CapsSkins Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 6 minutes ago, Llevron said: I am so confused about what happened now 68 reported; 70 didn't say anything. The ref mixes them up and thinks 70 reported. The play goes to 68 and they throw the flag. Campbell explicitly explained pre-game what was going to happen on that play, too. But the ref isn't looking and isn't paying attention when 68 runs over to report. So he mixes it up and thinks 70 reported. He bungled it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 5 hours ago, CapsSkins said: 68 reported; 70 didn't say anything. The ref mixes them up and thinks 70 reported. The play goes to 68 and they throw the flag. Campbell explicitly explained pre-game what was going to happen on that play, too. But the ref isn't looking and isn't paying attention when 68 runs over to report. So he mixes it up and thinks 70 reported. He bungled it. Ya. I watched it live but was falling asleep so I didn’t process it fully. I watched it again this morning and it’s clear as day that the refs dropped the ball on this. Absolutely awful officiating. The official on the broadcast team was even wrong. He said that Decker was covered up by the outside receiver, but he wasn’t. The outside receiver was off the LoS. Nothing about that play was illegal. That’s a pretty big screw up. 5 hours ago, Llevron said: I am so confused about what happened now You shouldn’t be. It’s VERY clear. Goff literally sent Decker over to the official to report. He was talking to 70. Decker went over and the ref started walking away as Decker got there. He got confused and reported the wrong # as eligible. It absolutely was a major **** up by the officials. As Campbell said post game, this is something coaches tell officials about pregame as well. HCs at every level speak to the officials about rules/trick plays they may use to give them a heads up. I’d say we need an explanation from the officials, but they’ll just say 70 reported and move on. But it’s clear as hell what happened here. The refs screwed up. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zCommander Posted December 31, 2023 Author Share Posted December 31, 2023 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zCommander Posted December 31, 2023 Author Share Posted December 31, 2023 8 hours ago, NickyJ said: The ref didn't hear Decker because the ref was thinking about what he'd say when he talks to America. Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Hella convenient catastrophic failure of officiating there... Go on youtube and find clips of NBA players talking about some places the need to win by 10 in order to win by 1... In Dallas against the Cowboys is one place I'm not comfortable playing close games in...it's either a blowout or doesn't feel neutral at all. I came prove it, it's not a conspiracy theory, but I know I'm not the only one that feels this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 4 hours ago, KDawg said: The official on the broadcast team was even wrong. He said that Decker was covered up by the outside receiver, but he wasn’t. The outside receiver was off the LoS. That's not what he was saying. He said Decker was uncovered. What he seemed to mean was that, if he didn't report, it would be a flag for him being uncovered anyway, regardless of the catch. It was a weird and confusing point to make, since the issue was whether he reported or not. 4 hours ago, KDawg said: t’s VERY clear. Goff literally sent Decker over to the official to report. He was talking to 70. Decker went over and the ref started walking away as Decker got there. He got confused and reported the wrong # as eligible. It absolutely was a major **** up by the officials. As Campbell said post game, this is something coaches tell officials about pregame as well. HCs at every level speak to the officials about rules/trick plays they may use to give them a heads up. I’d say we need an explanation from the officials, but they’ll just say 70 reported and move on. But it’s clear as hell what happened here. The refs screwed up. I don't think the thing about the discussion with the refs is the issue people are trying to make it to be. I'm sure they were clear on the play, but which player was eligible is still something that needs to be established before the snap. You can't tell them which player is the eligible receiver and expect that to be established 3.5 hours later. The issue with the refs to me is clearly that the Lions were reporting an eligible receiver and the ref ran off to do something else. He really needs to take a second to make sure he understood which one it is. Whatever it was that he ran off to do can wait a beat or two. He clearly thought that 70 reported and should have taken the time to make sure he had it right. That, imo, is what the Lions have to be pissed about today. I don't 100% take the Lions off the hook either, though. The refs announce "70 has reported as eligible" over the PA. Someone from the Lions sideline needs to run on the field screaming "NO NO NO" at that point. Whether the refs would have handled that correctly and not given them a delay penalty we will never know, but the Lions didn't do what they had to at that moment. As an aside, someone on twitter made a point that I think might be right. The fact that there were three OL around the ref before the play was weird. Someone made the point that the Lions might have done this to confuse the Cowboys, so the Cowboys might get lost as to which player had reported. If so, the attempt to create confusion backfired on them. Not that that has anything to do with whether the flag should have been thrown, just thought it was kind of an interesting observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srtman04 Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 We are on track to keep the #3 pick...good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 HINEYHINEY with the 75 yarder! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 (edited) Oops. Edited December 31, 2023 by TradeTheBeal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Cardinals!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaytoAli Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Yes, Philly sucks 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idaho fan Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simmsy Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Yes, I'm enjoying the Chiefs implosion. Yes, I'm also a shameless hater. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Someone is trying to tell me that a CBS stat blurb claimed that only 5 QBs who started the season are still playing this week. I believe that to be absolutely incorrect. Any idea what the stat was supposed to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Mahomes, Allen, (hopefully) Lawrence, Mayfield, Purdy...but there are still some "implications" to be decided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 1 hour ago, Simmsy said: Yes, I'm enjoying the Chiefs implosion. Yes, I'm also a shameless hater. Not me. I enjoy excellence (when not playing the commies). The chiefs were really special a couple years ago. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idaho fan Posted December 31, 2023 Share Posted December 31, 2023 Let’s go stillus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedBNG Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 Just saw the score of the Ravens game. 56 points. Whoa! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 Don't see how the Dolphins win the AFC with those three injuries today. Their defense is broken and Tua is not upper echelon even when he is healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 1 hour ago, BleedBNG said: Just saw the score of the Ravens game. 56 points. Whoa! Ravens felt disrespected and made the last two games personal. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedBNG Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 Got to admit the Vikings suck without Cousins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 (edited) Can anyone explain why tackling Reed after he called Fair Catch was not a penalty? Refs picked up the flag with the explanation that the tackle had already been initiated, but I can't see anything in the rules that allows you to interfere with a fair catch just because you already committed to the tackle. https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-rulebook/#section-1-opportunity-to-catch-a-kick Quote Item 1. Valid Fair-Catch Signal. A fair-catch signal is valid if it is made while the kick is in flight by a player who fully extends one arm above his helmet and waves it from side to side. A receiver is permitted to legally raise his hand(s) to his helmet to shield his eyes from the sun, but is not permitted to raise them above his helmet except to signal for a fair catch. ... Restrictions: (c) If a receiver has made a fair catch, an opponent is prohibited from blocking or tackling him, or causing a passive player of either team to contact him. Incidental contact is not a foul. Edited January 1 by PokerPacker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 I genuinely feel bad for Kevin O'Connell. He bounced out of the league as a QB because he wasn't good enough to stick, he's a head coach now, but at this very moment, he knows that he's young enough to still play the game and probably play better than 3 of the 4 QBs on his roster. 1 minute ago, PokerPacker said: Can anyone explain why tacking Reed after he called Fair Catch was not a penalty? Refs picked up the flag with the explanation that the tackle had already been initiated, but I can't see anything in the rules that allows you to interfere with a fair catch just because you already committed to the tackle. https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-rulebook/#section-1-opportunity-to-catch-a-kick If I remember it correctly, the Vikings player didn't have any feet on the ground by the time the fair catch was called. There was literally no way to stop him from hitting the returner by the time the fair catch was called. The returner was the only one who could have handled it differently, so the contact was his fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 3 minutes ago, NickyJ said: If I remember it correctly, the Vikings player didn't have any feet on the ground by the time the fair catch was called. There was literally no way to stop him from hitting the returner by the time the fair catch was called. The returner was the only one who could have handled it differently, so the contact was his fault. The rule does not give allowance for that, as far as I can see. To the best of my knowledge, it is on the tackler to make sure he's in position to not make an illegal hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now