So the NFL's game of the year boiled down to autistically debating a "catch"?
| Sticky liquid oxygen | 12/18/17 | | bateful indian lodge rigpig | 12/18/17 | | red business firm tattoo | 12/18/17 | | Sticky liquid oxygen | 12/18/17 | | Underhanded crusty blood rage sandwich | 12/18/17 | | red business firm tattoo | 12/18/17 | | Underhanded crusty blood rage sandwich | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | red business firm tattoo | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | Sticky liquid oxygen | 12/18/17 | | Sienna office useless brakes | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 02/04/18 | | jet-lagged rigor corner | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 02/04/18 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | red business firm tattoo | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | Sienna office useless brakes | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/18/17 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 12/25/17 | | Charismatic Mexican Round Eye | 02/04/18 | | Concupiscible Gaped Immigrant Center | 12/18/17 | | Sticky liquid oxygen | 12/18/17 | | Erotic Shimmering Step-uncle's House Coffee Pot | 12/18/17 | | bronze ratface codepig | 12/18/17 | | Sticky liquid oxygen | 12/18/17 | | clear titillating really tough guy | 12/18/17 | | Abnormal Narrow-minded Haunted Graveyard Milk | 12/18/17 | | Coral histrionic plaza | 02/04/18 | | crimson stirring wrinkle temple | 02/04/18 | | Violent athletic conference | 02/04/18 | | Zombie-like umber brethren | 02/04/18 | | Sticky liquid oxygen | 03/01/18 | | Ultramarine institution | 02/04/18 | | Sticky liquid oxygen | 03/01/18 | | House-broken floppy philosopher-king son of senegal | 03/01/18 |
Poast new message in this thread
|
Date: December 18th, 2017 3:03 PM Author: Zombie-like umber brethren
I legit don't know,
Is that the governing factor? The referee determining whether a player is balanced or not?
Either way, its a dumb rule, because clearly he had the ball in his possession, enough to lung and stretch it out.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#34950064) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2017 3:05 PM Author: Sticky liquid oxygen
>> Either way, its a dumb rule, because clearly he had the ball in his possession, enough to lunge and stretch it out. <<
Speaking as a non-fan with no dog in this hunt, that video above intuitively seems like he caught the ball. Like, if you ask a child "did that guy catch the ball" they'd all say yes.
But of course whether it's a catch or not isn't the point.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#34950086) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2017 3:07 PM Author: Zombie-like umber brethren
just to be autistic...
if he's falling backward, the ball is on his chest, he hits the ground, the ball pops up, out of his possession, doesn't hit the ground, he re-catches
good catch right?
if he has the ball, in his possession the whole time, falls to the ground, ball touches the ground, clearly doesn't move, clearly maintains possession the whole time
still a good catch right?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#34950107) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2017 3:15 PM Author: Zombie-like umber brethren
do you have to see the ball actually touching the grass when it moves? It obviously moves due to him falling, by the time you see it touching the grass, it appears to be back in 'dispute' as to whether he has control over it
I agree that physics renders this unlikely
but that seems like a standard that isn't uniformly applied to exactly how indisputable what you're looking at has to be
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#34950203) |
|
Date: December 18th, 2017 3:08 PM Author: Zombie-like umber brethren
the reason I'm getting autistic with this, is that I've seen calls that seem to meet a different standard of what exactly you need to see
I think it usually happens around fumble calls, where the question is whether the knee was down
due to piles of bodies, you don't get an exact view of the knee, but the hip will move such that the knee not hitting the ground would defy physics,
yet the call goes as call on the field stands because video evidence is inconclusive
-----
I think I've seen similar situation when reviewing whether or not a punt was touched, the ball will move in a way that defies physics, but the video evidence will be determined as inconclusive
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#34950115) |
|
Date: December 25th, 2017 2:31 PM Author: Zombie-like umber brethren
After the Benjamin score was overturned, many immediately blamed the NFL’s famously broken catch rule. But in a strange twist, the catch rule was not the problem here. The question here was whether both of Benjamin’s feet touched down in the end zone when he gained control of the ball. Having both feet down with possession is the purest definition of a catch, the one we all understood before things got extremely complicated.
The problem here was not with the rule, but with the way the NFL’s replay system operates. The on-field officials ruled that Benjamin got both feet down. Slow-motion replays raised the question of whether Benjamin’s second foot left the ground before he gained control, but there was no angle that definitively proved Benjamin didn’t have control when his foot left the ground.
The NFL is only supposed to overturn calls if there is “clear and obvious” video evidence that the on-field decision was wrong. If the video is inconclusive—or really, anything less than “clear and obvious”—the call on the field should stand. But between the Seferian-Jenkins overturn and this one, it’s now clear and obvious that the league’s replay office does not adhere to that standard.
The league’s replay system is meant to correct officiating errors by on-field officials. Instead, the league office is using challenges as an opportunity to freshly officiate the plays from New York. That takes a lot of agency away from the league’s referees. This is, of course, quite upsetting to officiating experts:
...
Leagues are right to use instant replay to ensure accuracy. But when slow-motion, high-definition replays from a variety of angles don’t definitively tell us what happened on a play, there is no right or wrong answer. And in those cases, there won’t be a better solution than trusting the refs.
https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/12/24/16817224/week-16-winners-and-losers-replay-officials-butt-interception-browns
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#35004410) |
Date: December 18th, 2017 2:50 PM Author: Concupiscible Gaped Immigrant Center
the NFL is done, dude
if you're a heterosexual male still watching the NFL you are a very confused individual
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#34949953) |
|
Date: February 4th, 2018 10:08 PM Author: Zombie-like umber brethren
The Steelers would have been the #1 seed
Jags would have played the Pats in the divisional round
This sport is ridiculous
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3833092&forum_id=2#35324709) |
|
|