Lets Talk the end of Lions/Falcons

[showtime]

In the scenario that happened yesterday in the Lions vs Falcons game.  The Lions did not even have a chance to attempt a final play because the refs had to review Tate's possible touchdown.  So what should be done about it?  You can't just give the Lions an untimed down because that wouldn't be fair to the Falcons.  The ref made the wrong call (called Tate's reception a touchdown) and that led to a stoppage of play for a review.  Wrong calls will happen.

This seems like a specific scenario that does not come up extremely often and maybe does not have a consensus correct way to adjust the rule.

[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 scoring 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.

[Forge]

Just now, Bullet Club said:

The Lions have literally already done it.

Yes...and that doesn't guarantee that they do it again..

[Mox]

Just now, Forge said:

Yes...and that doesn't guarantee that they do it again..

It's a naïve argument to think there isn't a good chance at it. Especially considering the actual situation on the field and where everyone was.

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

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

I mean that's true, but if that's the case Falcons fans would be on here wondering how Stafford can get the snap, take a two step drop and be in his throwing motion before a single second came off the clock. Let alone the ball traveling to Tate, him making the catch and then falling. NFL plays don't take 1 second.

[theuntouchable]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

Yes...and that doesn't guarantee that they do it again..

But it proves it's more than possible. 

[Packerraymond]

Just now, Bullet Club said:

It's a naïve argument to think there isn't a good chance at it. Especially considering the actual situation on the field and where everyone was.

It doesn't matter where the greatest athlete's in the world are positioned on the field, what matters is the where the elder aged officials are placed, and none are that close to the ball. They aren't going to run a 4.4 40 to retrieve the ball.

[theuntouchable]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

I mean that's true, but if that's the case Falcons fans would be on here wondering how Stafford can get the snap, take a two step drop and be in his throwing motion before a single second came off the clock. Let alone the ball traveling to Tate, him making the catch and then falling. NFL plays don't take 1 second.

As long as the play starts before 00 it doesn't matter how long it takes after that. You just have to get the ball snapped before it hits 0. You should know that .....

[Packerraymond]

Just now, theuntouchable said:

As long as the play starts before 00 it doesn't matter how long it takes after that. You just have to get the ball snapped before it hits 0. You should know that .....

What do you mean? The play took 2 seconds in all reality. You had some favorable clock management as to when the clock operator started the clock, as evidenced by the fact that the first second ticks off the clock as Stafford releases the pass. The clock is right on the edge of 11/10 seconds when that knee hits, so if it was neutral site game that clock would've for sure been at 10, or maybe 9. A spike takes 1 second off the clock. A 2 step slant takes more, lets be real. Falcons fans would have the legit gripe if they put 11 seconds on the clock and let you run 1 play with 1 second left. No matter what someone was going to have a gripe with the ending.

[Forge]

3 minutes ago, theuntouchable said:

But it proves it's more than possible. 

I've never said it wasn't in any of the posts, I said it wasn't guaranteed. The question is about a possible better solution. I've stated my case for that - the NFL does the research on the average time it takes to get set and snap and that's what the run off is. I have no doubt that a team could get one off in that situation in 10 seconds. 8 is a little harder, but doable. We have also seen teams take more than 10 seconds. I think 10 seconds is arbitrary. I agree that there needs to be a run off...my only argument as that there needs to be more research into the amount of time it takes and then use that as the run off. Maybe the average is 9 seconds, maybe it's 7.

[Forge]

6 minutes ago, Bullet Club said:

It's a naïve argument to think there isn't a good chance at it. Especially considering the actual situation on the field and where everyone was.

I'm not arguing what kind of chance there is. I'm saying it's both possible they get the snap off and not get it off. What I'm looking for is a better solution.

[squire12]

2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

What do you mean? The play took 2 seconds in all reality. You had some favorable clock management as to when the clock operator started the clock, as evidenced by the fact that the first second ticks off the clock as Stafford releases the pass. The clock is right on the edge of 11/10 seconds when that knee hits, so if it was neutral site game that clock would've for sure been at 10, or maybe 9. A spike takes 1 second off the clock. A 2 step slant takes more, lets be real. Falcons fans would have the legit gripe if they put 11 seconds on the clock and let you run 1 play with 1 second left. No matter what someone was going to have a gripe with the ending.

When Tate's knee hit the ground, there was 11 seconds on the clock.  Not 11 seconds when that play started

[Packerraymond]

Just now, squire12 said:

When Tate's knee hit the ground, there was 11 seconds on the clock.  Not 11 seconds when that play started

There were 12 seconds when the play started. 12-1=11. NFL plays don't take 1 second. It was real generous home town clock management. 

Technically by what the clock said Lions fans have a gripe, in reality, that clock wouldn't have read 11 if the clock started on the snap.

[theuntouchable]

4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

What do you mean? The play took 2 seconds in all reality. You had some favorable clock management as to when the clock operator started the clock, as evidenced by the fact that the first second ticks off the clock as Stafford releases the pass. The clock is right on the edge of 11/10 seconds when that knee hits, so if it was neutral site game that clock would've for sure been at 10, or maybe 9. A spike takes 1 second off the clock. A 2 step slant takes more, lets be real. Falcons fans would have the legit gripe if they put 11 seconds on the clock and let you run 1 play with 1 second left. No matter what someone was going to have a gripe with the ending.

I misread you, I thought you were talking about if there was one second left.

[theuntouchable]

5 minutes ago, Forge said:

I've never said it wasn't in any of the posts, I said it wasn't guaranteed. The question is about a possible better solution. I've stated my case for that - the NFL does the research on the average time it takes to get set and snap and that's what the run off is. I have no doubt that a team could get one off in that situation in 10 seconds. 8 is a little harder, but doable. We have also seen teams take more than 10 seconds. I think 10 seconds is arbitrary. I agree that there needs to be a run off...my only argument as that there needs to be more research into the amount of time it takes and then use that as the run off. Maybe the average is 9 seconds, maybe it's 7.

I can agree with the run off but I think this scenario is a different and should be handled differently altogether. The refs made the TD call, the play is then automatically reviewed. I'm not sure on the solution but I think it's safe to say that this specific scenario should be handled differently.