The Game Ball Thread: Wk 11 vs Bills

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,488
Santa Monica, CA
“@ZoandBertrand: . @scottzolak was told that Ray Lewis gave a speech to the Bills Sunday Night prior to the Pats game”
Not sure this is worth caring about. It's not like he was the referee for the game, he's a talking puppet on the pregame show. It wouldn't bother me if Rodney Harrison talked to the Bills before they played the Jets or Colts either.

Also, it's pretty common for broadcasters to do pep talks for teams as a favor to the coaching staff, especially in college sports, so this isn't some unprecedented breach of protocol, imho.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
24,962
Unreal America
The NFL rulebook is an unwieldy mess. Half of the officiating controversies involve their ability to make snap, esoteric judgement calls because the rules demand that kind of interpretation. In many cases I think the league has tried to follow applying consistent logic down such a twisting path that it ends up being illogical in practical application (e.g. the "football move" clause of TD receptions).

A better Commish would tell the owners that they need to cut the damn thing in half. The likelihood of that happening is about zero percent, of course.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
That's not right, the rule book specifically says that there is no forward progress when a runner goes backwards on his own accord (AR7.6), and that forward progress only comes into play to determine the ending of a play if the runner was stopped by the other team.
Yeah I wasn't sure on that part of it but that is why I said I assumed that is what the call was. I could at least make some sense of that in my brain and the whole "gave him self up thing" makes no sense.
I still think that the side judge may have been thinking forward progress and went with given up when he realized he screwed up.
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,794
Bow, NH
The NFL rulebook is an unwieldy mess. Half of the officiating controversies involve their ability to make snap, esoteric judgement calls because the rules demand that kind of interpretation. In many cases I think the league has tried to follow applying consistent logic down such a twisting path that it ends up being illogical in practical application (e.g. the "football move" clause of TD receptions).

A better Commish would tell the owners that they need to cut the damn thing in half. The likelihood of that happening is about zero percent, of course.
Re: the bolded, I think it should be the other way around. The owners should be telling RG to cut it in half. RG forms a committee to make the proposed changes, and then the owners vote on it.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,889
Washington, DC
Yeah I wasn't sure on that part of it but that is why I said I assumed that is what the call was. I could at least make some sense of that in my brain and the whole "gave him self up thing" makes no sense.
I still think that the side judge may have been thinking forward progress and went with given up when he realized he screwed up.
Sure, I think that's the likely and easier explanation: the side judge screwed up and now is finding some explanation that justifies his call, rather than the side judge was correct.
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,105
A Scud Away from Hell
A few observations after rewatching the game:
  • Buffalo was very lucky not to have more turnovers. Several near misses.
  • Sheard really brings another dimension to the game. It's a credit to Pats depth that the defense kept improving without his contributions.
  • Absolutely wrong to blame Chung. He's a safety asked to cover Woods & Hogan, two speedy wideouts. He also kept himself competitive enough to break up a couple of long passes
  • OL really had a tough time getting the right assignments. I think this is more a scheme/chemistry/mental problem rather than a sheer strength/talent problem. Rex really dialed it up this week.
  • Easley could have had a monster game, but had several near-misses for a tackle for a loss or a sack. I really like him staying healthy enough to contribute this year, but watch out for 2016.
  • Getting Hicks for Hooman was another win (or win/win as Hooman has played well for NO). The man eats up space.
  • Logan stayed close to his man all game. What a surprise he has been -- just slightly less than Butler.
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,717
Amstredam
This is all probably fodder for a thread of its own.

But just to chime in:
How long before the option for varying shots is just built in to every broadcast? You want the sky cam? It's yours. All-22? Sideline? Endzone? That funky thing some stadiums do with the Matrix-style shot? Have at it. All the logos and scores and whatever would be applied to each one, but the viewer gets to choose which (or multiple).
Doesn't NBC do this now for everything (NHL, BPL, NFL) on their online Live Extra Stream online?

Edit: Please move to NFL viewing experience thread.
 
Last edited:

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,719
I kind of felt at the time that giving the Pats the yards for the reception was an in-the-moment make-up call by the refs.

Fact is, the whistle was inadvertently blown clearly before Amendola made the catch, meaning according to rule, the play was dead then and the down should've been replayed. I am sure that is something the booth in New York could have confirmed if they reviewed the replay looking for that. I think giving the Pats the 14 yards for the catch was an intentional hedge against the "if he caught it he could've gone all the way" problem... And then the extra 15 yards for Rex's interfering with the referee was the separate consequence of his self-inflicted buffoonery.

.
that is my read, too, and along with doubts that Dola could have gone all the way, I'm sort of good with that.

I thought Tavon Wilson had a heck of a game, as did Butler. Sheard was a difference-maker as well. James White only had 4 touches, but sure made the most of them. His TD was the biggest play of the game, IMO.
Have been wondering all season long why Wilson was even on the roster but he put in a real creditable performance. He's a solid tackler, filled his lanes well, flashed in the blitz, and while hard to read coverage from a broadcast was not picked on due to any egregious errors.

I do have some hope that while the Pats have the injury bug in spades, most seem like they should be back by the playoffs (not Lewis, obviously, which hurts the most). In the interim, getting players like Wilson and Mayo and all the OL guys playing time only improves them and improves the depth. In particular, I hope Collins is feeling better, soon -- whatever the bubonic plague virus he has, I have to think even if he come back he'll come back weakened, so another guy who will hopefully be truly right by the playoffs.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
Link

NFL V.P. of officiating Dean Blandino said on NFL Network on Tuesday night that Watkins rolled out of bounds without being touched, which means the clock should have stopped. The official closest to the play erroneously thought Watkins was giving himself up in the field of play and signaled for the clock to keep running.

“He is down in bounds, but he’s not contacted,” Blandino said as he showed video of the play. “He’s attempting to get out of bounds, you want to give that player the opportunity to get out of bounds, and really, that’s what should have happened.”

For the official right on top of that play to screw it up is a serious mistake. It also doesn’t help matters that the NFL waited until Tuesday night to acknowledge the error. That led to a day of confusion in which many fans, wrongly interpreting the rule, posted on social media that the clock kept running because Watkins wasn’t moving forward when he went out of bounds.
NFL finally gets around to that whole "Yep we screwed up once again" apology.

And looks like Football Zebras, Mike Pereira, et al were all right. Should have been time left.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,604
Somewhere
Which is a buyable excuse if you ignore the fact that the ball itself never came close to crossing the out of bounds line, and the official was in no position to see that one way or the other. Brady was moving toward the sideline but he threw across his body back into the field of play. Where Amendola caught it was further from the line than where Brady threw it from, and he caught it moving away from the sideline.
I think he was blowing the whistle to tell Rex to get his fat ass out of his way.
 

singaporesoxfan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2004
11,889
Washington, DC
Link



NFL finally gets around to that whole "Yep we screwed up once again" apology.

And looks like Football Zebras, Mike Pereira, et al were all right. Should have been time left.
The fans mentioned in the article defending the decision and "explaining" the rule wrongly should just have used Occam's Razor, instead of tying themselves up in knots trying to interpret down by contact or forward progress (neither of which was ever an issue here). Given what we had seen up to that point, was it more likely that the ref screwed it up or that the ref correctly applied an interpretation of an arcane rule?