Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Conversations are moderated for civility. We ask that you please stay on topic. For more info, see our Community Guidelines ×
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

New England (-9.5) at NY Jets (10-15-17)

oldunclemark

By oldunclemark
in NFL General

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 234
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Yehoodi Walk On

Yehoodi

Posted
Posted

Sorry guys, but it was the correct call on the touch back.

 

The ball was dislodged by an opponent, thus loss of possession, free and live ball, which requires wide receiver rules for possession (control plus two feet or knee) by either team, but did not happen until player was out of bounds in end zone

 

Thus ball is dead out of bounds in end zone

 

Result of play, offensive player looses control in the field of play, is dead out of bounds in end zone before either team gains possession,  therefore touch back

 

Football is sequential, if you follow the dots it is easy to see the call is correct

 

Unusual event surely but correct call

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jvan1973 Ring of Honor

jvan1973

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Yehoodi said:

Sorry guys, but it was the correct call on the touch back.

 

The ball was dislodged by an opponent, thus loss of possession, free and live ball, which requires wide receiver rules for possession (control plus two feet or knee) by either team, but did not happen until player was out of bounds in end zone

 

Thus ball is dead out of bounds in end zone

 

Result of play, offensive player looses control in the field of play, is dead out of bounds in end zone before either team gains possession,  therefore touch back

 

Football is sequential, if you follow the dots it is easy to see the call is correct

 

Unusual event surely but correct call

 

He already crossed the plane when the ball came out.   It wasn't the correct call.   The league will issue an apology.    Had that been the original call on the field,  maybe.   But they overturned it.   He was beyond the goal line

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yehoodi Walk On

Yehoodi

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

He already crossed the plane when the ball came out.   It wasn't the correct call.   The league will issue an apology.    Had that been the original call on the field,  maybe.   But they overturned it.   He was beyond the goal line

No he didn't, the ball was dislodged around the 1 yard line, best view is from side line shot, behind the down marker where you see Harmon,s number 30, sry am on phone but would find a link to the replay

 

When you look at the replay of the play, wait for that view and you see the tight end hunch forward with chest over 1 yard line and ball dislodged

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yehoodi Walk On

Yehoodi

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, coltsva said:

He lost the ball and got clear possession back before hitting the ground. TD!!!!

 

He may of gotten control of the ball before hitting the ground, but control is not possession.   Possession is both control and two feet down or a body part above the knee (not including palm) in the field of play. 

 

Alas, for the Jets, his right foot was in the air when he gained control of the ball with his right hand.  The next thing that happen was his left shoulder hitting out of bounds in the end zone in which case he is out of bounds and thus not in possession, no different than a WR only have one foot in bounds and the second foot (or other body part) lands out of bounds it is not possession and thus not a catch, even though he is in full control of the ball.

 

What is sad is the location that this happened on the field and the rule that a ball going out of the end zone is a touch back.

 

Had this exact same event occurred at the 5 yard line and he lands out of bounds at the say 3 yard line, it would still be jets ball with the loss of possession occurring at the 5 yard line, the play dead at the 3, and with no one in possession of the ball when it is dead at the 3, it reverts back to the offense at their last possession point which would be the 5 yard line in this example.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2006Coltsbestever Ring of Honor

2006Coltsbestever

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, Yehoodi said:

 

He may of gotten control of the ball before hitting the ground, but control is not possession.   Possession is both control and two feet down or a body part above the knee (not including palm) in the field of play. 

 

Alas, for the Jets, his right foot was in the air when he gained control of the ball with his right hand.  The next thing that happen was his left shoulder hitting out of bounds in the end zone in which case he is out of bounds and thus not in possession, no different than a WR only have one foot in bounds and the second foot (or other body part) lands out of bounds it is not possession and thus not a catch, even though he is in full control of the ball.

 

What is sad is the location that this happened on the field and the rule that a ball going out of the end zone is a touch back.

 

Had this exact same event occurred at the 5 yard line and he lands out of bounds at the say 3 yard line, it would still be jets ball with the loss of possession occurring at the 5 yard line, the play dead at the 3, and with no one in possession of the ball when it is dead at the 3, it reverts back to the offense at their last possession point which would be the 5 yard line in this example.   

 

He never fumbled, I thought the call was awful and so does everyone else on the ESPN and the NFL Channel. The ball moved but he still had it when he went down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yehoodi Walk On

Yehoodi

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

He never fumbled, I thought the call was awful and so does everyone else on the ESPN and the NFL Channel. The ball moved but he still had it when he went down.

 

It does not matter if he "fumbled" or not, if fumbled is to mean the ball has to land on the ground.  The only thing that matters was whether or not he lost possession of the ball, and he clearly did.  

 

It is no different than what we have seen hundreds of times, and once in the Jax game today, and that is when a ball is jarred from a runner before his knee goes down.  The analysis there is whether or not the ball is free from the guys control before his knee hits, if not, he is down, but if it is, even by the thickness of a credit card is out of his control, he has lost possession and thus his knee hitting does not make it down, it does not matter that it has to hit the ground before his knee hits just that is free from his hand at the hands of a opponent before the knee hits.  I am sure you have heard many times, "did the ball come out before his knee hit?"  It is the exact same rule

 

The key thing here was whether or not his regained possession before hitting out of bounds in the end zone.  If he did it is a touchdown, if he did not then its a touch back. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
2006Coltsbestever Ring of Honor

2006Coltsbestever

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Yehoodi said:

 

It does not matter if he "fumbled" or not, if fumbled is to mean the ball has to land on the ground.  The only thing that matters was whether or not he lost possession of the ball, and he clearly did.  

 

It is no different than what we have seen hundreds of times, and once in the Jax game today, and that is when a ball is jarred from a runner before his knee goes down.  The analysis there is whether or not the ball is free from the guys control before his knee hits, if not, he is down, but if it is, even by the thickness of a credit card is out of his control, he has lost possession and thus his knee hitting does not make it down, it does not matter that it has to hit the ground before his knee hits just that is free from his hand at the hands of a opponent before the knee hits.  I am sure you have heard many times, "did the ball come out before his knee hit?"  It is the exact same rule

 

The key thing here was whether or not his regained possession before hitting out of bounds in the end zone.  If he did it is a touchdown, if he did not then its a touch back. 

 

 

The ball was jarred loose for like half a second but then he still held it and had it when he landed. Mike Golic thought the call was horrible, everyone does. It was ruled a TD in the first place as well which makes this worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coffeedrinker Practice Squad

Coffeedrinker

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I know that may be the worse call I have ever seen in my 40 years of watching and there has been a lot of bad ones. Top 10 is safe here though lmao 

Tuck rule call was worse.  Same team. hmmmmmmmmm, interesting.

 

I guess when the owner of an NFL franchise is also one of the NFL's biggest sponsors, certain adjustments need to be made by the officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dgambill Practice Squad

dgambill

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

I have never seen that and I'll never see it again....because its so obviously wrong.

The ball can move in your arms..and you still possess it.....

..when you switch hands on a run...you still possess the ball even though its loose for a split second.

The tight end didn't have to re-establish possession...he HAD possession and he never lost possession

 

I'm sure some pencil pushing geek back in the NFL office mixed the pass reception rules with the run possession rules.

That person's name better never come out..at least not in New York....

The worst part of the thing is that you have to have Indisputable Evidence to overturn the call on the field of TD. Meaning you had to have evidence he did not have control of the ball when he hit the pylon....not the other way around that it was called a touchback and he had to have evidence that he had the ball. Sure the ball shuffled around but he clearly had it when he touched the pylon. Even if they couldn't see he had it when he touched the pylon they had to have evidence he DID NOT HAVE IT when he touched the pylon....not that he lost it but couldn't confirm he regained it before touching the pylon. They really outsmarted themselves there on that call....or shown how dumb they are....or worse if they had a bias in the NFL offices. I'm sure NE probably still wins the game because they are a better team than NY but man that changed the outcome completely after that. Just to shed some more light to the term Indisputable...here are the synonyms for the word:

 

(

incontrovertible, incontestable, undeniable, irrefutable, beyond dispute, unassailable, unquestionable, beyond question, indubitable, not in doubt, beyond doubt, beyond a shadow of a doubt, unarguable, airtight, watertight)

 

Does anyone...anyone think that applies to this call that they had enough evidence to overturn it??? Yeah that was just awful call. The fact it favored NE....well I'm sure others have a conspiracy theory on that one....I'm just upset they really screwed it up no matter what team it affected. Someone in NY should be suspended over that call...they clearly need to go back to training on what they are looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gramz Team Captain

Gramz

Posted
Posted

The problem with Riveron's explanation though is that it goes against the spirit of the NFL's replay rule, according to two people who used to hold Riveron's position. Dean Blandino and Mike Pereira, who both served as the NFL's head of officials at one point, both believe that Riveron blew it when he decided to overturn the ball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Tsarquise
      What about Leonard at safety?

      By Tsarquise · Posted

      Yeah, he isn't signed. 
    • shasta519
      How many games will the Colts win in 2024?

      By shasta519 · Posted

      I think HOU certainly got better. On defense, they added an All-Pro pass rusher in Hunter and also added Autry. They might have best ER duo in the NFL (though I say that without looking too in depth into it).   On offense, even if Diggs isn't still a great WR, you can do a lot worse at WR3. Nico had a legit breakout and Tank Dell was on pace for 1k+ yard/10+ TDs as a rookie. Even Noah Brown was productive. They have talent and depth there.   They also have a proven TE in Schultz, which I think gives their TE room the edge. Stover is also a prospect I liked. At this point, the Colts TE room doesn't have that TE1.   Colts have the better OL, but HOU is still a top 15 unit, possibly top 10 when healthy (which is the key). They dealt with injuries early last season, but once they got healthy, they were much better.   And at QB, Stroud is the more proven QB at this point.   Have to give them edge on offense overall. On defense, I would have to give them edge as well, due to their secondary. Right now, I think that's a big ? for the Colts.    I really don't see any major weakness, at least on paper. But they do have to face a gauntlet of a schedule, which probably caps their win total. Still, they should be the favorite in the AFCS.   But it's not just HOU, I think TEN is going to be much improved as well. And JAC has won 4/5 games against IND. Just overall, the AFCS should be really competitive, which makes picking up more wins tricky (vs. the past where at least one of those teams was typically bad).        
    • TheNewGuy
      What about Leonard at safety?

      By TheNewGuy · Posted

    • Creekside
      What about Leonard at safety?

      By Creekside · Posted

      Summer heat's gotten to him. Somebody call somebody!
    • IndyEV
      What about Leonard at safety?

      By IndyEV · Posted

      The only position Maniac can probably play now is on special teams! Put him on KO/KOR/Punt team! I’d kick the tires on that only if it were for vet min!

  • Members

    • Tsarquise

      Tsarquise 1,244

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jvan1973

      jvan1973 11,079

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Yoshinator

      Yoshinator 9,470

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • G8R

      G8R 57

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • il vecchio

      il vecchio 134

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • shasta519

      shasta519 5,325

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • #12.

      #12. 3,328

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtStrong2013

      ColtStrong2013 3,565

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BProland85

      BProland85 2,836

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 4,683

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...