incognito_man Posted October 12, 2017 Author Share Posted October 12, 2017 1 minute ago, GSUeagles14 said: what i figured, should have left blocked posts blocked. this doesnt even come close to answering the question. which was a pretty simple question tbh. and could you point any where people feel his progress was only stopped by himself? Video cleary shows a handful of gb defenders hanging on to him. again, you are confusing a body with a football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 On 10/9/2017 at 12:18 PM, TheEagle said: I think my main problem with the reversal is that the overhead camera wasn't directly over where the ball was. Agreed. And I am certain that if you precisely placed that overhead camera, you could show a large space between the ball and the line - to- gain. Optics matter. Fox was thrilled to roll out their 2nd overhead camera on Sunday, its one of their new gimmicks for 2017. But before the refs and replay guys start using it to decide calls, they need to have some serious education on its limitations and biases. Its fine for the fans, but its not- ready- for- prime time in terms of adjudicating a football game. You have to correct for the angle of observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quark3 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 14 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said: what i figured, should have left blocked posts blocked. this doesnt even come close to answering the question. which was a pretty simple question tbh. and could you point any where people feel his progress was only stopped by himself? Video cleary shows a handful of gb defenders hanging on to him. But ... those same defenders were hanging on to him as he extended the ball out, and as he brought it back to himself. So if he had the freedom of movement to extend it out, he had the same freedom of movement to bring it back. Seems to me the replay booth just bricked the call. It's not a goal-line situation, where as soon as the ball is extended hits the goal line, boom, TD, play over, even if the runner brings the ball back outside the goal line afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted October 12, 2017 Share Posted October 12, 2017 5 hours ago, Quark3 said: But ... those same defenders were hanging on to him as he extended the ball out, and as he brought it back to himself. So if he had the freedom of movement to extend it out, he had the same freedom of movement to bring it back. Seems to me the replay booth just bricked the call. It's not a goal-line situation, where as soon as the ball is extended hits the goal line, boom, TD, play over, even if the runner brings the ball back outside the goal line afterwards. doesnt matter if he brought it back, if they ruled his progress was stopped when the ball was extended, it was the proper spot. Look at it as him bringing it back was after tha play was already dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quark3 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 12 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said: doesnt matter if he brought it back, if they ruled his progress was stopped when the ball was extended, it was the proper spot. Look at it as him bringing it back was after tha play was already dead. We know what the ruling was, the issue is was it correct. And they should not have ruled that his "progress was stopped when the ball was extended", because his 'progress' wasn't stopped, as he was able to bring the ball back to himself as easily as he extended it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 8 hours ago, Quark3 said: We know what the ruling was, the issue is was it correct. And they should not have ruled that his "progress was stopped when the ball was extended", because his 'progress' wasn't stopped, as he was able to bring the ball back to himself as easily as he extended it. i dont think they say why they spotted it whered they did, thats just where they spotted it. Could be mistaken, and if i am, this entire thread has been pointless. The 2nd part of your post makes no sense. The rule is forward progress, who the bleep cares if he can move his arm backwards. please expand on this, i really hope im misunderstanding what youre trying to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 On 10/12/2017 at 6:25 PM, GSUeagles14 said: doesnt matter if he brought it back, if they ruled his progress was stopped when the ball was extended, it was the proper spot. Look at it as him bringing it back was after tha play was already dead. Actually they ruled him short on the field. It was reviewd and the spot changed IIRC. They didn't rule forward progress was stopped, at least on the field. So the replay ref said he forward progree wasn't stopped when he was contacted or when he reached forward ONLY when he VOLUNTARILLY retracted. That isn't what forward progree is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 14 hours ago, mse326 said: Actually they ruled him short on the field. It was reviewd and the spot changed IIRC. They didn't rule forward progress was stopped, at least on the field. So the replay ref said he forward progree wasn't stopped when he was contacted or when he reached forward ONLY when he VOLUNTARILLY retracted. That isn't what forward progree is. There could be some added detail to this in the rule book, but heres what i found from a quick search. Quote (b) when a runner is held or otherwise restrained so that his forward progress ends; or im not understanding why people think bringing the ball back is relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 1 minute ago, GSUeagles14 said: There could be some added detail to this in the rule book, but heres what i found from a quick search. im not understanding why people think bringing the ball back is relevant. Because the rule is saying he can't get further because he was being prevented. He wasn't prevented from keeping the ball out he voluntarilly made the decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 9 minutes ago, mse326 said: Because the rule is saying he can't get further because he was being prevented. He wasn't prevented from keeping the ball out he voluntarilly made the decision. i mean, if were just arguing forward progress at this point, once the ball is extended his progress is stopped. he extended the ball so again, once its extended him bringing it back means absolutely nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 Just now, GSUeagles14 said: i mean, if were just arguing forward progress at this point, once the ball is extended his progress is stopped. he extended the ball so again, once its extended him bringing it back means absolutely nothing. Forward progress has always been that the defense prevented him going further and HE didn't go back. Just think about a player voluntarilly running backwards. He doesn't get the furtherest point forward he got because he voluntarilly went backwards. Same here just with the reach instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 5 hours ago, mse326 said: Forward progress has always been that the defense prevented him going further and HE didn't go back. Just think about a player voluntarilly running backwards. He doesn't get the furtherest point forward he got because he voluntarilly went backwards. Same here just with the reach instead. is that in the rule book somewhere? if so, obvs wrong call but just seems off and against logic to say forward progress isnt stopped becaise he went back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 2 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said: is that in the rule book somewhere? if so, obvs wrong call but just seems off and against logic to say forward progress isnt stopped becaise he went back. Do you think that a player gets his most forward progress when he runs backwards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 2 hours ago, mse326 said: Do you think that a player gets his most forward progress when he runs backwards? did anyone ever tell you not to answer a question with a question? i mean, if yoire claiming forward progress wadnt stopped because he briught it back willingly, show me the rule. because from what ive seen in the rulebook that isnt the case. im more than willing to say im mistaken here. just show me where in the rule book it says what tou are saying, or even something close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEagle Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 As a Packers fan, I don't understand what people are arguing about regarding him moving the ball back. It's irrelevant. He gets forward progress. My only issue was where they judged forward progress to be. They marked it past the 19 yard line. It didn't look he got past the 19 yard line with an overhead camera that was not directly over the ball. IThe camera was over the 20 yard line (that angle will make it appear the ball got further than it did). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.