BS call againts Jets.
 

Chris Baker would have clearly stayed in bounds for the TD to tie they game if they made the extra point. It was not reviewable because it was a judgement call. Anyone who looks at this replay has to be blind to see that he wouldn't have stayed in bounds.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

For the Jets to be in that position against the Browns, they deserve to lose

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
For the Jets to be in that position against the Browns, they deserve to lose

[/ QUOTE ]

They def. deserve to lose when Rueben Droughns runs all over them and they were unable to run themselves on the Browns plus Dawson missed a chip-shot FG.

Still, I've never been one to excuse bad calls like that based on what "should've happened" elsewhere in the game. I mean the Patriots shouldn't have been in a position to kick a FG against the Rams after leading 17-3 in the 4th Qtr but they were. It seems like if they're going to make a rule that you can recover a fumble after the whistle, then the "force out" ought to be reviewable as well even though it's a judgement call. There was a similar bad call in the Oakland-Tampa SB but fortunately it wasn't a close game. But the Browns seldom get those breaks so oh well.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
For the Jets to be in that position against the Browns, they deserve to lose

[/ QUOTE ]

That's really a ridiculous argument. I guess the Mets and Cardinals shouldn't have played the bottom of the 9th, since the Mets didn't desrve to win.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

The call was awful and the Jets DESERVED to have an OT with Cleveland

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

He would have been in easily. The worst part was having to listen to the announcers ramble on about how he probably would have gone out and there wasn't conclusive evidence.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

standard NFL

it's like watching the WWE at times

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

I still havent seen this play, but since everyone here seems to be in agreement (WTF is goin on) The Jets must have gotten screwed.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

I got screwed out of my money by that call (Over 37). Also possibly screwed out of the top spot in the 3+1 contest (that was my $400 pick).

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

I saw this, and it looked close at least. Yeah, he might have been able to get the feet in, it wasn't a horrible blown call though like what we see most weeks.
I don't see how it being a "judgement call" should make it unreviewable, such dumb rules. Don't they think that getting a better look of the play would make their "judgement" more accurate?

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

as a jet fan, this game totally sucked...first the jets had problems with the browns...i know the jets aren't great, but still, that is bad...and then that call was blown...still, the game shouldn't have that close in the first place...ugh...

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

marginall call. not as bad as you guys are saying but still a [censored] way to lose.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
It was not reviewable because it was a judgement call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this part. Why wasn't it reviewable? Isn't every call essentially a "judgement call?"

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

By rule a "force out" is not reviewable. The rationale is that it is a "judgment" call.

I am not sure I understand this though. I think a "force out" should be reviewable, subject to the same standard as every other review -- indisputable video evidence that the receiver would have come down in bounds but for the "force out". With the right camera angle, I am not sure why this can't be determined via replay.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
By rule a "force out" is not reviewable. The rationale is that it is a "judgment" call.

I am not sure I understand this though. I think a "force out" should be reviewable, subject to the same standard as every other review -- indisputable video evidence that the receiver would have come down in bounds but for the "force out". With the right camera angle, I am not sure why this can't be determined via replay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this seems like total BS. All calls are judgement calls and the video will sometimes be pretty conclusive with a forceout. If its not, then you don't overturn it, but why not even have the option? Plus, there are so many calls that do get reviewed for which video is so much less helpful For example, the Champ Bailey fumble against the Pats in the playoffs last year - why review something like that but not a forceout?

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
With the right camera angle, I am not sure why this can't be determined via replay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly,, nobody seems to realize Baker's momentum was going towards the back of the endzone, not to the side of it. There was no doubt that he was landing in bounds if he wasnt touched. 100% with one camera angle they showed. Think of the replays where a baseball player gets hit with a pitch. They show where the ball redirects off his body. In the super slo-mo replay, they show him going one direction with the ball, then the other.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

I disagree with those saying he "might have" come down in bounds. He was way inside the plane, was close to the ground, and had hardly any left-right momentum. It would have taken some extraordinary physics for him to come down out of bounds on his own.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

His right foot was certainly going to hit the ground, and based on the position of his right foot along w/ his momentum his left foot would have also hit the ground with out any question about it.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

Wow, first I've seen this play. He was 2 feet from the sideline, what a terrible call.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree with those saying he "might have" come down in bounds. He was way inside the plane, was close to the ground, and had hardly any left-right momentum. It would have taken some extraordinary physics for him to come down out of bounds on his own.

[/ QUOTE ]

He might have landed on his one foot, then inexplicably hopped off of it and landed out of bounds on the other foot...

Go Browns! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

This was a bad call, but nowhere near as bad as people are saying. It is not easy for the refs to determine momentum when also trying to determine if he has control of the ball, especially for a one-handed catch. The rule is the stupid part that it can't be reviewed.

The roughing the passer call that cost the Bengals vs. Tampa two weeks ago was way worse than this call.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

It's amazing the NFL has as strong and loyal a fanbase as it does, considering how routinely the refs rape both the teams and the fans.

The review system is terrible, almost everythign should be reviewable or everything shouldn't be. None of this "if we call it this way we can, but if we call it this way we can't" crap.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

i think they should eliminat this rule like in college. if you hit a guy out, congrats, good play, no catch.

also, in regards to fumbles and catches etc, refs should never whistle a play dead

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
i think they should eliminat this rule like in college. if you hit a guy out, congrats, good play, no catch.



[/ QUOTE ]


This is a very good idea

I'm all for giving Refs less judgment calls.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
The roughing the passer call that cost the Bengals vs. Tampa two weeks ago was way worse than this call.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to hijack or anything, but I think the roughing the passer penalty needs to be addressed way before review of a force out. Roughing the passer calls are generally game changers because they happen on passing downs (of course), typically third downs, and they award the "roughed" team a first down on what probably was 3rd and long. Instead of having a stop and forcing a kick, the "roughed" team now has a 1st down and a gift of 15 yards.

For instances where someone really goes out to hurt the QB, such a result is deserved. But if they are going to call a penalty every time some 300-lb. lineman rushing at full speed blows on the QB a few seconds after the ball is gone, then how can they justify making what often can be a game changing call?

My solution -- if they feel they need to protect the QB to such an extreme -- is to do what they did with roughing the kicker. Make a new 5-yd penalty for "running into the QB" or "unintentional contact with the QB", and keep the 15-yd personal foul for the worst cases.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
My solution -- if they feel they need to protect the QB to such an extreme -- is to do what they did with roughing the kicker. Make a new 5-yd penalty for "running into the QB" or "unintentional contact with the QB", and keep the 15-yd personal foul for the worst cases.


[/ QUOTE ]
I like this idea alot.

As for the OP that was a terrible call. There is some specific reason why a force out is not reviewable. It was one of the things that was looked at last year when they changed the down by contact fumble rule. Watch the NFL Network Wednesday night and I'm sure the director of officals will explain.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I saw this, and it looked close at least. Yeah, he might have been able to get the feet in, it wasn't a horrible blown call though like what we see most weeks.
I don't see how it being a "judgement call" should make it unreviewable, such dumb rules. Don't they think that getting a better look of the play would make their "judgement" more accurate?

[/ QUOTE ]

The battle to get instant replay back at all was a big one. Many many people didn't want it at all because of how it slowed down the game. Look at baseball for example, which still doesn't use it at all!

So they had to make many compromises to get it in at all. Judgment calls being unreviewable was one of them.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It was not reviewable because it was a judgement call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this part. Why wasn't it reviewable? Isn't every call essentially a "judgement call?"

[/ QUOTE ]

No, some calls are clear cut. For example, whether a player stepped out of bounds or not. He either stepped out or he didn't. But this is a judgment call because since he did NOT come down in bounds you have to made a judgment about whether or not he would have. Its a complete hypothetical.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]

also, in regards to fumbles and catches etc, refs should never whistle a play dead

[/ QUOTE ]This suggestion would last until a star player got hurt on a play in which he stopped playing because it was clear to him that the play was over but the refs didn't whistle it dead and he got hit when he wasn't ready. Imagine if this happened to a star QB...the outrage of the fans would be enormous.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

I like niss' idea a lot too.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

The call was terrible, but that is what you get for having that stupid rule (and making it unreviewable).

I prefer the college rule. You only have to get one foot in, but you have to get it in. If you are pushed out, too bad.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's amazing the NFL has as strong and loyal a fanbase as it does, considering how routinely the refs rape both the teams and the fans.


[/ QUOTE ]

In general, I think the NFL officials are better than the official in other team sports.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

also, in regards to fumbles and catches etc, refs should never whistle a play dead

[/ QUOTE ]This suggestion would last until a star player got hurt on a play in which he stopped playing because it was clear to him that the play was over but the refs didn't whistle it dead and he got hit when he wasn't ready. Imagine if this happened to a star QB...the outrage of the fans would be enormous.

[/ QUOTE ]

From the time someone first starts playing, they are taught to play until the whistle. If someone stops playing and gets hurt, it is their own fault, just like a boxer who decides to stop defending himself.

This is why it drives me nuts when they penalize for hits that are just slightly out of bounds when there hasn't been any whistle.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

niss, i think you missed that bengals play. they hit gradkowski while he still had the ball in his hand. they didnt hit him high, or low. the lineman wrapped him up and took him down in one motion, so it wasnt in the grasp.

otherwise i like your idea.

assani, why would players top paying attention if someone just fumbled or possibly fumbled? players are taught to play from whistle to whistle.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

also, in regards to fumbles and catches etc, refs should never whistle a play dead

[/ QUOTE ]This suggestion would last until a star player got hurt on a play in which he stopped playing because it was clear to him that the play was over but the refs didn't whistle it dead and he got hit when he wasn't ready. Imagine if this happened to a star QB...the outrage of the fans would be enormous.

[/ QUOTE ]

Teams can get screwed by this if they don't have any timeouts left and it's before the 2 minute warning. It's already happened once (Mike Furrey "intercepted" an Aaron Brooks pass from Ernie Conwell, when Ernie had been on the ground for a full second), but since it was the Saints and Rams nobody cared.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

i like Niss' idea in general, but have trouble giving refs even more judgment calls

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
My solution -- if they feel they need to protect the QB to such an extreme -- is to do what they did with roughing the kicker. Make a new 5-yd penalty for "running into the QB" or "unintentional contact with the QB", and keep the 15-yd personal foul for the worst cases.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like that a lot too. The only concern that I can see would be how you justify not making that 5 yds an automatic 1st down when "illegal contact" and defensive holding are.

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's amazing the NFL has as strong and loyal a fanbase as it does, considering how routinely the refs rape both the teams and the fans.

The review system is terrible, almost everythign should be reviewable or everything shouldn't be. None of this "if we call it this way we can, but if we call it this way we can't" crap.

[/ QUOTE ]

The NFL has fans?

Re: BS call againts Jets.
 

I saw a replay finally


this call was atrocious and a big deal



ref who was responsible should be suspended without pay for awhile