Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

ES Coverage & Interactive Game Day Thread: Redskins at Giants (Final)


JimmiJo

Recommended Posts

The one that really drives me crazy and I absolutely do believe there's a conspiracy involved is the TV replay "controller". I don't know if it's just one guy who controls the replays during any given broadcast or a few, but I swear it's slanted some times to benefit one team. I can't count how many times an iffy play occurred (like, say, the opposing team fumbled but the refs called the player down) and they never show a replay for it so our coaches are left either throwing the flag blindly or just not having a chance to challenge. And then during the same game we'll do something to that effect and IMMEDIATELY the replay is shown so their coaches can be told, lol.

 

This has been driving me nuts this season as well. It applies not just to our team, too. My fiance is a Bills fan, so I end up watching a lot of their games as well. They too are a team that has no respect in the league, because to do so would be an affront to Brady and Belecheat, and what you said happens to them all the time too. Phantom holding calls, phantom defensive holds, illegal contacts, fumbles, incompletes... everything that happens to us. It's enraging, because when I'm watching a Bills vs ___ game, I dont really care about anything other than watching a good game, and it almost never happens. Replay after replay happen for every NFL darling team, with a chorus of announcers saying how it should be challenged or was wrong. Hell I even saw once what looked like a ref walking up to Belecheat, asking him if he wanted a flag, and then throwing it long after the play had ended (I cant actually believe that happened, but it sure looked that way). Plus refs fist bumping a Broncos touchdown "because they got the call right" which makes zero sense... the play had just ended, how did they know they got the call right? No repay tho. Just a touchdown.

 

TL;DR: Absolutely.

 

And has Mike Perreria EVER disagreed with a call on the field??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused. He bobbled the ball before it crossed the plane. He catches it and has both feet down inbounds. The ball is in the endzone at that point. Why, is that different from any other runner extending the ball out. Why isn't the play dead at that point?

 

The issue in my mind is when he regained possession.  He regained right as he crossed the goal line. Even after watching it over and over, that element of the play is probably too close to call.  So I can see why the refs didn't give him possession prior to crossing.  Even freeze framing it, a reasonable argument could be he had both hands on it, but it didn't quite amount to control.  Had he established possession a half yard earlier, it'd have been a TD.

Just a few random threads from other boards from different times where fans of different teams think the "refs are trying to screw" them. Enjoy.

 

Cowboys fans saying refs are out to get them:

http://boards.dallascowboys.com/topic/25181-tell-me-again-about-the-refs/

 

Niners fans talking about conspiracy theories:

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/179667-niner-games-refs/page15/

 

Eagles fans, "refs getting ready to screw us."

http://philly.barstoolsports.com/around-barstool/refs-are-already-talking-about-screwing-the-eagles-chip-kellys-genius-tempo/

 

Giants fans saying there's a conspiracy when hits on Eli don't get flags other hits on other QBs do:

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f74/giants-vs-refs-1969019/

 

I could go on for all 32, but ... I'm not a total lunatic. 

 

You want to say the call was wrong today? Ok, that's one thing. I sadly don't agree, but whatever. But a conspiracy? Really? Well, I guess the NFL is out to get all of us, clearly. 

 

Such a waste of time from dealing with the team's REAL issues. 

 

I'm with you.  I hate the "refs are out to get us" whining. It's a function of people being in their own fanbase cocoon.  Same thing with "so & so announcer hates us".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been driving me nuts this season as well. It applies not just to our team, too. My fiance is a Bills fan, so I end up watching a lot of their games as well. They too are a team that has no respect in the league, because to do so would be an affront to Brady and Belecheat, and what you said happens to them all the time too. Phantom holding calls, phantom defensive holds, illegal contacts, fumbles, incompletes... everything that happens to us. It's enraging, because when I'm watching a Bills vs ___ game, I dont really care about anything other than watching a good game, and it almost never happens. Replay after replay happen for every NFL darling team, with a chorus of announcers saying how it should be challenged or was wrong. Hell I even saw once what looked like a ref walking up to Belecheat, asking him if he wanted a flag, and then throwing it long after the play had ended (I cant actually believe that happened, but it sure looked that way). Plus refs fist bumping a Broncos touchdown "because they got the call right" which makes zero sense... the play had just ended, how did they know they got the call right? No repay tho. Just a touchdown.

 

TL;DR: Absolutely.

 

And has Mike Perreria EVER disagreed with a call on the field??

Hi. Did I misunderstand but I thought Barcardi Rambo intercepted 3 Rogers passes in the Bills game. If true how come he never did that when he was here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.  Nice capture.  Clear shot.  I thought that no call on the field would be overturned without clear and obvious evidence.  The word from the NFL was that they were going to let the officals call the game on the field and not overturn calls unless there was something on the field the official should have seen during the play that replay would have pointed out.  Not sure how a ref would catch the split second the ball came loose with the naked eye....seems like a typical Redskin call to me.  Nice pic.

 

That's not a clear shot because that shot is actually past the goal line.  A better shot would be a half-second to a second earlier as he gets to the goal line, not after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is that he never regained possession.  The more fans and players complain about this, the more irrational they appear.

 

Regardless if it was the correct call or not, that is a terrible rule and like others have mentioned many times this would never be called in almost any other game.   

 

Why did the refs not review Beckham's first TD when he was clearly losing control as he landed out of bounds?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue in my mind is when he regained possession.  He regained right as he crossed the goal line. Even after watching it over and over, that element of the play is probably too close to call.  So I can see why the refs didn't give him possession prior to crossing.  Even freeze framing it, a reasonable argument could be he had both hands on it, but it didn't quite amount to control.  Had he established possession a half yard earlier, it'd have been a TD.

 

I'm with you.  I hate the "refs are out to get us" whining. It's a function of people being in their own fanbase cocoon.  Same thing with "so & so announcer hates us".

 

 

When your team is killing itself it is just easier to blame it on the refs, and then of course the announcers just appear to be piling on. That said, Mike Carey came out after retirement and made comments about how he felt about the name and that he requested to not call Redskins games, I remember when he did call them and he sure appeared to have a quicker trigger in Skins games. 

The #Redskins have been penalized 108 times for 1,014 yards this season, the second highest penalty yards total in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How funny will it be if we found out there WAS in fact a conspiracy...but one to HELP the Redskins "Boys - the Redskins mess is effecting sales and TV ratings. Do whatever you can to make sure they get a top 5 draft pick!"

 

LOL - truth is bad teams get bad calls BECAUSE they get the bad refs and the not so great people in NY doing the replays.  the GOOD refs and the focus in NY is on the BIG games.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless if it was the correct call or not, that is a terrible rule and like others have mentioned many times this would never be called in almost any other game.   

 

Why did the refs not review Beckham's first TD when he was clearly losing control as he landed out of bounds?   

By rule they reviewed both and it is a great rule.  Griffin did not score and he would have under no review.  Do we really support non TDs being ruled TDs? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tarik El-Bashir ‏@TarikCSN  4m4 minutes ago

The #Redskins have been penalized 108 times for 1,014 yards this season, the second highest penalty yards total in the league.

People have been defended the lack of discipline by saying they were undisciplined last year, but even if you isolate the discipline factor to on the field last week they had already surpassed the total number of penalties for the entire 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue in my mind is when he regained possession.  He regained right as he crossed the goal line..

 

Not exactly. According to the rules, you can't possess (or in this case, repossess) the ball in mid-air. The key is the fact that RGIII left the ground, then lost possession.

Since you can't possess the ball in mid-air, he had to complete possession through the ground. Since he was crossing the goal line you got the Calvin Johnson rule in play. He lost possession when he hit the ground. It was a fumble out of the endzone and touchback.

it's a terrible rule, but it was the right call.

Why did the refs not review Beckham's first TD when he was clearly losing control as he landed out of bounds?   

They did. All scoring plays get reviewed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not exactly. According to the rules, you can't possess (or in this case, repossess) the ball in mid-air. The key is the fact that RGIII left the ground, then lost possession.

Since you can't possess the ball in mid-air, he had to complete possession through the ground. Since he was crossing the goal line you got the Calvin Johnson rule in play. He lost possession when he hit the ground. It was a fumble out of the endzone and touchback.

 

I don't see how that works, when a runningback or quarterback dives over the OL at the 1 yard line and crosses the plane in mid air it's a TD, doesn't matter how he comes down with it.

 

I feel they're confusing two rules here, just because his feet weren't on the ground does not mean he became a receiver all of a sudden. For me it's clear he had possesion of the ball right before or as he crosses the plain, as a diving runner, so that's a TD. I don't care if he flips it up in the air or spins it on his head for all I care, he had the ball as he crossed the plane as a diving runner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how that works, when a runningback or quarterback dives over the OL at the 1 yard line and crosses the plane in mid air it's a TD, doesn't matter how he comes down with it.

 

I feel they're confusing two rules here, just because his feet weren't on the ground does not mean he became a receiver all of a sudden. For me it's clear he had possesion of the ball right before or as he crosses the plain, as a diving runner, so that's a TD. I don't care if he flips it up in the air or spins it on his head for all I care, he had the ball as he crossed the plane as a diving runner.

 

He became a "receiver" when his feet left the ground and he didn't have the ball in his hands. You cannot reclaim possession in the air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He became a "receiver" when his feet left the ground and he didn't have the ball in his hands. You cannot reclaim possession in the air.

 

Ah ok I can see how that works, thanks for clarifying, still think it's an iffy rule when it comes to breaking the plane with apparent possession, but I see now once he lost possession he can not regain it apparently according to the rules, unless he comes down with the ball and clearly shows he has the ball, which he didn't..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He became a "receiver" when his feet left the ground and he didn't have the ball in his hands. You cannot reclaim possession in the air.

That doesn't explain the Qb or Rb diving over the pile and extending the ball, only to have it knocked out of his hands in air.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't explain the Qb or Rb diving over the pile and extending the ball, only to have it knocked out of his hands in air.  

Apples and oranges.  Griffin fumbled into the end zone before breaking the plane.  After that he would be held to the receiver rule of 2 feet and possession throughout the play.  It wasn't close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't explain the Qb or Rb diving over the pile and extending the ball, only to have it knocked out of his hands in air.

If the ball get's knocked loose in air before it touches the goal line, it's a fumble. If it's knocked loose after the plane is broken, it's a TD.

 

The point is, a player cannot repossess the ball in mid air. He has to maintain control through contact with the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges.  Griffin fumbled into the end zone before breaking the plane.  After that he would be held to the receiver rule of 2 feet and possession throughout the play.  It wasn't close.

 

More importantly, once you fumble the ball, you are no longer considered a runner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More importantly, once you fumble the ball, you are no longer considered a runner.

 

Wait a minute, I don't mean to drag this on, I'm seriously trying to understand this ruling, but isn't a fumbled ball recovered in the end zone by the fumbler a TD?

 

You say you can not regain possession in mid-air, but once there is a fumble, isn't it a live ball in the end zone here? And unless it goes out of bounds or is recovered by the defense it should be a TD if it is indeed recovered by RGIII?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait a minute, I don't mean to drag this on, I'm seriously trying to understand this ruling, but isn't a fumbled ball recovered in the end zone by the fumbler a TD?

 

You say you can not regain possession in mid-air, but once there is a fumble, isn't it a live ball in the end zone here? And unless it goes out of bounds or is recovered by the defense it should be a TD if it is indeed recovered by RGIII?

 

My take is that once he fumbles it, it follows the rule of a receiver: He must maintain possession once he hits the ground. 

 

Which begs the questions posted above - Assume there is still time on the clock - what happens if the ball stays in the end zone & an NYG falls on it? Is it placed at the spot of the fumble (can't fumble it forward < 2 minutes) or is it a NYG recovered fumble? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...