BS call againts Jets.

[HajiShirazu]

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?

[Suigin406]

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...

[Victor]

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

[sam h]

[ 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?"

[niss]

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.

[sam h]

[ 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?

[B00T]

[ 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.

[Army Eye]

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.

[K-Slay]

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.

[Spellmen]

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