NFL WipeOut 2012

[Zag]

[Jedo the Jedi]

The Chargers scored 22 and 38 points in the last two weeks. W. T. F? They wimped out against the Falcons?
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Chuck]

Field goal, Patriots!

[Chuck]

Touchdown, Patriots! The Ravens still have nothing.

[Zag]

Ooooo! Guess what would happen if the Ravens are a wipeout team!

[Chuck]

Touchdown, Ravens!

[Jedo the Jedi]

Maybe the Seahawks will be the Wipeout team?
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Jedo the Jedi]

Well, damn. I'm too proud to root against my own team. Zag prevails again, somehow.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Zag]

Hey Jaguar, how about the Packers being the wipeout? That would be pretty funny, eh?

Edit: Better still, if they just tie the Chargers and both teams are wipeouts. Now that would be awesome.

[Chuck]

Seahawks 7, Packers 3, twenty minutes left in the game.

[Chuck]

Field goal, Packers! The sole wipeout team is The Chargers.

[Quailman]

[Chuck]

[Suspence]

All I can say is WOW after the end of that game.
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[referee]

Don't say it, because you'll be wrong. The call is right.
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Jedo the Jedi]

Sooo not the right call. I'll argue 'til I'm blue in the face.

Though I'm not going to make this about the replacement refs. The regular ones could have made that mistake.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Suspence]

[Jedo the Jedi]

I've watched dozens of videos and commentaries now, and nearly everybody has said that call was a joke. I saw it on my first watch of the replay. 1) It's not a simultaneous catch. Tate barely had his arm on Jennings' arm. 2) Tate made a major offensive pass interference before the ball even got to them. It's textbook.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[referee]

1) Airborne control is not control, the catch is simultaneous. 2) Tate's hands touch the defender's back, yes, but he doesn't push. The defender falls down.

Touchdown.
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Jedo*]

1) Tate still doesn't get both hands on the ball until after they are on the ground. 2) It's a very deliberate push.

You are going to disagree with the majority of commentators who say the same thing? The guys who have a trained eye for these sort of things?

You must be a Seahawks fan.

[Suspence]

I'd need to see it frame-by-frame, but there was a good period of time where Tate only had one hand on the ball. If the defender has both feet or a body part on the ground while Tate has only one hand, surely the "catch" is not simultaneous.
_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[referee]

The guys that have a trained eye for those sort of things, as you say, are not the ones holding a microphone and telling us their thoughs.

If you want to know where my allegiance is, look no further than at my screen name.
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Suspence]

This image clearly shows Tate's second hand nowhere near the ball, however, the defender doesn't have "possession" yet, as he has not hit the ground:

_________________
I hate people who try to write interesting things in their signature.

[Jaguar]

I pick what Zag's picking.... OK, I know that's not possible .

Arg. I'm just going to pick a bunch of teams and forget about stats and such and hope for the best. LOL. And it's a girl's prerogative to pick based on the colour of the uniforms.

For kicks I'm going to track how all the cats and birds do this week and maybe that will be my pick next week.

[Undercover Monk]

Yeah I think I may be too biased to count because I had a lonely pick in my picks league on the hawks but to me it def wasnt clear cut.

Jennings does not have possesion til his feet touched the ground at that point tate had a good grip on the ball. The only media personality I heard who thought it was a catch was Dan Dakich a local radio personality who commentates on ESPN for Big Ten basketball. Im not sure if it was the correct call but it isnt as cut and dry as people are making it out to be. Tate did deserve to be called for Offensive Pass Intereference but I cant recall ever seeing a OPI called on a hail mary....ever. Either way I hope this ends the lock out so we can stop talking about it.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning

[Jedo the Jedi]

From the NFL Rulebook:

Rule 8, Article 3, Item 5: Simultaneous Catch - It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control.

Notice that it doesn't say, "if a player gains control and gets both feet on the ground." It is only if a player gains control. Which brings us to...

Rule 8, Article 3: A forward pass is complete or intercepted if a player, who is inbounds: a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and b) ....

Jennings had control before Tate did. That's all that matters to say it wasn't caught by Tate. It doesn't have to be intercepted to say that Tate subsequently gained joint control.

Also, the commentators who have played football, the football players themselves, these also have a trained eye. How about the fact that one ref was signaling touch-back while the other was signaling touchdown? That's fine for you to support the refs, but they don't even agree with each other. It was not a catch.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Suspence]

That's pretty convincing. It is clear that Jennings had "control" of the ball before Tate.

That said, the NFL issued a statement today that agree with the ref's interpretation (although it said the game should have ended on the OPI, which should have been called.)

[referee]

how does the rulebook define "control"?
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Jedo the Jedi]

They don't have a definition for "control." What they do have is "a player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball" and "if a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession," and further, "secures possession of a pass, kick, or fumble in flight." (All from Rule 3, Section 2, Article 7)

So, that might be something they should clarify in the rules. As it stands, it would probably involve "firm grip of the ball" "in his hands or arms" "prior to the ball touching the ground." Suspence may also be correct about a difference in spirit and letter. They should at least admit these factors though.

And I think we should admit that part of the NFL's decision to affirm the call made is a political one of wanting to continue supporting the "replacement" refs. Obviously, we can't determine how much if any of that is contained in this decision, but I think we would be foolish not to admit the possibility.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[referee]

Well, that's why there are rules changes over the time. But the call is the right one by the rules.

Questions:

1) What would people say if this play had happened in the 1st quarter?

2) What would people say if this final play made the final score GB 28 - SEA 14?

3) What would people say if this game had been officiated by regular officials?
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Jedo the Jedi]

Why don't you show it's the right one by the rules instead of just making assertions? I've actually shown how the rules go against the call, at least by the letter. Show your different interpretation.

People would still say it was a bad call, just like they are doing about all the other bad calls going on around the league. I've seen plenty of games where there were blatantly bad calls made and upheld after review. The difference is usually that people get over them faster when they don't appear to affect the outcome of the game directly.

So, the answer to all of those questions is "the same." In this instance though, people are noting that these refs are not as knowledgeable, and that there has been a significant increase in the number of penalties and game delays while these refs figure out what they are supposed to do. I'm not really trying to conflate these issues, but we can talk about that if you want.

What about the ref who recently granted a challenge to the 49ers coach when he didn't have any timeouts left? And his response afterward that he knew he shouldn't have done it because a team has to have two timeouts to make a challenge? That's two strikes: he shouldn't have granted the challenge, and it doesn't require having two timeouts to do. I think something like that suggests this ref situation isn't up to snuff for the NFL.

Here are the issues: 1) these refs don't have the experience the regular refs do, and 2) they haven't been cleared for biases like the regular refs. In the case of the former, it's about time spent refereeing and about the level of play. They fail on both of those. In the case of the latter, they need to background check these people extensively as if they are the permanent refs. The fact that they haven't shows that the NFL doesn't expect this to be a long-term solution. Yes, they did catch that one referee before he participated in the Saints' game, but only just before he walked on the field. That should have been caught long before that.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[referee]

I, an official (that's where my name comes from), has told you the call is right. The NFL has told you the call is right. But nah, we're only defending our colleague/employee. As for the upholding, the wording the referee used indicates insufficient evidence to overturn the ruling on the field, which was a touchdown. You can argue whether that's true, but I agree. Note that you have to get conclusive evidence to overturn the call from a single take, you can not combine takes to reach the conclusion of reversing the ruling on the field.

The replacement officials are taken from the ranks of the officials in training. They're not getting random people from the street. Those people are still knowledgeable about the rules and the game. It's not their fault that their debut has been rushed, now is it?

It's very easy to blame the ref for your loss. But maybe, just maybe, you could have made it meaningless, and you didn't. There are dropped passes, missed tackles, fumbles... but no, it's one call that cost us the game. I dare you to get on a field and try to officiate a game, and see how easy it is (hint: It is not.). I double dog dare you. And no official will be able to quote the rulebook verbatim. They are human, not AIs which can download the rulebook and search for the relevant bit in nano-seconds. It's easy from the seat of your house to look for that bit and, based on the word "control", which isn't defined in the rulebook at all, declare that the call is a bad one.

I could have called you a GB fan as you called me a Seattle fan, based on "I'll argue 'til I'm blue in the face.", but I didn't, because that would be an uncalled assumption. But now you're calling the replacement officials biased. An official is allowed to root for a team, as long as he leaves his preferences outside of the game. They have to do their job with neutrality, they don't need to be a walking Switzerland 24/7.

If that play had been on the first quarter, it would have been forgotten at the next questionable call, and if the score was different, it would have died but now. But again, you are wrong on your assertment. Ask Jim Joyce about calls that don't affect the outcome of the game.
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Jedo the Jedi]

Just to get it out of the way, I know you are a referee. You can leave that out from now on.

You didn't bother to address the fact that two different judges gave different calls (touch back and touchdown), and it was only after the "discussion" with them that the referee made the call. After that, the booth reviewed and affirmed, and now the NFL. So, the problem with the review system is even though the call on the field may be incorrect, it stays unless there is "sufficient evidence" from a single take. (I saw the mistake on a single take, so I'm sure they could do the same.) That's why it's important for the referee to have discussed adequately with those two men who called the play different things.

I know those officials aren't from the street--my goodness--but they haven't spent as much time officiating as the regular officials. The regular officials have ten years of experience before making it to the NFL; the referee of that game only had nine, and the other officials even less than that. Why isn't the NFL holding to the same standard? Because they have to put somebody out there? It's desperation, and that desperation is shining forth.

It's not one call that cost the game. I mentioned that there were plenty of other bad calls going on around the league, this one just appeared "to affect the outcome of the game directly," as I said before. Listen though, there were 24 penalties in that game. There were also 24 penalties in the Ravens/Patriots game the night before. And these were significant penalties! The amount of penalty yards was averaging around 10 yards per penalty, so these weren't just false starts. That's significant. Either the teams are going crazy and forgetting how to play "cleanly," or the officials are making multiple bad calls. If it's the latter, then it's amounting to a series of questionable calls which can't be forgotten.

Finally, I know they can't quote the rulebook verbatim, but they should know the definitions well enough to deliberate what "possession" and "control" mean. While control isn't expressly defined, that doesn't stop them from deciding whether a person had "control" of a ball as they were falling out of bounds; so there's obviously enough of a working definition for them to decide in other instances. And you causally ignored my comment about the official who didn't even know enough of the rulebook to make a correct decision regarding challenges.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[Quailman]

The NFL said that the refs missed the offensive pass interference call.

The other part could have gone either way and was inconclusive.

[referee]

OK, the two officials making different signals is a mistake. But it is a procedural mistake. They should have agreed first, and then make the same signal. However, the other signal was not a Touchback signal, that is only one arm (kinda like a fair catch signal by a returner). That signal means "stop the clock", and I'll grant you this would be the right signal to do. Then you should discuss with your fellow official, and when you agree on something, call that.

The increase in the number and severity of penalties could also come from an NFL directive to be stricter, so that things that weren't called last year, are called this year, resulting in an increased number of penalties. In any case, I think the sample size is still too low to see if the increase is statistically significative. In the NFL case, you should at least remove the DPI penalties when trying to find the average yards per penalty, since those can distort the average too much.

The referee that made a rules mistake is bundled with the "no verbatim quoters" argument. In the pressure of the situation they remember a rule, because they don't have the benefit of stopping to consult the rulebook, and they remember it wrong. It can happen to the best official. It can happen to everyone. Officials aren't the only professionals that make mistakes.

And about the word 'control', it's not like that. See, the guy falls out of bounds, but it holds onto the ball. It would be a posession, once they fall, had it not been out of bounds, therefore, if they were pushed OB and would have fallen on the end zone otherwise, TD is called. If the ball falls down, it's incomplete either way.
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Jedo the Jedi]

Thank you. I can appreciate that response. These refs have made mistakes.

I confess, my response was a little over-the-top in response to your static comment. It wasn't initially about the refs for me, but eventually I did want you to admit these guys don't have their stuff all together. You'll notice though that I originally said the regular refs could have made the same mistake.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the call. I don't care if you are an official, I saw immediately how late Tate came to the ball, so it must boil down to a definition of control. I suppose that's something that should be shored up in the ever-expanding rulebook.
_________________
Paragon Tally: 19 mafia, 3 SKs (1 twice), 1 cultist, numerous chat scum...and counting.

[referee]

There are ref mistakes on every game, though some are more noticeable than others. What should be eradicated is that thought of "The officials cost us the game", because it is not true. There are a lot of factors in the outcome of the game.
_________________
Jan 21st, 2008: The pillaging continues.
Mar 4th, 2008: Rest in Peace, Gary Gygax. May your dice always roll a natural 20 wherever you are.

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

[Chuck]

I should review all scoring myself and deduct undeserved points for NFL Wipeout purposes, but then I'd have to watch every game.

Week 4 choices are due in 41 hours.

[Suspence]

[Undercover Monk]

What sealed the deal for me is hearing the live play by play call by the ESPN announcers, the green bay radio guys, and the seattle radio guys.

The Seattle guys said it was a TD then went nuts when the refs confirmed that.

The GB guys said interception then went nuts when the refs refuted that.

Gruden and Toriko expressed confusion until the refs ruled TD. Then after seeing the replay in HD slow-mo bashed the officials they clearly had a bias against in the first place.

To me its a clear case of what happens when you ask two people what they saw. There's what he said, what she said and the truth usually lies somewhere in between.

I swear to you on a stack of bible that Lee Evans caught Joe Flaccos pass in last years AFC championship game but the refs said he didnt have possesion of the ball long enough and to me the plays are similar.

The bottom line is that every defender is taught to smack the ball down on hail marys not try to catch it so I have no sympathy for jennings. or a team that allowed their QB to be sacked 8 times.
_________________
The Classic Blunders:
1. never get involved in a land war in Asia
2.Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line
3. Never release Peyton Manning