Lets Talk the end of Lions/Falcons

[BladeKor]

Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Right.  To fix bad calls.  Which it was.

So, we can admit that the refs made the wrong call by ruling it a TD.  The refs then had an official review to determine if their call was wrong.  They then ended the game, on 4th and goal at inches.

Sure if the ball wasn't inches away, it's easy to mistake a TD when it was that close. Which is why every TD that close, is re-viewable. But like I said, if only Lions had a timeout left, they could've used it to stop the clock.

[JaguarCrazy2832]

4 hours ago, MookieMonster said:

Stupid rule. Essentially the Lions got screwed because the refs made the wrong call initially. Had they made the correct call Detroit would've had time to line back up and run one more play. 

Exactly. The ref screwed up and the Lions paid for it. If they called it right they would have had a chance. Yes Detroit could have called a timeout if they had one but they might not have even needed it if not for the rule

[Forge]

1 minute ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Then give them a chance to get the play off.  I don't want the clock stopped.  I want 8 seconds to try and run another play.

The Lions were in a formation that would've allowed them to run another play quickly.  It's why they run plays like that in those situations.

Yes, I agree that it sucks that they weren't given the shot to run the play. I won't argue that. But there's no guarantee that they get the play off. Every situation is different. You can't just start the clock because people have moved, the action isn't where it was...asking everyone to remain in the exact place they were at the end of they play is not realistic. So you can't just give them 8 seconds...while the review is going on, every team would line up and be ready just in case the call was overturned. That's not fair to the other team who made the stop.

But let's flip it. Lets say that they called it down and he was really in. Would you want them to stop the clock and do the replay then? Of course you would. Can't have it both ways - refs make mistakes. Can't act like they are perfect, and asking them to be is ridiculous. When plays are that close and they need to be reviewed, the clock has to be stopped. If it is found that the play would have resulted in the clock still running, then that run off time has to be accounted for. You can't just stop the clock where it was down, because then you are punishing the other team.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Refs make mistakes.  Absolutely.  A refs mistake should not end a game with time on the clock.  No exceptions.

The formation the Lions ran left the majority of the players already lined up.  It wouldn't have been hard to snap the ball again.  Whether they would have or not is irrelevant, as ANY option is better than giving them no chance and ending the game.

[Packerraymond]

This is the first time in 5 years this rule has had an impact on a game. 16 games * 32 teams * 5 years, so 1/2560 games have been impacted by this rule. No reason to change it, 50/50 whether the Lions got screwed or not anyway. You can say 8 seconds, but in reality  there was no ref anywhere around there, by the time the ref even gets to the ball you probably have 4 seconds left, runs the ball to the spot where it's down and now you're at 1-2 seconds, then the refs needs to get to a safe area for the ball to be snapped, probably game over. Lions should have just run a play that guaranteed a TD or incompletion instead of throwing out of the endzone, they had 11 seconds, that's 2 shots for a TD.

[theuntouchable]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

This is the first time in 5 years this rule has had an impact on a game. 16 games * 32 teams * 5 years, so 1/2560 games have been impacted by this rule. No reason to change it, 50/50 whether the Lions got screwed or not anyway. You can say 8 seconds, but in reality  there was no ref anywhere around there, by the time the ref even gets to the ball you probably have 4 seconds left, runs the ball to the spot where it's down and now you're at 1-2 seconds, then the refs needs to get to a safe area for the ball to be snapped, probably game over. Lions should have just run a play that guaranteed a TD or incompletion instead of throwing out of the endzone.

Also, people keep saying 8 seconds but if you go by when the knee was down there was 11 seconds. Just sayin

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

This is the first time in 5 years this rule has had an impact on a game. 16 games * 32 teams * 5 years, so 1/2560 games have been impacted by this rule. No reason to change it, 50/50 whether the Lions got screwed or not anyway. You can say 8 seconds, but in reality  there was no ref anywhere around there, by the time the ref even gets to the ball you probably have 4 seconds left, runs the ball to the spot where it's down and now you're at 1-2 seconds, then the refs needs to get to a safe area for the ball to be snapped, probably game over. Lions should have just run a play that guaranteed a TD or incompletion instead of throwing out of the endzone.

"Probably" game over.  Therein lies the issue.  Of course, it doesn't matter if bad rules influence the outcomes of games so long as it doesn't happen often.  Right?

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Just now, theuntouchable said:

Also, people keep saying 8 seconds but if you go by when the knee was down there was 11 seconds. Just sayin

Don't.  He'll just add seconds to his scenario and dismiss the possibility anyway.

[theuntouchable]

27 minutes ago, BladeKor said:

Sure if the ball wasn't inches away, it's easy to mistake a TD when it was that close. Which is why every TD that close, is re-viewable. But like I said, if only Lions had a timeout left, they could've used it to stop the clock.

Right, which is fine but ultimately who made the call to review the play? No one actually made the call to review the play, it's an automatic review of any scoring play. I don't think extra time should be ran off the clock for a play that was going to be reviewed regardless.

[Packerraymond]

Just now, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

"Probably" game over.  Therein lies the issue.  Of course, it doesn't matter if bad rules influence the outcomes of games so long as it doesn't happen often.  Right?

I think .0004% of games being impacted is a small enough percentage to not care, yes. It probably takes any NFL team between 8-12 seconds to have the ball properly spotted, have the ref move to a safe area of the field, everyone lined up in a legal formation, set for 1 second, and snap the ball. I see nothing outrageous about a 10 second runoff.

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, theuntouchable said:

Also, people keep saying 8 seconds but if you go by when the knee was down there was 11 seconds. Just sayin

That means nothing with a moving clock, by the time Tate releases the ball there's 8 seconds left. The rule is meant to deduct the time for the moving clock, I'm speaking as if the initial ruling was that he was down, no TD. It's no given the Lions get another play off in that case.

As far as how much time should've been left after the review, I'm not sure, probably between 10-11 seconds. The Lions were at home though, maybe they should get a more favorable clock operator.

[Blazer026]

Don't think they would have got another play off anyway, but who knows, maybe they could have. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

8 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I think .0004% of games being impacted is a small enough percentage to not care, yes. It probably takes any NFL team between 8-12 seconds to have the ball properly spotted, have the ref move to a safe area of the field, everyone lined up in a legal formation, set for 1 second, and snap the ball. I see nothing outrageous about a 10 second runoff.

Other than the fact that there would have been 11 seconds after his knee hit.  Sounds like they got robbed.

[theuntouchable]

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

That means nothing with a moving clock, by the time Tate releases the ball there's 8 seconds left. The rule is meant to deduct the time for the moving clock, I'm speaking as if the initial ruling was that he was down, no TD. It's no given the Lions get another play off in that case.

As far as how much time should've been left after the review, I'm not sure, probably between 10-11 seconds. The Lions were at home though, maybe they should get a more favorable clock operator.

Right but the play was stopped for an official review. Once the review process began they should then be looking at it as how much time was left after his knee touched. 

I would absolutely without a doubt say that the lions get another play off in 8 seconds. I've watched them do it from 30 yards in 12 to 13 seconds with players on the ground.

regardless, the clock was stopped because the refs stopped it. The play was reviewed because it's automatic. The lions offense was punished because the ref made the wrong call on the field and because all scoring plays are reviewed.

now I'm not saying that all plays shouldn't be reviewed but in this specific instance, if it's an automatic review and it goes against the call the ref made on the field, I don't really agree with ending the game on that note.

[Mox]

41 minutes ago, Forge said:

Not at all. I'm arguing the notion that it's a bad rule. It's not. It can be improved upon, that's all. If you remove the run off altogether, you're screwing the other team. It's an imperfect situation, but it needs to be accounted for that the clock would keep running if it were called correctly on the field. If they used a run off that was backed by some sort of research, i'd have absolutely no problem with how that played out. But again, 10 seconds is just arbitrary. I know that teams can get plays off faster than that. Can they get one off within 8 seconds? I don't know. That's cutting it close.

The Lions have literally already done it.