Week 12 (Game 11!): Patriots @ Vikings on Thursday

SemperFidelisSox

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
26,605
Boston, MA
Dak or Jimmy G are just as likely to do something stupid in January as Cousins. The Vikings could make a run.

But I’m still expecting KC or Buffalo to beat whoever comes out of the NFC.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
9,886
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Dak or Jimmy G are just as likely to do something stupid in January as Cousins. The Vikings could make a run.

But I’m still expecting KC or Buffalo to beat whoever comes out of the NFC.
KC Sure. I don't have nearly the same faith in Buffalo, I think they could easily lose to the Eagles, Cowboys, Vikings, Bucs or 49ers. I still don't see enough consistency in Josh Allen to pencil in playoff wins, even though he went god mode last postseason.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
47,222
If you need 10 minutes going microsecond by microsecond with a replay, you can’t overturn it. It’s crazy this isn’t simply part of the rules already.

And it’s shady as hell to have an NFL ref in the tv booth declaring huge calls as obvious before/while the real ref is taking those 10 minutes.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
31,872
Hingham, MA
If you need 10 minutes going microsecond by microsecond with a replay, you can’t overturn it. It’s crazy this isn’t simply part of the rules already.

And it’s shady as hell to have an NFL ref in the tv booth declaring huge calls as obvious before/while the real ref is taking those 10 minutes.
Back at the start of replay, wasn't there like a 90 second limit?
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
19,032
I don't know if the replay official is watching the television broadcast while he's evaluating replays during a review.

But in NO way was that "obvious". As I've said....it's the kind of thing that if the call on the field was an incompletion, you couldn't overturn it from a frame by frame replay. But the call on the field was a catch, and in no way should THAT have been overturned either.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
47,222
Back at the start of replay, wasn't there like a 90 second limit?
I’m not sure if it was 90 but there was definitely a clock. It very quickly became a joke because even then they took a long time, especially with worse angles and cameras back then.
 

Cotillion

lurker
Jun 11, 2019
3,362
His hand is under the red highlighted portion, if the ball is hitting the yellow highlight (ground) and then moves as it did, I can’t really lose it over the refs call.
View attachment 58105
There is no surviving the ground rule anymore. Even if the ball touches before that he completed all elements of a catch. He possesses the ball, he even re-reaches across the goal line (movement common to the game with control) and then his body, arm, hand, and a bunch of other stuff all hit the ground before the ball moves.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
23,935
Newton
I don't know if the replay official is watching the television broadcast while he's evaluating replays during a review.

But in NO way was that "obvious". As I've said....it's the kind of thing that if the call on the field was an incompletion, you couldn't overturn it from a frame by frame replay. But the call on the field was a catch, and in no way should THAT have been overturned either.
I don’t know either. But McCauley’s rant was so over the top and rushed before we saw all the angles that it would’ve been incredibly awkward for the league to uphold the call. They would’ve had to follow up with him after the review to ask what he was basing his opinion on and it would’ve opened the league up to massive criticism over a hugely important call in a prime time game again.
 

A Bad Man

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2016
932
As has been said, it’s all about needing “incontrovertible visual evidence” to overturn. And there is no way the evidence was incontrovertible. So it was a game-warpingly terrible call.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,233
I felt a lot worse after the games v Chicago and Baltimore.

The two ST fuckups, especially the KR TD, and some bad calls really added up.
People keep bringing up the KR TD without talking about the block in the back that wasn't called... but isn't that part of the reason that return happened?
The next return Slater was blocked in the back two times again without a call. The officiating in this game (besides the running into the punter) completely changed the outcome of this game multiple times.. at least a 14 point swing... the even said the ball hit the ground on the Henry catch when his hand was clearly under the ball which has been the standard for a catch since that rule has been in place... even if the ball moves.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,233
If you need 10 minutes going microsecond by microsecond with a replay, you can’t overturn it. It’s crazy this isn’t simply part of the rules already.

And it’s shady as hell to have an NFL ref in the tv booth declaring huge calls as obvious before/while the real ref is taking those 10 minutes.
The only reason the NFL has a former ref in the booth has been to confirm pretty much every call as far as I can tell. They add zero to the broadcast and might as well be a union rep.. calls were starting to get talked about because refs were (and still are) making a lot of bad calls or non calls so the NFL put their reps in the booth to make sure there's a positive voice for the officiating on basically every call now.
 

CFB_Rules

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2016
900
The only reason the NFL has a former ref in the booth has been to confirm pretty much every call as far as I can tell. They add zero to the broadcast and might as well be a union rep.. calls were starting to get talked about because refs were (and still are) making a lot of bad calls or non calls so the NFL put their reps in the booth to make sure there's a positive voice for the officiating on basically every call now.
If you think that’s the case you clearly never followed McAuley on Twitter. He lit up the NFL so often NBC had to tell him to stop.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
9,233
If you think that’s the case you clearly never followed McAuley on Twitter. He lit up the NFL so often NBC had to tell him to stop.
I guess I'm wrong but I feel like Mike Pereira, Blandino and others have rarely been critical and even when they disagree like to talk about how difficult it is to see in real time etc. etc.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
28,408
His hand is under the red highlighted portion, if the ball is hitting the yellow highlight (ground) and then moves as it did, I can’t really lose it over the refs call.
View attachment 58105
the review standard is what makes calls like this so bad….as you note it’s very unclear whether it touched ground. And it was called a catch. So what you have to conclude to overrule the call on field is way beyond what you can get to even on frame by frame.

whatever one thinks about the theoretically correct call, there’s not a real case there’s enough to meet review standard here
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
56,248
New York City
I guess I'm wrong but I feel like Mike Pereira, Blandino and others have rarely been critical and even when they disagree like to talk about how difficult it is to see in real time etc. etc.
They are rarely critical. You are absolutely correct.

And CFB's post about the NFL muzzling McAuley is actually proof that these guys are just propaganda arms. Maybe at one time McAuley told it like it was. But now he's just a mouthpiece. Baghdad Bob.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
23,935
Newton
Perreira was the first guy doing this IIRC and remains a league apart from these other former refs. He knows he’s not supposed to rock the boat too much but that’s no different than any other announcer and we shouldn’t expect these guys to be Eck level candid for every play in the booth. What he does, unlike every other one (Gene, McCauley) is explain the context for why the refs called what they did, what they are probably reviewing under the hood and how it might play out. I find that valuable.

What I’ve never heard Perreira do is argue something unequivocally should be called a certain way like McCauley did last night because he knows that will invite criticism and potentially influence the league.
 

astrozombie

lurker
Sep 12, 2022
37
I have been down on the Pats this year, but they actually did pretty well in this loss. Overturning the Hunter TD was disappointing (I have given up on trying to understand NFL catch rules) and allowing that return for a TD was brutal, but other than those two things I think the Pats actually looked good. Not necessarily elite, but at least more competent than the recent past.
 

RobertS975

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
252
Beyond all of the non-calls, kickoff return, etc, etc.

Even with all of that, it came down to two plays:
1. The Henry non-TD.
2. The sack on 3rd and 7 at the MIN 30 with 2:15 left to make it 4th and 16 at the MIN 39

He had his hand under it. Four point swing. All else equal (yeah, I know), that’s 33-30.

And the sack made the conversion so, so tough. But with the Henry TD, you only need 3 to tie.

If they’re down 3, are they running shorter routes/quicker reads? 48 yarder is feasible. 57, less so.
Running into their punter was actually a pivotal play IMO. Instead of having to punt, the Vikings went down for a TD.
 

JOBU

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 22, 2021
5,174
I mean HH’s hand was under the football. With competent refs it’s a total different ballgame. Just mind blowing that they had conclusive evidence it was incomplete
58133
 

Minneapolis Millers

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,335
Twin Cities
Get a decent screen grab and you can see Henry’s hand under the end of the ball, but the middle of the ball is pretty clearly touching the turf. The problem for Pats fans (and with the rule, I think) is that it doesn’t start to shake loose until after he rolls over and secures it to his body.58138