Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Sign in to follow this  
ColtsSouljah

Rules Question - Doyle incompletion

Recommended Posts

So on the failed 3rd down conversion which sparked the disastrous kick that totally changed the game, I have a question.

 

Doyle did drop the ball but he was clearly interfered with. When Tenn challenged that it was incomplete, could the refs have ruled that it was P.I.? If not, could we have countered-challenged for P.I. when it was ruled incomplete?

That blown call really shows how a ref screw-up can totally change the game. Instead of us driving for a TD, we're demoralized by a blocked kick return for a TD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, it WAS pass interference.  At the same time, I'd bet if we challenged the refs would refuse to admit it.  And, yeah, what's with all the thread locking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ColtsSouljah said:

So on the failed 3rd down conversion which sparked the disastrous kick that totally changed the game, I have a question.

 

Doyle did drop the ball but he was clearly interfered with. When Tenn challenged that it was incomplete, could the refs have ruled that it was P.I.? If not, could we have countered-challenged for P.I. when it was ruled incomplete?

That blown call really shows how a ref screw-up can totally change the game. Instead of us driving for a TD, we're demoralized by a blocked kick return for a TD.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but this is my understanding.  When you challenge a play (eg. challenging what was ruled a catch as being an incompletion), that's all the refs can review.  If there was holding on the pass during that play, that can't be reviewed.  The only thing they can review is if there's a completion or not.  So even if there are other aspects to the play that weren't called correctly, those can't be reviewed during a challenge.

 

9 minutes ago, bluebombers87 said:

Not sure why this post was locked. Game was effectively over but anyways.

 

There needs to be better consistency on these calls.

 

3 minutes ago, Turftoe said:

IMO, it WAS pass interference.  At the same time, I'd bet if we challenged the refs would refuse to admit it.  And, yeah, what's with all the thread locking?

Forum policy is to lock any threads that are created during a game because it's usually just posts about what happens during the game, which should be done in the game day thread.  If it isn't like that, they'll be re-opened after the game to allow the discussion to take place, as is what happened here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

Maybe I'm wrong here, but this is my understanding.  When you challenge a play (eg. challenging what was ruled a catch as being an incompletion), that's all the refs can review.  If there was holding on the pass during that play, that can't be reviewed.  The only thing they can review is if there's a completion or not.  So even if there are other aspects to the play that weren't called correctly, those can't be reviewed during a challenge.

 

 

Forum policy is to lock any threads that are created during a game because it's usually just posts about what happens during the game, which should be done in the game day thread.  If it isn't like that, they'll be re-opened after the game to allow the discussion to take place, as is what happened here

May I request that the policy be revised? This post was tantamount to having a sidebar conversation in a very crowded room. It didn’t detract from the Gameday thread and participants could willingly post there during the game or take part after the game has concluded. Just a suggestion

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

Maybe I'm wrong here, but this is my understanding.  When you challenge a play (eg. challenging what was ruled a catch as being an incompletion), that's all the refs can review.  If there was holding on the pass during that play, that can't be reviewed.  The only thing they can review is if there's a completion or not.  So even if there are other aspects to the play that weren't called correctly, those can't be reviewed during a challenge.

 

 

Forum policy is to lock any threads that are created during a game because it's usually just posts about what happens during the game, which should be done in the game day thread.  If it isn't like that, they'll be re-opened after the game to allow the discussion to take place, as is what happened here

I could be wrong but I think once you challenge something you can review all aspects of the play pertaining to challenges.  Since PI is reviewable I think that would be covered by that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bluebombers87 said:

May I request that the policy be revised? This post was tantamount to having a sidebar conversation in a very crowded room. It didn’t detract from the Gameday thread and participants could willingly post there during the game or take part after the game has concluded. Just a suggestion

I understand what you're saying, but the post was re-opened for discussion after the game was over to allow the discussion to take place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GoColts8818 said:

I could be wrong but I think once you challenge something you can review all aspects of the play pertaining to challenges.  Since PI is reviewable I think that would be covered by that.  

But wouldn't you have to state that when challenging?  The refs ask the coach what they want to challenge.  So, if I understand correctly, the order would have to be Tennessee challenges that there was no catch, then Indy would challenge that there was PI?  Not sure how it all works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

I understand what you're saying, but the post was re-opened for discussion after the game was over to allow the discussion to take place.

Fair enough

3 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

But wouldn't you have to state that when challenging?  The refs ask the coach what they want to challenge.  So, if I understand correctly, the order would have to be Tennessee challenges that there was no catch, then Indy would challenge that there was PI?  Not sure how it all works

If it wasn’t so much of a joke challenging PIs this year we prolly would’ve had a chance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

But wouldn't you have to state that when challenging?  The refs ask the coach what they want to challenge.  So, if I understand correctly, the order would have to be Tennessee challenges that there was no catch, then Indy would challenge that there was PI?  Not sure how it all works

Yeah but it’s like when you challenge being short of a first down.  Say they spotted the ball wrong respotted it but you were still short you would win the challenge because the ball moved but you didn’t get the first down which is what you challenged.  I’ve seen that happen in Colts games before.  

 

In theory then Frank would have had as much right to turn around and challenge the PI call.  I don’t think the NFL wants two reviews on the same call.  Again I could be wrong.  I am no expert on the NFL replay rules but I think I’ve heard the former officials say all aspects subject to review are reviewed on reviews before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

Maybe I'm wrong here, but this is my understanding.  When you challenge a play (eg. challenging what was ruled a catch as being an incompletion), that's all the refs can review.  If there was holding on the pass during that play, that can't be reviewed.  The only thing they can review is if there's a completion or not.  So even if there are other aspects to the play that weren't called correctly, those can't be reviewed during a challenge.

 

 

That does make sense; I do still wonder if we could have then challenged that it was P.I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was no pass attempt on the 3rd down prior to the FGA that was blocked and returned for a TD

 

JB stood in a nice pocket and wasted 3 seconds then scrambled to his left and lost 2 yards.

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Popular Now

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It is not obvious, neither does it make sense, sorry.   If your good OL can give your QB  comfortable 3 seconds, and he can gain another 2 or 3 seconds scrambling, the odds of the passing offense succeeding goes up. So, if the baseline time given by the OL goes up with good OL players, an offense will take it 100% of the time. I can't see why you cannot see it.
    • We could pay both though.. your looking at probably less than 40 mill a year for the two
    • Hmm...comebacks do not happen just because a team keeps doing onside kicks and keeps the ball, you know. Defenses give QB margins for error and keep their teams alive in games. Yes, you need the QB to finish the job but a sack or turnover generated by the DL can flip field position well if you have play makers that can get your QB the ball back.   Eli Manning 2007 and 2011, his comebacks do not happen if his D did not keep the score within striking distance for his 4th qtr. plays. Tom Brady, his 2014 comeback, down 10 in the 4th qtr. does not happen if his D does not force 3 and outs vs Russell Wilson.   Let us not diminish the value of playmakers on D just because the QB touches the ball every snap.
    • TE wouldn't make my top 5 positions of need.
  • Members

    • Glen

      Glen 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • boo2202

      boo2202 330

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NannyMcafee

      NannyMcafee 1,517

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 3,163

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 6,797

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Barry Sears

      Barry Sears 1,170

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Chloe6124

      Chloe6124 6,344

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • twfish

      twfish 1,787

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • HoosierHero

      HoosierHero 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • chad72

      chad72 10,682

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