|
Mystic Stylez posted:KC are even bigger favorites to make the SB than they already were before the season started IMO the NFC is very clearly worse.
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
a neat cape posted:Still wondering how that was a pick cross posting this from the afc north thread: Borsche69 posted:having watched that INT a couple more times, I know what they're referring to regarding the rules. I definitely agree that if it was a WR catching it, no one would really give a second thought to it. https://twitter.com/_joeyhayden/status/1325528019797209088?s=20 This replay has the best angle of what they're looking at. The ball doesn't really start to bobble until after he takes his second step and already starts to bring the ball in ("move common to the game"  ). It makes sense down to the letter of the law, but you know that they just aren't going to call this consistently.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:If they're calling that an interception, its clearly a fumble as well. The ball is out as Peters' rear end hits the ground Yeah they called it an interception and fumble, recovered by the defense. I think Chuck Clark? was the lucky one that got to pad his stats with the 'fumble recovery' that occurs when everyone thinks the play is dead and he gets to slowly pick the ball up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2020 19:23
|
|
|
The real problem is trying to learn and unlearn their standards for a catch. The 'catch has to survive the ground' rule is locked into my brain and hard to remember now that it's been 100% replaced with 'act common to the game'. That would make this also a catch btw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIH-GrnnPVM
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
wandler20 posted:Lee Evans played for Baltimore? Is it a rule that every old discarded WR has to go to Baltimore for at least one season? Lots of people remember that Branden Stokley played for the Ravens, but what they don't remember is that we brought him back when he was suitably old and washed up enough to entice Ozzie.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
Kawalimus posted:He never really had control though. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2020 01:28
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:His hands never even stay stationary on that ball, it's wobbling out of his grasp practically the whole time. That's an incompletion. https://twitter.com/_joeyhayden/status/1325528019797209088?s=20 watch this again
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2020 01:42
|
|
|
really queer Christmas posted:first time watching this and my immediate gut reaction was to say how the gently caress was this called an interception He has control of the ball through the first two steps (no movement off the ball at all through that process), the ball is moving before the third but (and I'm guessing) not enough to declare a loss of control until after his third step (where the ball actually becomes loose). Frank Reich said the refs told him something about counting steps so, as far as I can tell, that's their explanation of it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2020 01:52
|
|
|
Basically, from what I can tell, they don't think he loses control of the ball here: Which is before his third step. And that's probably because he has or regains control here:  Which is after his third step. And then they determine Peters to actually lose control here:  Where you can see his hand physically come off the ball. But yeah, again, how consistently do they ever make this call? It's right by the letter, even with what is technically enough evidence to overturn a call on the field, but 9/10 they just ignore it or let the ruling on the field stand. They're never consistent, and rarely this consistently anal.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2020 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
Mystic Stylez posted:well Marcus Peters just gets INTs so if that's him it's an INT. sound reasoning by the refs this. sorry to see people hate on the galaxy brained refs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2020 02:36
|
|