runs off the clock whether or not the call was correct.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

11 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Ugh. The time runs off the clock whether or not the call was correct.

The 10 second runoff does not happen if the correct call is made on the field.  This is a fact.

[incognito_man]

1 minute ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

The 10 second runoff does not happen if the correct call is made on the field.  This is a fact.

It is a fact that there is a clock runoff if the correct call is made. It happens about 100 times in every game.

[scar988]

39 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

It is a fact that there is a clock runoff if the correct call is made. It happens about 100 times in every game.

Yup. If the call is down by contact at x yard line regardless of correct or incorrect call, it's a 10 sec runoff.TL has been arguing a lie.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

I've posted the rule numerous times.  Here it is again:

ARTICLE 4. REPLAY REVIEW AFTER TWO-MINUTE WARNING OF EITHER HALF. If a replay review after the two-minute warning of either half results in the on-field ruling being reversed and the correct ruling would not have stopped the game clock, then the officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball to be put in play on the ready-for-play signal. The defense cannot decline the runoff, but either team can use a remaining timeout to prevent it.

That's what we've been arguing.  If you have another rule that applies here, posting it days ago would be pretty helpful.  As that rule reads, the runoff only happens if the call on the field is reversed.

[Jakuvious]

6 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Had officials stopped the play within a few seconds to either measure or review the play (which they undoubtedly would have), the clock would have only restarted once the ball was placed and determined ready for play.  The offense would already be set and ready to snap the ball.  There would have been plenty of time to get another snap off.

Again, I mentioned a perfect example for reference on this. In the Chiefs/Broncos game it took the refs 11 seconds after the moment Hill was down to stop the clock for the review. So you can stop saying they would've undoubtedly stopped the play within a few seconds. It also took them 10 seconds to spot the ball. You continue speaking in absolutes on things that are clearly maybes. That is why you are not in the right here. Even if they had been really on top of things, and maybe it only took them 6 or 7 seconds to stop the play for the review, you'd only have 1 or 2 seconds to get that snap off, which functionally isn't possible, even if you're pre set. They put the ball down, blow the whistle, and the 1 second immediately ticks of the clock before the C even touches the ball.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

49 minutes ago, Jakuvious said:

Again, I mentioned a perfect example for reference on this. In the Chiefs/Broncos game it took the refs 11 seconds after the moment Hill was down to stop the clock for the review. So you can stop saying they would've undoubtedly stopped the play within a few seconds. It also took them 10 seconds to spot the ball. You continue speaking in absolutes on things that are clearly maybes. That is why you are not in the right here. Even if they had been really on top of things, and maybe it only took them 6 or 7 seconds to stop the play for the review, you'd only have 1 or 2 seconds to get that snap off, which functionally isn't possible, even if you're pre set. They put the ball down, blow the whistle, and the 1 second immediately ticks of the clock before the C even touches the ball.

One play?  One example is all you have here?

Have anything that shows, on average, how long it takes for the refs to stop a play and initiate a review?  If so, I'd love to see it.  Because, if ruled short on the field, and no official review was initiated, the Lions would already be setting back up to run another play.

The glaring mistake in all of this is that they weren't afforded that chance due to an incorrect call on the field.

[Jakuvious]

26 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

One play?  One example is all you have here?

Have anything that shows, on average, how long it takes for the refs to stop a play and initiate a review?  If so, I'd love to see it.  Because, if ruled short on the field, and no official review was initiated, the Lions would already be setting back up to run another play.

The glaring mistake in all of this is that they weren't afforded that chance due to an incorrect call on the field.

One play is all you have here. That's a terrible argument for you to try to use. Your entire argument is based on the only time, to anyone's apparent knowledge in this thread, that this has ever happened. Your argument in favor of a rule change is literally based on one play.

I don't have an average, no. Nobody does. But I have proof that 10 seconds isn't a guarantee. For the refs or for an offense setting up. That's really all that's needed.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

2 hours ago, Jakuvious said:

One play is all you have here. That's a terrible argument for you to try to use. Your entire argument is based on the only time, to anyone's apparent knowledge in this thread, that this has ever happened. Your argument in favor of a rule change is literally based on one play.

I don't have an average, no. Nobody does. But I have proof that 10 seconds isn't a guarantee. For the refs or for an offense setting up. That's really all that's needed.

What?  You're referencing something, booth-initiated reviews, that are done on a weekly basis.  Of course I expect more than one example.  "Hey, this one time, that took 11 seconds, so I'm going to assume that it always takes 11 seconds, despite how inaccurate it is".

Guess what?  During a 2016 game against the Vikings, the Lions moved 27 yards between plays in only 7 seconds without the use of a timeout.  There's my proof that 8 seconds was enough time for them to snap the ball again.

This rule was first added for the 2010 season.  This is the first time that it allowed an incorrect call on the field to end a game.  That's not a huge span of time.  Now, if this ever happened in the playoffs (or against the Patriots or Packers), the backlash would be intense.