The Nation's Tears: Volume II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
Clearly this isn't a popular opinion in this area. It frustrates me, because obviously the timing of calls (or non-calls) also makes a huge difference.

There were a couple of huge non-calls on early passing plays that benefited the Jaguars. If those calls are made, maybe the Pats are never down the way they were. Maybe those calls and the field position take some of the edge off the aggressiveness of the Jaguar defense. Who knows? There was some serious non-calls all day on both teams (imo) and when that happens it tends to favor the more aggressive team. By all accounts the Jaguars would be described as the more aggressive team. The wrestling suplex on white after he scored his touchdown wasn't whistled, the punches thrown, the taunting after Gronk walked off the field. All of that could have (should have?) been called - and by not doing it - the Jaguars gained a large advantage. A Patriots pass rusher stumbled over a fallen blocker, starts to get up to pursue Bortles and the OL just shoved him in the middle of his back sending him back to the turf. No whistle. So I'll acknowledge that there were a number of missed calls - they were missed on both sides of the ball. But if the ref is going to let them play, which happened - and that approach favors the other team, I'm not going to get too worked up about complaints of the referee.

Finally, knowing what we know about the Patriots playoff/post season record - a referee was chosen that somehow the Patriots had a losing record in front of. What are the odds of that??? That referee should never have been assigned to the Patriots game by the league.
There were two clear pass interference calls missed, one in Cooks but I’m forgetting who the other was. The tackle on White after the td should have drawn a flag, but it doesn’t make a realdifference, it just means a closer PAT (which with Ghost I guess might actually make a difference, but whatever) or on the kickoff. The hit on Gronk I’d normally just say ‘course of the game’ but they played chippy and nasty all game, so I’m not disinclined to think he targeted him and should have been tossed. The Pats only getting one penalty isn’t about being favored it’s abiut them being more disciplined and the Jags being cheap shot loud mouths looking for an edge.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
It's very clear in the replay that Lewis had his hand on the ball, secured against his body, and the ball was not moving at all when his hip touched. I guess I understand how someone could say that isn't 'full possession' since he subsequently lost it. I also get why (as Blandino said) given the call was fumble why it wasn't overturned (and it also wasn't confirmed, suggesting NY saw it the same way I'm suggesting), but I think the actual right call there was pretty clearly that he had possession and was down by contact.
My only issue with that line of thinking is that while his hand was on the ball and it was against his body - there wasn't really a moment when the ball wasn't rolling against his body. If it had stopped rolling around his leg for a moment, I would agree that he had maintained the ball, but it (to me) seemed like he never truly secured it.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
He didn't have control of it (and it never hit the ground) until he was like 2 feet away from Lewis
That's the not the rule though.

http://www.footballzebras.com/2018/01/21/championship-liveblog-jaguars-at-patriots/

Whenever a ball is stripped from a player in possession on the ground, it is down by contact and no fumble. In this case, the ball was not in possession but taken from an opponent’s hands, so this is deemed as “contact” by the Patriots as Myles begins to take control.

Is it possible that there was no hand-to-hand contact? Yes, but there is no way that can be perceived, so the officials are instructed to treat this as down by contact.

The contact, by the way, only has to occur when a player is beginning to secure the ball. It is held until the player finishes establishing control, and is dead at that point.


This was correctly ruled as down by contact on the recovery.
The play was called correctly if you think it was a fumble.
 

Import78

Member
SoSH Member
May 29, 2007
2,091
West Lebanon, NH
If the refs were really in the bag for the pats that would have been called down by contact, not a fumble recovered by Jax. Especially given the circumstances: late in the game, Pats down and driving.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
There were two clear pass interference calls missed, one in Cooks but I’m forgetting who the other was. The tackle on White after the td should have drawn a flag, but it doesn’t make a realdifference, it just means a closer PAT (which with Ghost I guess might actually make a difference, but whatever) or on the kickoff. The hit on Gronk I’d normally just say ‘course of the game’ but they played chippy and nasty all game, so I’m not disinclined to think he targeted him and should have been tossed. The Pats only getting one penalty isn’t about being favored it’s abiut them being more disciplined and the Jags being cheap shot loud mouths looking for an edge.
Agreed.

Although if they had called a personal foul penalty in the end zone on Jack, then maybe he has to tone down the chippiness to avoid a second and ejection. Maybe it changes the game.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
That's the not the rule though.

http://www.footballzebras.com/2018/01/21/championship-liveblog-jaguars-at-patriots/



The play was called correctly if you think it was a fumble.
That is correct. Think about it this way. Receiver jumps up to make a catch. Defender hits him either before or as the ball is getting there, and he bobbles it, and then regains control as he goes to the ground from the hit. Just because the receiver bobbled it and didn't get control until after the hit by the defender, doesn't mean he isn't down by contact.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
My only issue with that line of thinking is that while his hand was on the ball and it was against his body - there wasn't really a moment when the ball wasn't rolling against his body. If it had stopped rolling around his leg for a moment, I would agree that he had maintained the ball, but it (to me) seemed like he never truly secured it.
I didn't see it that way. Lewis lost control of the ball, but then he really pinned it to his hip firmly with one hand just before he hit the ground. I really thought there was about an 80% chance of an overturn on that call.
 
Last edited:

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
There were two clear pass interference calls missed, one in Cooks but I’m forgetting who the other was. The tackle on White after the td should have drawn a flag, but it doesn’t make a realdifference, it just means a closer PAT (which with Ghost I guess might actually make a difference, but whatever) or on the kickoff. The hit on Gronk I’d normally just say ‘course of the game’ but they played chippy and nasty all game, so I’m not disinclined to think he targeted him and should have been tossed. The Pats only getting one penalty isn’t about being favored it’s abiut them being more disciplined and the Jags being cheap shot loud mouths looking for an edge.
The other DPI you're thinking about was on Hogan early in the game. He was clearly grabbed and turned by the defender before the ball got there.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
I didn't see it that way. Lewis lost control of the ball, but then he really pinned it to his hip firmly with one hand just before he hit the ground. I rally thought there was about an 80% chance of an overturn on that call.
I'll re-watch replays. Maybe I just didn't see what I thought I did.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,212
My only issue with that line of thinking is that while his hand was on the ball and it was against his body - there wasn't really a moment when the ball wasn't rolling against his body. If it had stopped rolling around his leg for a moment, I would agree that he had maintained the ball, but it (to me) seemed like he never truly secured it.
There is a clear shot of the ball not moving at all right when the hip hits, it was in the replay. One can argue it wasn't long enough to constitute "full possession" and that's a reasonable thing to conclude, though I think not the better of the arguments to be made on the play.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
I didn't see it that way. Lewis lost control of the ball, but then he really pinned it to his hip firmly with one hand just before he hit the ground. I really thought there was about an 80% chance of an overturn on that call.
He definitely had it pinned. I wasn’t sure which way it would go but where it moved before and after that pinning I was thinking fumble but also realized it was the NFL so who knows anymore.
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,639
Sometimes announcers definitely have rooting interests. Comparing announcers to refs is ... I can’t come up with a good analogy right now.
It’s silly though.
Local announcers, sure. I'm talking about national announcers. They don't have a rooting interest. I don't agree with all the posts about Nantz and Romo wanting the Pats to lose.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
2,351
I've seen a hilarious number of posts elsewhere about Romo rooting for the Pats, so clearly every sensitive fan just thinks the announcers are rooting against their team.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
Local announcers, sure. I'm talking about national announcers. They don't have a rooting interest. I don't agree with all the posts about Nantz and Romo wanting the Pats to lose.
There's over a decades' worth of games where Nantz very obviously LOOOOOOVES Peyton Manning and has shown a bit of coolness to the Pats. I concede that Nantz is the exception to most of the national broadcasters, though.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
There's over a decades' worth of games where Nantz very obviously LOOOOOOVES Peyton Manning and has shown a bit of coolness to the Pats. I concede that Nantz is the exception to most of the national broadcasters, though.
Nantz has called like 6 Pats games a year for the last 15 years. I really don’t think he’s anti Pats.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
37,069
Hingham, MA
I love that anyone thinks the league is in the bag for the Pats. Every questionable call could go their way for the next decade and it wouldn’t even us out for them taking away two first round picks and our fucking quarterback for 4 games last season.
 

kelpapa

Costanza's Hero
SoSH Member
Feb 15, 2010
4,639
Yep. Romo was certainly openly excited for some big Jags plays. He was also leaping out of the chair with exuberance at the Brady-Amendola hookups.
Announcers want exciting games and exciting plays. They don't want to call a 45-0 blow out no matter who it favors.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,058
In general they want an entertaining game, so if big favorite is losing, it's going to be more exciting than the favorite getting out to a big lead.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Yep. Romo was certainly openly excited for some big Jags plays. He was also leaping out of the chair with exuberance at the Brady-Amendola hookups.
Yes, it is aggravating when you’re pulling hard for a team, the other team makes big plays, and the announcers go nuts. Extremely aggravating.

But Romo loves football, loves explaining football, works hard at it and is good at it.

Considering other things we’ve been through, snowflakes should be sturdier in Boston.
 

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
14,542
South Boston
Anti-Tears - Reggie Bush on NFL Network... Responding to Jags not sure if they will ever get back here...

"I mean, you never know. Unless you are the Patriots. They will always be there. Want to win? Go there. I know. I mean.. Trust me, I tried to get there".
 

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
14,542
South Boston
Hell hath frozen over. Tomlinson, in NFL Network, says that is so unsurprising. The Patriots are playing 9k such a different level than the rest of the NFL. And he wished he could have played on a BB coached team
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,926
Wayne, NJ
Rewatching end of first half.

Delay of Game out of a timeout costs you a huge first down conversion.

How you even get close to 0 is beyond me. Follow up by punting at 2:09 with clock running and play clock @ 23 seconds. Amendola fair catch @ 2:02. We know Pats score with 55 seconds but that is total negligence. By scoring so quickly they give the Jags a good chance at points to end the half but as we know...they top off the above idiocy by sitting on the ball with 55 seconds and 2 timeouts up only 4 points in Foxboro.

So blow an 11 point lead and then the 10 point lead with thorough game mismanagement and you want to blame who exactly?!?! The Referees?!?! Wah Wah Wah
 
Status
Not open for further replies.