|
Acebuckeye13 posted:My core contention is this: at the end of the day, regardless of how much time was actually left on the clock (Impossible to say), and regardless of whether Tate was down (He was), the game ended because the refs made a mistake. Had they properly called Tate down to begin with, the Lions would at least have had a chance (No matter how minor) to make a play and end the game on their terms. Instead, because the refs improperly called a touchdown, the Lions were robbed of that last chance and forced to watch helplessly as time expired. And don't get me wrong, the Lions had plenty of chances to win the game before that, either on Tate's catch itself, on the plays preceding it, and even earlier in the game when they failed to stop Freeman or score more than a single offensive touchdown. The Falcons won the game because they straight up scored more points, and played like the better team-but that doesn't change the fact that the ending was an utter travesty and a mockery of officiating. It's kind of a lose-lose situation though, because in most cases people would want them to call the touchdown to initiate the automatic review. The alternative is calling him down short with the Lions having no challenges, and the game still ends (because there is literally no way they get that next snap off, unless you think Tate doesn't spend even a half-second thinking that he was in). There seems to be a general trend lately of refs, in extremely close and game-important situations, erring on the side of making the call that initiates an automatic review, and it's mostly been a positive thing. The fact is that he was down short, and any correct decision the refs made was going to result in the Lions losing the game. At least by calling it a score and reviewing it they had a chance to take a close look and make sure the call was correct before the game was over.
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 20:28 |
|