Triplette Explanation (Prepare Yourselves) (merge)

[mirobi]

I thought the rules were that in the 2 minute warning all scoring plays are reviewed. the refs didn't call it  a TD down at the one so why did it get reviewed? just curious what i missed or don't understand the rule

[HungarianColtsFan]

I'va already posted this picture in an other thread:

 

Mr. Triplette, take a seat:

 

Anyway, that call took away our D's momentum...so if we look strictly the numbers it hasn't influenced the outcome, but IMO it changed the game mentally and not in Colts' favor. That was a bad call, and league's apology won't make us feeling better. 

[lollygagger8]

 

[IUfan_Charlie]

That intentional grounding no call was almost as bad. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

I've got still pix of mistakes, including Chapmans left hand on Green_Ellis right foot to trip his balance.  Let's say I've never seen such a lopsided imbalance of bad calls.  But I'm still not going to be one of those who blame refs for handing a victory to the other team.  We came to life and made a game of it, yet never was I thinking we were in control and ready to step on their throat and take the game.  They made plays, we didn't.  Yes, they had help, but that happens.  The imbalance favoring the opponent is what still strikes me.

 

Ok, shoot.  I'll throw one pic up and my bridge is built... now I'll cross and get over it. (see a blue glove on a black shoe?)

 

[Coffeedrinker]

I thought the rules were that in the 2 minute warning all scoring plays are reviewed. the refs didn't call it  a TD down at the one so why did it get reviewed? just curious what i missed or don't understand the rule

All scoring plays are reviewed no matter when they happen during the game.  Cincy called for the review of this play because it was ruled, correctly, on the field that the player was down by contact.  So it was not a scoring a play when Cincy threw the red flag.

[Old Colt]

He's a *.

Yes he is......  unfortunately it wouldn't have made any difference in the long run of this game....  defense was still terrible and offense was off until Ben's Gals went into prevent ......

[Coffeedrinker]

I'va already posted this picture in an other thread:

 

Mr. Triplette, take a seat:

 

Anyway, that call took away our D's momentum...so if we look strictly the numbers it hasn't influenced the outcome, but IMO it changed the game mentally and not in Colts' favor. That was a bad call, and league's apology won't make us feeling better. 

Nice pic.

 

You know, coaches all over the NFL say that most games come down to 5 or 6 plays, if the other team makes those 5 or 6 plays they win the game.  When the Colts make those 5 or 6 plays and they get overturned or become non calls the other team still wins.

 

There is not much to be done, and if the Colts played in the 1st half how they played in the 2nd half it may not have been as much an issue.  But it's still frustrating.

[The Fish]

But guys, he looked at the goal line. That's what he looked at.

 

 

He needs a new line of work.

[HungarianColtsFan]

Nice pic.

 

You know, coaches all over the NFL say that most games come down to 5 or 6 plays, if the other team makes those 5 or 6 plays they win the game.  When the Colts make those 5 or 6 plays and they get overturned or become non calls the other team still wins.

 

There is not much to be done, and if the Colts played in the 1st half how they played in the 2nd half it may not have been as much an issue.  But it's still frustrating.

 

I can't look it back, but as far as I can remember in Luck era, when our 1st scoring opportunity was FG-attempt and AV missed it, we lost the game. It would be nice if someone could look it back and check it.

No, I don't blame AV, the whole team played poorly in the first half, and only our O came back to life in 2nd. Less drops, more FG-attempts, and we had a real chance to win. 

[OffensivelyPC]

That intentional grounding no call was almost as bad. 

It really was.  Like if you remember the 49ers/Saints game, those were at least close, so to call or not call them, it was excusable.  Dalton dropped straight back 3 steps before he threw it to the sidelines.  Like there was little to no lateral movement. 

 

Pretty sure those calls are reviewable, so I don't know why we didn't throw the red flag.

[pgt_rob]

He will probably be in the super bowl game for his awesome work officiating.

[sfergson727]

That intentional grounding no call was almost as bad.

Absolutely! How in the heck can the QB be out of the pocket when he dropped straight back. Calling Triplette a * is an insult to stupid people.

[JoKeR]

Considering Trip's history of making terrible calls with no punishments, he's not a ref but a professional manipulator, IMO. It could point to something bigger going on behind the scenes.

[IndyD4U]

Terrible piece of officiating to say the least!

[Coltswarriors]

Yes he is......  unfortunately it wouldn't have made any difference in the long run of this game....  defense was still terrible and offense was off until Ben's Gals went into prevent ......

 

You're probably right, but you never know.

 

Colts wouldn't have wasted their timeouts on our last drive and if our defense could get a 3 & out (lol) we would of had a chance in the end.

 

Obviously none of that matters & it's all hypotheticals, but whatever.

[JoKeR]

It's hard to predict what would've happened if Trips didn't give the TD to the Bengals.

In a way, if you keep going back to the teams mistakes, it lets a Trips off the hook.

This isn't about us winning or loosing, it's about the integrity of the game.

[GoColts8818]

It's hard to predict what would've happened if Trips didn't give the TD to the Bengals.

In a way, if you keep going back to the teams mistakes, it lets a Trips off the hook.

This isn't about us winning or loosing, it's about the integrity of the game.

exactly, like I said before just because he didn't cost us the game doesn't make it okay.

[sfergson727]

My concern is that because his huge goof did not affect the outcome of the game, it will be ignored by the NFL. I've been watching NFL Network off and on throughout the morning, and have not heard one word about it.

To me, considering how badly Triplette has screwed up this season, let alone his history, this story should be leading the discussion on what needs to be done to improve the officials in the NFL.

Personally, I feel justice will not be served until Triplette is out of the league.

[dw49]

All scoring plays are reviewed no matter when they happen during the game.  Cincy called for the review of this play because it was ruled, correctly, on the field that the player was down by contact.  So it was not a scoring a play when Cincy threw the red flag.

 

 

No.. it was all the booth and Tripplet. You forgot it was in the last two minutes of the half.

[House]

My concern is that because his huge goof did not affect the outcome of the game, it will be ignored by the NFL. I've been watching NFL Network off and on throughout the morning, and have not heard one word about it.

To me, considering how badly Triplette has screwed up this season, let alone his history, this story should be leading the discussion on what needs to be done to improve the officials in the NFL.

Personally, I feel justice will not be served until Triplette is out of the league.

I'm not sure how any one could say that call didn't effect the outcome of the game. They had a free 7 points spotted to them. If that 7 isn't there, we tied the game at one point.

Totally different equation being tied than being down 7.

[sfergson727]

I'm not sure how any one could say that call didn't effect the outcome of the game. They had a free 7 points spotted to them. If that 7 isn't there, we tied the game at one point.

Totally different equation being tied than being down 7.

I meant simply by the final score. There is no question that the mental aspect of being raped by the ref played mind games with the players during halftime.

[JoKeR]

exactly, like I said before just because he didn't cost us the game doesn't make it okay.

Yep but I'm not so sure he didn't cost us the game. I do think this issue is bigger than the outcome of this game.

[FanFromtheWasteland]

No question it didn't cost us the game but just because it didn't cost us the game doesn't make it okay. This is the second week in a row that this official has messed up in a major way. Add to that his other major mistakes (the blown coin flip on Thanksgiving and the flag in a player's eye) and I think the league has to do something here. I thought I read he was on probation or something like that after the Redskins/Giants game anyways but I don't now. He needs to be at the very least demoted (which the league does do) or fired not some token he wont get the work the Super Bowl punishment that the league hands out with officials from time-to-time because there was no danger of that happening to start with.

Now he will be on double secret probation.

Never have neen one to wish ill on someone, but in his case i will make an exception. Cant some team run an out rout or swing pass in his direction and put him out of our misery?

[Coffeedrinker]

No.. it was all the booth and Tripplet. You forgot it was in the last two minutes of the half.

I did forget.

[Thewholefnshow28]

After reading Triplette's explanation, when they initially made the call a ref must have incorrectly ruled another player, not Chapman, as the player who touched The Lawfirm and ruled him down. Then when Triplette went to review the play he must have been specially looking for that player that was touching The Lawfirm to rule him down by contact.  He obviously did not see that player and in his mind that was the irrefutable proof that was needed to change the call on the field.  

 

It is the only logical thing I can come up with.  If you are told X player touched Y player so he is down by contact and you review the play and see that X player did not touch Y player then in your mind he is not down by contact. I wonder how much this is due to NFL review policies.  I wonder what their procedures for cases like this.  Does it say they only look for the exact ruling that is on the field and not allow them to look at the entire play?

 

This whole crew failed on that play because they probably did not even identify the correct player who initially contacted the Lawfirm. 

[sfergson727]

After reading Triplette's explanation, when they initially made the call a ref must have incorrectly ruled another player, not Chapman, as the player who touched The Lawfirm and ruled him down. Then when Triplette went to review the play he must have been specially looking for that player that was touching The Lawfirm to rule him down by contact.  He obviously did not see that player and in his mind that was the irrefutable proof that was needed to change the call on the field.  

 

It is the only logical thing I can come up with.  If you are told X player touched Y player so he is down by contact and you review the play and see that X player did not touch Y player then in your mind he is not down by contact. I wonder how much this is due to NFL review policies.  I wonder what their procedures for cases like this.  Does it say they only look for the exact ruling that is on the field and not allow them to look at the entire play?

 

This whole crew failed on that play because they probably did not even identify the correct player who initially contacted the Lawfirm.

Even so, wouldn't you think that he would look and see why the ball carrier lost his footing? They should have looked at the play in it's entirety. By his explanation, he looked to see if any colt touched him after his knee hit the ground and he squirmed into the end zone.

[OffensivelyPC]

After reading Triplette's explanation, when they initially made the call a ref must have incorrectly ruled another player, not Chapman, as the player who touched The Lawfirm and ruled him down. Then when Triplette went to review the play he must have been specially looking for that player that was touching The Lawfirm to rule him down by contact.  He obviously did not see that player and in his mind that was the irrefutable proof that was needed to change the call on the field.  

 

It is the only logical thing I can come up with.  If you are told X player touched Y player so he is down by contact and you review the play and see that X player did not touch Y player then in your mind he is not down by contact. I wonder how much this is due to NFL review policies.  I wonder what their procedures for cases like this.  Does it say they only look for the exact ruling that is on the field and not allow them to look at the entire play?

 

This whole crew failed on that play because they probably did not even identify the correct player who initially contacted the Lawfirm. 

That still doesn't matter.  You don't escape the correct ruling simply because the number on the jersey.  All reviewable aspects of the play are reviewed, even parts of the play outside of the original issue up for review.  For instance, if Cincinnati had 12 men on the field that was originally missed, then they would have reviewed it and said something to the effect that "while the ball carrier (a) was down by contact (b) was not touched and broke the plane for a touchdown, there were 12 men on the field.  Thus, Cincinnati will be assessed a 10 yard penalty from the previous spot of the ball.  Replay 4th down."

 

So even if it the referee called him down by contact, the play should have been upheld.  The only difference would have been that the official stats would have credited chapman with the tackle instead of whomever the referee originally believed it to be.

[HOZER]

Now Now lets not get the Refs mad they may go on strike again!!!!

[OffensivelyPC]

My whole issue (other than the fact that he clearly did not consult all available camera angles) with this is the "indisputable visual evidence" bit.  He had to have indisputable evidence that BJGE was not touched.  Thus, he had to look at all angles, and other than the aerial angle that clearly shows Chapman touched BJGE before he went down, none of hte other angles were conclusive one way or the other.  If you take out the aerial view and still say "I can't tell if he was touched or not" then the play stands.  End of discussion. 

[throwing BBZ]

Not even bothering reading it. It was ruled not a td. You are supposed to have indisputable evidence to overturn. There wasn't any cause Chapman clearly hit his foot!

They never showed us a pic of Chapman touching his foot.

But we saw enough to know he did.

Triplette said he wasn`t shown film of Chaps play. Someone upstairs screwed up.

[NewEra]

They never showed us a pic of Chapman touching his foot.

But we saw enough to know he did.

Triplette said he wasn`t shown film of Chaps play. Someone upstairs screwed up.

Agreed, but he should if asked to see the whole play from beginning to end

[dw49]

I did forget.

  

 

No big deal.

[coltsfanej]

Mistakes happen were all human ... but when they start overturning calls with ZERO CONCLUSIVE evidence they should not be fined they should be out of work for good - that is not a mistake it is crooked!

[coltsfanej]

Exactly. We all make mistakes. But we dont all review them. hindsight is 20 20 but not if u close ur eyes . What a punk. He's a joke. And I agree with those that say punish or fine. That is conduct detrimental to the league. Oh the bad language I'd use if I spoke with him

[GoColts8818]

Now he will be on double secret probation.

Never have neen one to wish ill on someone, but in his case i will make an exception. Cant some team run an out rout or swing pass in his direction and put him out of our misery?

He'll probably get the NFL's version of punishment for refs who mess up like this.  He can't work the Super Bowl.  Sorry but there was no danger of that happening to start with. 

 

I don't wish real harm to come to him physically but he's proven time and time again that he is just not good enough to do this job.  He needs to be at least demoted if not flat out fired. 

[Cynjin]

A league spokesman apparently told a USAtoday reporter that the reversal was a judgement call.  You bet it was, Bad Judgement.

[GoColts8818]

A league spokesman apparently told a USAtoday reporter that the reversal was a judgement call.  You bet it was, Bad Judgement.

Yeah not going to fly at least with me of course unless people raise a fire storm over it (namely the media who will just let it go) it will just go away. 

 

League is just protecting their own which in way is their job.  Kravitz said he was in the press box Sunday right in front of the league's official supervisors and when he over turned it he heard him yell out "What on earth are you doing?"

[Cynjin]

Yeah not going to fly at least with me of course unless people raise a fire storm over it (namely the media who will just let it go) it will just go away. 

 

League is just protecting their own which in way is their job.  Kravitz said he was in the press box Sunday right in front of the league's official supervisors and when he over turned it he heard him yell out "What on earth are you doing?"

 

I heard Kravitz say that too.  Pereia(sp?) the former head of officials also said that the call should not have been reversed. 

[Tomy]

I've got still pix of mistakes, including Chapmans left hand on Green_Ellis right foot to trip his balance.  Let's say I've never seen such a lopsided imbalance of bad calls.  But I'm still not going to be one of those who blame refs for handing a victory to the other team.  We came to life and made a game of it, yet never was I thinking we were in control and ready to step on their throat and take the game.  They made plays, we didn't.  Yes, they had help, but that happens.  The imbalance favoring the opponent is what still strikes me.

 

Ok, shoot.  I'll throw one pic up and my bridge is built... now I'll cross and get over it. (see a blue glove on a black shoe?)

 

 

It was a horrible call, but this pic is not accurate with respect to Chapman tripping up the back. Chapman grabbed Green-Ellis left foot which is the foot (toe) on the ground where he short stepped his toe and fell. This picture is after Chapman's tackle (foot grab)… just the timing of the pic looks like he is touching the right foot, but it already happened and the fall is beginning.