Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 63
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,087
    vCash
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    No, I said it the way I meant it.

    Now if we want to discuss whether the rule that says all scoring plays must be reviewed and this wasn't because the rule that says if it is over the top of the uprights removes it from consideration, thereby creating an exception to the scoring review rule that is one thing, but anyway, I believe they got the call right.
    Whether they got the call right or wrong is irrelevant. There is a rule that coaches can't challenge field goals that go over the uprights. They removed the ability for coaches to challenge scoring plays because the NFL changed the rules to review every scoring play anyway. Ergo the new "review every score" rule would supersede the old rule, logically. (I'll entertain claims that nothing the NFL does is logical).


    So either the new rule needs to be changed to read "most scoring plays will be reviewed, when the refs feel like it" or they need to review field goals.


    The technology exists to check. If the NFL is too poor to buy it maybe they should cut back on some of the multi million dollar contracts so they can afford it.


    The other guy who said something about positioning an object in 3D space requires multiple angles... you are correct, but 3D space is not the issue here, 2D space is. All they needed to know is if the ball crossed the line created by the edge of the upright or not.



    Say what you will about the NHL being locked out and whatnot, but they are WAY ahead of football when it comes to using camera technology to improve the game.


    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    168
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post


    The other guy who said something about positioning an object in 3D space requires multiple angles... you are correct, but 3D space is not the issue here, 2D space is. All they needed to know is if the ball crossed the line created by the edge of the upright or not.

    .
    It absolutely does require all 3 XYZ coordinates to be met. We know that Y was met due to height. But no single camera angle can determien the X and the Z coordinates.

    NFL should invest in camera in the dirt pointing straight up.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    Whether they got the call right or wrong is irrelevant. There is a rule that coaches can't challenge field goals that go over the uprights. They removed the ability for coaches to challenge scoring plays because the NFL changed the rules to review every scoring play anyway. Ergo the new "review every score" rule would supersede the old rule, logically. (I'll entertain claims that nothing the NFL does is logical).


    So either the new rule needs to be changed to read "most scoring plays will be reviewed, when the refs feel like it" or they need to review field goals.


    The technology exists to check. If the NFL is too poor to buy it maybe they should cut back on some of the multi million dollar contracts so they can afford it.


    The other guy who said something about positioning an object in 3D space requires multiple angles... you are correct, but 3D space is not the issue here, 2D space is. All they needed to know is if the ball crossed the line created by the edge of the upright or not.



    Say what you will about the NHL being locked out and whatnot, but they are WAY ahead of football when it comes to using camera technology to improve the game.
    the best view is the view directly below it wher ethe refs stand. give me the technology excuse all you want, they ahve the best view and got it right. field goals aren't reviewable, just like forward prgroess and what not.
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals


  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    6,039
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    ...There is a rule that coaches can't challenge field goals that go over the uprights. They removed the ability for coaches to challenge scoring plays because the NFL changed the rules to review every scoring play anyway. Ergo the new "review every score" rule would supersede the old rule, logically. (I'll entertain claims that nothing the NFL does is logical).


    So either the new rule needs to be changed to read "most scoring plays will be reviewed, when the refs feel like it" or they need to review field goals.


    The challenge rule does not apply. BB didn't throw the challenge flag, he didn't attempt to throw the challenge flag, the challenge flag is not the issue here. They are no longer allowed to challenge in this situation. All scoring challenges were made unnecessary by the scoring play review rule

    This particular situation appears to be an exception to the review rule.

    You believe lack of right to challenge is the issue.

    I believe it is the exception of not being able to review a FG over the uprights competing with the all scoring plays will be reviewed rule.

    I expect we are arguing the same point from a different perspective.

    BTW, on the technology issue, there are lots of refits that could be done today to assist officials in getting it right. I believe we will see some technological changes like electronic gadgets in balls to determine their position on the field to a greater degree, more cameras etc. in the near future to assist the officials. Lets hope anyway.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    168
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    the best view is the view directly below it wher ethe refs stand. give me the technology excuse all you want, they ahve the best view and got it right.
    Thats not necessarily the argument either. We all agree that was the call the ref made, but just like all other calls in a game we normally have a chance to go back and validate their call.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    42,208
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezekial View Post
    It is in the review clause that a kick that goes over the upright not reveiwable and the official standing under the post has the best view, his judgement is the final call. Just like the announcers stated.
    This.
    All I do is hit. I even hit your mother once. Yep, hit it good.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    13,654
    vCash
    1500
    Reviewable or not (its not, but whatever) it was too close regardless to overturn it, so it's a moot point.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    168
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by YEDB90 View Post
    Reviewable or not (its not, but whatever) it was too close regardless to overturn it, so it's a moot point.
    Exactly my secondary point. The camera angle required is not available.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,087
    vCash
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    the best view is the view directly below it wher ethe refs stand. give me the technology excuse all you want, they ahve the best view and got it right. field goals aren't reviewable, just like forward prgroess and what not.
    If the refs can see it by looking straight up, then a camera could be placed where the ref stands and offer the exact same data, without human bias.

    Period.


    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,087
    vCash
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    The challenge rule does not apply. BB didn't throw the challenge flag, he didn't attempt to throw the challenge flag, the challenge flag is not the issue here. They are no longer allowed to challenge in this situation. All scoring challenges were made unnecessary by the scoring play review rule

    This particular situation appears to be an exception to the review rule.

    You believe lack of right to challenge is the issue.

    I believe it is the exception of not being able to review a FG over the uprights competing with the all scoring plays will be reviewed rule.

    I expect we are arguing the same point from a different perspective.

    BTW, on the technology issue, there are lots of refits that could be done today to assist officials in getting it right. I believe we will see some technological changes like electronic gadgets in balls to determine their position on the field to a greater degree, more cameras etc. in the near future to assist the officials. Lets hope anyway.
    Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

    The rule is that coaches cannot challenge field goals that go over the uprights. Coaches cannot challenge any scoring play now (brand new this year) ergo the rule about not challenging field goals is null and void. It doesn't exist.

    The only rule that now exists is that all plays that result in a score will be reviewed by the box. Technically this means PATs need to be reviewed too. The NFL has been breaking its own rules every game.


    "Hater" is a term used by weak minded people in the face of legitimate criticism.
    -Scott van Pelt

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by PATSfaninPHL View Post
    Thats not necessarily the argument either. We all agree that was the call the ref made, but just like all other calls in a game we normally have a chance to go back and validate their call.
    no not like all other calls. there are some things that are not reviewable. this is one of them. this is not a call refs screw up. you look up the post and if the ball is on the outside it's not good. cant get easier than that
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals


  12. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    52,937
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    If the refs can see it by looking straight up, then a camera could be placed where the ref stands and offer the exact same data, without human bias.

    Period.
    cameras and repl;ays are in palce for the refs for calls they may not see. looking staright up is not one of them. why waste time, effort, energy and money putting a camera there for the miniscual amount of times it would actually be needed?
    30 Team Stadium Checklist: 10 to go

    1) Yankees 2) Orioles 3) Rays 4) Red Sox 5) Mets 6) Braves 7) Phillies 8) Nationals 9) Marlins 10) Pirates 11) Padres 12) Astros 13) Mariners 14) Twins 15) Cubs 16) White Sox 17) Cardinals 18) Indians 19) Tigers 20) Royals


  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    168
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    no not like all other calls. there are some things that are not reviewable. this is one of them. this is not a call refs screw up. you look up the post and if the ball is on the outside it's not good. cant get easier than that
    I'm aware that there are calls and plays that arent reviewable and I was speaking in gerneralities. But lets dive into that for a second...

    Why isnt forward progress reviewable? Most likely for the same reason a ball traveling over an upright is also not reviewable.

    The difference between the two being that a ball's location relative to an upright can EASILY be determined, as I said earlier, with a camera in the dirt pointing straight up, or one attached to the back of the upright pointing straight up.

    Forward progress, and even challanging the spot, on the other hand, is not as easily done. Not by a long shot. I believe the ball spot is still challangeable? Unless I missed something. And even then, unless its incredibly glaring which cannot be said about this field goal, the spot doesnt change.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Jersey
    Posts
    3,317
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Pinstripe power View Post
    cameras and repl;ays are in palce for the refs for calls they may not see. looking staright up is not one of them. why waste time, effort, energy and money putting a camera there for the miniscual amount of times it would actually be needed?
    To get the call right. That call could be the difference of a team winning the Super Bowl or not.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bolingbrook, IL
    Posts
    5,895
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bullseyed View Post
    If the refs can see it by looking straight up, then a camera could be placed where the ref stands and offer the exact same data, without human bias.

    Period.
    You couldn't put a camera there tho because the ref is there. The ref needs to be there to make the call.

    You could put one on the upright, but that would bring other factors into play since it isn't a totally fixed point.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •