|
Replies: 27
| visibility 1
|
Commissioner [996]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 866
Joined: 9/9/14
|
Yet another game ruined by officials
11
11
Feb 12, 2023, 10:17 PM
|
|
There has to be some kind of punishment for officials when they make ticky tack calls that completely ruin a good game.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [27325]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10114
Joined: 2/14/13
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
2
Feb 12, 2023, 10:19 PM
|
|
Punishment for doing what they are told?
Money decides these games outcomes well before they are played
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [244]
TigerPulse: 50%
Posts: 215
Joined: 4/15/12
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
Feb 12, 2023, 11:28 PM
|
|
How stupid!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1959]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1649
Joined: 1/8/01
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
1
Feb 15, 2023, 6:36 AM
|
|
How, stupid?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [666]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 780
Joined: 8/7/17
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
Feb 12, 2023, 10:19 PM
|
|
There was a leaked image showing Philly supposed to win this 38-35. Highly suspect the score is the same…
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [707]
TigerPulse: 77%
Posts: 1265
Joined: 11/25/22
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
Feb 15, 2023, 1:47 PM
|
|
How is that telling when the wrong team won? If the fix was in, KC could have missed the kick, gone to OT, and Philly could have kicked the FG instead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5072]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5618
Joined: 8/17/03
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
5
5
Feb 12, 2023, 11:53 PM
|
|
The defender straight up grabbed the jersey of the receiver as the receiver was starting his route. If that’s not defensive holding then what is? Even the defender admitted it was the right call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
By the definition of the word, there's "holding" on EVERY single play.
Feb 15, 2023, 1:18 PM
|
|
Either on the OL or in the secondary.
Holding is called when it prevents the other player from doing his job. It's up to referees to discern the difference, but they literally could call "holding" on every play.
Some folks seem to taking the word "holding" in a literal sense and not the definition of of the rule. The DB grabbed ("held") the jersey for a split second, but he did not stop or slow the WR from running his route.
Regardless, the ball was not catchable. Even if it was true holding in the football sense of the word, the flag should have been picked up considerg the ball wasn't catchable. When I watch the replay, I see a WR who couldn't have caught up to that ball even if he was running a straight line to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5072]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5618
Joined: 8/17/03
|
Re: By the definition of the word, there's "holding" on EVERY single play.
Feb 15, 2023, 1:27 PM
|
|
As I said in a comment below, the call was for defensive holding prior to the pass being thrown so whether the ball was catchable or not has no impact on the penalty. The ball being catchable has an impact on PI because that involves the defender interfering with the receivers ability to catch a ball that's already been thrown. For all we know, Mahomes threw a floater up because the receiver wasn't open and he didn't want to risk turning the ball over. That pass could've been completely different had the receiver not been held and he was open by a couple steps.
Also, you mention the definition of the rule, and the rule doesn't say anything about it being required for the receiver to be stopped or slowed down. I agree, it's not a very exciting way for a game to end, but that doesn't mean the refs should just completely ignore all penalties in that situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67844]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115473
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
Feb 13, 2023, 8:16 AM
|
|
what got me was Ted Valentine prancing on the field after he made that call. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1655]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1824
Joined: 12/9/15
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
Feb 13, 2023, 11:42 PM
|
|
why exactly was the game ruined?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
You ever go to a movie and its good until
Feb 15, 2023, 1:20 PM
|
|
some sort of dumb ending? That ending ruins the movie.
The call gave the Chiefs the opportunity to run the clock out. It ruined the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5032]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3552
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: Yet another game ruined by officials
Feb 14, 2023, 8:28 AM
|
|
The CB admitted he was holding. Once you understand that, you have to accept that the referee called what he saw - which is according to the rules of the game. For the referee to do otherwise is an expectation (by those who disagree withe referee) for the integrity of the game to be ignored to comply with their personal desires - a most corrupt expectation for personal satisfaction or gain (as in gambling).
The referee saw the foul and called it. That is his job..... it's not his job to control the outcome or make for a more interesting finish - as his detractors would have him do.
If the integrity of the game is lost, then so is the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5454]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5196
Joined: 12/3/07
|
That’s not the problem.
Feb 14, 2023, 11:09 AM
|
|
The problem is consistency. Plenty of similar events went uncalled throughout the entire game, then they call that ticky tack foul.
I don’t know how you solve that when human error is involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5032]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3552
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: That’s not the problem.
Feb 14, 2023, 12:58 PM
|
|
I agree that the problem is one of consistency - not one of intentionally changing the outcome. So, the complaints should be about consistency, not about pointing to an admitted and correct call as "ticky tack".
Of course, the tin foil hat crowd can suggest that the referees were making no-calls early in the game in order to lure the Chiefs into committing penalties late in the game in order to beat them if theytook the bait.
I'd surely like to see consistency in all sports, but human error won't allow it. Also,f the referees called every penalty throughout the game, then many would complain that the referees were slowing down the game and killing a team's momentum.
Jusst enjoy the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5454]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5196
Joined: 12/3/07
|
I agree with most of what you said.
Feb 14, 2023, 8:15 PM
|
|
Though I think the reason there are so many actual infractions that occur is because the players generally get away with it. So by the refs not calling penalties, it begets more infractions. I suppose the actual solution to maintain consistency is to call a penalty on EVERY infraction. But to enact that with infractions happening on every play would be ridiculous. The game would be 6 hours long. Everyone playing, and everyone watching, would be annoyed. Yet over time that would change players’ mindsets and they would stop committing so many infractions because they know they are unlikely to get away with it. I have no idea how many seasons of calling penalties like that would take to correct the problem.
But let’s be honest, ain’t nobody have time for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
He admitted to "holding", but he didn't think it changed the play.
Feb 15, 2023, 1:55 AM
[ in reply to Re: Yet another game ruined by officials ] |
|
The WR wasn't impeded and the ball wasn't catchable. The flag should have been picked up if nothing else.
It happens in all sports - flags and whistles get a little more restricted in end of game situations. But again, either way, when the ball isn't catchable, then the flag should be picked up.
Horrible way to end the game. It was like a great movie with a terrible ending. You end up not liking the movie, and it gets bad ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5032]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3552
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: He admitted to "holding", but he didn't think it changed the play.
1
Feb 15, 2023, 9:49 AM
|
|
Whether a ball is catchable or not is often misjudged. At the moment of the ball flying over the receiver's hands out of reach doesn't (to me) tell the whole story. If the receiver's progress is not impeded, then no harm/no foul.
But when the receiver's progress is impeded, then there is cause for a penalty. Often a play is based on QB/WR timing - the QB expects the WR to be at a certain position with a given depth (or spot) and he throws the ball to that spot. If the receiver's progress is impeded, I think that's interference. Mahomes threw the ball while the receiver was being held, indicating to me that it was a timing route.
Even though I don't think if unimpeded the receiver could have gotten to the ball, I'm not good enough to state emphatically that the receiver could not have done so if the defender hadn't mugged him. Apparently, neither was the referee.
Jamming or chucking a receiver and remaining in contact with him for the first 5 yards of his route is OK unless the receiver gets a step on the defender. If (as in this case) the receiver gets a step on the defender, the defender must break contact. When this penalty happened was after the reeiver had gotten a step on the defender and the defender grabbed him from behind..... shoud be an automatic penalty.
As a former receiver, I admit I have a slight bias in favor of letting a receiver run his route and the defender should challenge his catch - not his route. IOW, as a defender, let the receiver take you to the ball and play the ball, not the receiver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
It's all good.
Feb 15, 2023, 1:08 PM
|
|
Please watch the replay.
The non-impeding part is pretty simple to see. He did momentarily grab the jersey, but the WR was not slowed in his route.
The WR could have run a free route and still not have caught up to that pass under duress.
That's what I see everytime I watch the replay. I agree with the TV crew. Bad call on several levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5072]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5618
Joined: 8/17/03
|
Re: It's all good.
1
Feb 15, 2023, 1:16 PM
|
|
I'm not trying to be a smartass, but how exactly can you tell whether or not the receiver was slowed in his route? I don't see how this could possibly be known unless you have a timed comparison of him running this exact route without being held to compare to how long it took him during this play.
Besides, the NFL rule for defensive holding doesn't say anything about the holding impacting the receivers route. From the NFL rules:
ARTICLE 6. DEFENSIVE HOLDING
It is a foul for defensive holding if:
a defensive player tackles or holds any opponent other than a runner, except as permitted in Article 5.
https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/defensive-holding/#:~:text=ARTICLE%206.-,DEFENSIVE%20HOLDING,as%20permitted%20in%20Article%205.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5072]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5618
Joined: 8/17/03
|
Re: He admitted to "holding", but he didn't think it changed the play.
1
Feb 15, 2023, 1:09 PM
[ in reply to He admitted to "holding", but he didn't think it changed the play. ] |
|
The call was defensive holding before the ball was thrown so whether the pass was catchable or not has nothing to do with the call. The type of pass thrown in that situation can differ based on how open the receiver is. In this instance, the receiver gets held up so Mahomes throws a safer ball that had no chance of being intercepted.
I'm also not sure how you can conclude that the receiver wasn't impeded. I'd imagine that having someone tug on your jersey as you try to run would at least slow you down by a step or 2. Who's to say that without the hold the receiver doesn't get a step or 2 ahead of the receiver which results in Mahomes throwing a different type of pass? The defender must have been concerned over this possibly or else he wouldn't have held.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
I concluded whAt I did based on what I saw. The WR
Feb 15, 2023, 3:01 PM
|
|
was not slowed or impeded in any way. He did his 360 deg turn and his steps were never hindered. Please re-watch that video, and you can CLEARLY see he did lose any steps at all.
The flag was thrown, as you said, during the play. Fair enough, but it should have been picked up. There's a reason the "uncatchable" part is in the rule, and that was a classic example. No way was JuJu getting to that ball. No way. If the ball was catchable, then ok, but it wasn't, sooo...
And again, there is NEVER a play where someone isn't grasping a jersey. It's a matter of the effects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1020]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1187
Joined: 1/3/19
|
It absolutely changed the likely outcome of the play.
1
Feb 15, 2023, 1:28 PM
[ in reply to He admitted to "holding", but he didn't think it changed the play. ] |
|
There were two holds by the same defender. One coming off the line and the second when the receiver made his break toward the corner.
The defender admitted it and said he hoped he could get away with it.
End of story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
No sir. No holding penalties on that play.
Feb 15, 2023, 3:04 PM
|
|
And that's precisely why the announcers were so adamant, and there's still half the nation talking about it.
You're right. End of story. It.s over and it DID impact the outcome. Even if you want to call holding, then okay, but the ball was nowhere near catchable, and the DB did nothing to prevent the WR from getting here.
It was a bad call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1487]
TigerPulse: 76%
Posts: 1995
Joined: 1/2/23
|
And too, the DB did admit he grabbed the jerset, but he also
Feb 15, 2023, 3:07 PM
[ in reply to It absolutely changed the likely outcome of the play. ] |
|
said he didn't think it impacted the play.
The key is the ball wasn't catchable. Justin Jefferson could have had a free release, and he wasn't getting to that ball.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5032]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3552
Joined: 7/7/12
|
Re: And too, the DB did admit he grabbed the jerset, but he also
Feb 15, 2023, 5:27 PM
|
|
We all agree that the ball wasn't catchable as thrown, but consider the comment from 2003:
The call was defensive holding before the ball was thrown so whether the pass was catchable or not has nothing to do with the call. The type of pass thrown in that situation can differ based on how open the receiver is. In this instance, the receiver gets held up so Mahomes throws a safer ball that had no chance of being intercepted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 27
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
