2012 NFL Season

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

But if the ball goes over the upright, to me an extension of the upright means the ball hits the upright. To me it makes more sense to have the rule the other way.

if it goes over, you give the benefit of the doubt to the offense that the portion that would have hit an upright would have been enough to cause it to bounce in...that kick would not have been good if he had kicked it 4 feet lower but he did hit it over so it counts.

 

[The Rube]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

if it goes over, you give the benefit of the doubt to the offense that the portion that would have hit an upright would have been enough to cause it to bounce in...that kick would not have been good if he had kicked it 4 feet lower but he did hit it over so it counts.

And that kind of goes for any sport. Tie goes to the runner in baseball, goaltending in bouncyball, etc.

 

[Handyman]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Second game in a row decided by these **ssclowns. Yew hah.
If Bill didn't grab that jackanapes, Harbaugh would have.

Um if the ball went over the uprights it is good. The refs didnt screw you no matter how much you may think they did.

This is not a new rule folks it has been in play since I started watching football. (and is the same at all levels)

 

[UNH GH]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Rule 11, Section 4, Article 2:

(c) The entire ball must pass though the vertical plane of the goal, which is the area above the crossbar and between the uprights, or, if above the uprights, between their outside edges.

The ball was certainly above the uprights. So that means the ball has to be entirely between their outside edges.

I think one could certainly argue the ball wasn't fully between their outside edges. Enough to overturn, maybe not...but it's certainly not a definite field goal.

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Rule 11, Section 4, Article 2:

(c) The entire ball must pass though the vertical plane of the goal, which is the area above the crossbar and between the uprights, or, if above the uprights, between their outside edges.

The ball was certainly above the uprights. So that means the ball has to be entirely between their outside edges.

I think one could certainly argue the ball wasn't fully between their outside edges. Enough to overturn, maybe not...but it's certainly not a gimme.

The referee that was directly below the upright said it was, so I don't think you can argue that at all. And before you bring up their incompetence, standing under an upright is the same in HS, college, or NFL....

 

[UNH GH]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

You're going to tell me that definitively, that ball was completely between the outside edges of the uprights?

C'mon. There have been missed calls on field goals similar to this before. In all levels of football.

I'm not saying it was definitely wide. I'm just saying that it wasn't definitely good either.

It's borderline and deserves to be looked at via video review.

 

[The Rube]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

You're going to tell me that definitively, that ball was completely between the outside edges of the uprights?

C'mon. There have been missed calls on field goals similar to this before. In all levels of football.

I'm not saying it was definitely wide. I'm just saying that it wasn't definitely good either.

It's borderline and deserves to be looked at via video review.

I thought it was definitely in between the OUTSIDE edges. If the uprights were extended, would the ball have hit the upright? Probably.

 

[UNH GH]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Part of the ball certainly was in between. But the whole ball has to be in between, at least with how I read the rules.


And completely unrelated...but you would think the uprights would be another 3-5 feet higher. Balls go over them frequently, but not usually by more than that.

 

[The Rube]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Part of the ball certainly was in between. But the whole ball has to be in between, at least with how I read the rules.


And completely unrelated...but you would think the uprights would be another 3-5 feet higher. Balls go over them frequently, but not usually by more than that.

I read the rule as "the whole ball must be between the outside edges of the upright" which in this case, it was. And yeah, I wouldn't mind higher uprights. I don't know when or if they ever changed the height of the uprights (obviously they have changed the base), but with stronger kickers nowadays....not a bad idea.

 

[goldy_331]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Good job, Bill. A gentleman, like always.

He didn't flip off the ref, did he?

 

[Jon]

Um if the ball went over the uprights it is good. The refs didnt screw you no matter how much you may think they did.

This is not a new rule folks it has been in play since I started watching football. (and is the same at all levels)

In general, if you screw up calls all night, you do not get the benefit of the doubt. At all.

Does that clarify things, or do we need to bring out sock puppets.

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

The referee that was directly below the upright said it was, so I don't think you can argue that at all.

I'm not following this. Are you saying people can't argue it on here? Or that by rule, you cannot review it? By no means do I think it was an easy call, but I don't think simply standing where he does automatically gives him the best view of telling if it was good or not. He could have made a mistake, which is why it should at least be looked at on replay.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

It's borderline and deserves to be looked at via video review.

Not reviewable, by rule.

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Are the ratings down? Are people choosing not to buy tickets and do other things on Sundays? No? Then nothing changes.

Why anyone thinks "embarrassment" is going to stop a multi-billion dollar corporation from doing whatever the hell they want because it's football instead of a oil company or whatever is beyond me.

It's a good point, but when you have coaches breathing down the necks of their owners and owners seeing games like last night...

How do you think Bob Kraft feels today? One of if not the most influential owner in the NFL.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

I'm not following this. Are you saying people can't argue it on here? Or that by rule, you cannot review it? By no means do I think it was an easy call, but I don't think simply standing where he does automatically gives him the best view of telling if it was good or not. He could have made a mistake, which is why it should at least be looked at on replay.

actually it kinda does give him the best view. Who else can see if it is inside the uprights at the exact moment it crosses the upright. Tell me how any replay you saw could conceivably give you the same information? Perspective is very important on that call, no better view than looking straight up at the goal post.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

At least the Ravens didn't get 5 timeouts in the second half.

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

actually it kinda does give him the best view. Who else can see if it is inside the uprights at the exact moment it crosses the upright. Tell me how any replay you saw could conceivably give you the same information? Perspective is very important on that call, no better view than looking straight up at the goal post.

In regard to on-field officials, he might have the best view but that doesn't make it a great view like you and others seem to think. To have to call that live isn't easy. Replay should be used for instances of that IMO. The replay I saw told me the ball went over the upright, so by rule I think he got it right. But that play should be reviewable.

 

[JF_Gophers]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

Hey. The Bears won this weekend. Let's all just rejoice in that fact.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

In regard to on-field officials, he might have the best view but that doesn't make it a great view like you and others seem to think. To have to call that live isn't easy. Replay should be used for instances of that IMO. The replay I saw told me the ball went over the upright, so by rule I think he got it right. But that play should be reviewable.

Where are you going to set the cameras? Those in place for NBC couldn't be considered conclusive. When you watch the review, you don't know if the ball is over the posts completely or if it only appears to be outside the posts after it crosses the plane. You just don't know and it's based upon the placement of the cameras. Only if we have a cameras littering the stadiums will we ever get conclusive evidence. Until that happens, you have to trust the officials. As Brent said, the rule regarding field goals and the posts holds true regardless of what level these officials normally work.

I'm not wild about these replacement officials. They're blowing a lot of calls, impacting games because of those misses. That said, the field goal call is not something you can pin on them being replacement refs.

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NFL Season

I'm not blaming the replacement ref for that call. By all accounts, he got it right according to the rule. It's a difficult call for any ref, let alone a replacement ref. Because it's so difficult, I'm saying it should at least be reviewable. Just because I think it should be reviewable doesn't mean I think the review would have changed anything. At least if you review it, you don't have Belichick chasing after a ref and Wilfork going nuts.