Toggle sidebar

Bad calls...

Earle, you didn't include the missed horse collar on Josh Jacobs on the opening drive, too. That was pretty big because we would have had first and ten inside the 15.

Would love to read IndyBison's thoughts on the pictures because he gave a lengthy explanation of holding calls a few weeks ago.
 
B1GTide said:
I agree with the general feeling that this was just a poorly called game. Both teams were effected by the bad calls fairly equally (IMO). But if a game is going to be poorly called, this is the way that I would prefer it to happen - with a slew of non-calls rather than 20+ penalties which totally disrupt the flow of the game.

Ultimately the players decided the game. Both teams realized that this was a free for all, and both just buckled down.

I understand the heart ache felt by GA fans right now. First their Falcons collapse in the Super Bowl, then GA gives up a late lead to lose to Alabama, and now the Falcons lost another winnable playoff game. It has to be tough being a football fan in that state right now.
Click to expand...

I commented during the game the refs were letting them play and I am fine with it as long as it is consistent. On the Najee non-PI call I agree with Earle that the backjudge would have called it if we had not scored or if Calvin had not crossed all the way across the field. The pass was to Najee IMO.
 
B1GTide said:
Yep - the officials got it wrong completely. They called off-sides when they should have called false start. What the GA fans fail to accept - either way, the block doesn't count. One of the teams made a mistake there (take your pick), and the result is a re-kick.
Click to expand...

I wondered if the officials meant to call the Ga defender for drawing the false start by the nearby Bama players (I personally hate this penalty). Either way there definitely a dead ball penalty.
 
B1GTide said:
When I log out I can see them as images. Only logged in do they appear as attachments that I cannot launch. Must be an account permissions issue.
Click to expand...

Some I can see and some I can't.

An Aubie told me if we hadn't paid the ref's we would have lost. I smiled real big and told him we did not pay the ref's, the CFPC and ESPN paid them. It made him mad. I loved it.
 
Last edited:
Redwood Forrest said:
Some I can see and some I can't.

An Aubie told me if we hadn't paid the ref's we would have lost. I smiled real big and told him we did not pay the ref's, the CFPC and ESPN paid them. It made him mad. I loved it.
Click to expand...

I wonder why we paid them to let us go down 13-0...?....as I said before ...we must not have paid them enough
 
RTR91 said:
Earle, you didn't include the missed horse collar on Josh Jacobs on the opening drive, too. That was pretty big because we would have had first and ten inside the 15.

Would love to read IndyBison's thoughts on the pictures because he gave a lengthy explanation of holding calls a few weeks ago.
Click to expand...
I wasn't trying to present all of the bad calls which went their way. I'd hoped that maybe some others would have other closeups of the gaffs which went their way...
 
Trying to determine holding on a still picture is pretty worthless. Your are missing too much context. Just because a jersey is stretched doesn't mean he had a step taken away. If you don't see the ball in the picture you don't know where it is in relation to the click which could impact whether it impacted the play.

For example, one of the pictures appeared to show a restriction by an interior linemen from behind as the runner approaches the hole. If the runner is tackled near that block no advantage is gained so no foul. Plus, the U in the background can't see through the bodies to see that action anyway.

On the photo of the action in the back of the end zone I believe someone said the ball was on the air to a different receiver. If that's the case and there is a restriction here, what advantage is gained by this defender? None so this wouldn't be a foul regardless of that other receiver catches it. Just another example of why a still picture doesn't tell the entire story.

The blocked punt was a crazy play. I bet that shows up on our training videos this summer. When I saw it live I thought the defender was so far offsides I was surprised they didn't shut it down. I only saw one replay from an angle and it did look like he didn't cross until after the ball was snapped. I'm guessing the line judge was fooled like me. I want to see the potential false starts again because the view they showed from behind looked like there was early movement. I saw a GIF with a sideline view and it appears that movement was pretty close to the snap. That's why I really want to see it again. The only you have a neutral zone infraction is if the offensive player was on the line and adjacent to the defender in the neutral zone. The potential false starts by Alabama were all backs so that wouldn't apply. It would be a dead ball foul so if that's what they meant to call, they would have shut it down. It was just a screwy call all around.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
IndyBison said:
Trying to determine holding on a still picture is pretty worthless. Your are missing too much context. Just because a jersey is stretched doesn't mean he had a step taken away. If you don't see the ball in the picture you don't know where it is in relation to the click which could impact whether it impacted the play.

For example, one of the pictures appeared to show a restriction by an interior linemen from behind as the runner approaches the hole. If the runner is tackled near that block no advantage is gained so no foul. Plus, the U in the background can't see through the bodies to see that action anyway.

On the photo of the action in the back of the end zone I believe someone said the ball was on the air to a different receiver. If that's the case and there is a restriction here, what advantage is gained by this defender? None so this wouldn't be a foul regardless of that other receiver catches it. Just another example of why a still picture doesn't tell the entire story.

The blocked punt was a crazy play. I bet that shows up on our training videos this summer. When I saw it live I thought the defender was so far offsides I was surprised they didn't shut it down. I only saw one replay from an angle and it did look like he didn't cross until after the ball was snapped. I'm guessing the line judge was fooled like me. I want to see the potential false starts again because the view they showed from behind looked like there was early movement. I saw a GIF with a sideline view and it appears that movement was pretty close to the snap. That's why I really want to see it again. The only you have a neutral zone infraction is if the offensive player was on the line and adjacent to the defender in the neutral zone. The potential false starts by Alabama were all backs so that wouldn't apply. It would be a dead ball foul so if that's what they meant to call, they would have shut it down. It was just a screwy call all around.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The pi on Najee in the endzone should have been called. The pass was caught by Ridley however he cut in front of NH and caught the ball. Najee slowed down to catch the ball and was creamed before Ridley caught the ball.
 
Then that contact had no impact on the play. If the pass is gong to a different receiver, unless it's a personal foul it's nothing.

Most fouls fall into one of three categories:

Procedural (offsides, illegal formation, delay of game)
Advantage/disadvantage (holding, pass interference, block in the back)
Safety (clipping, block below the waste, chop block)

Safety fouls should be called any time they happen. Procedural fouls should have a higher threshold to be called late in blowout games (don't get too technical). Advantage/disadvantage fouls generally have the most judgment involved and most have additional philosophies/tools that help to reduce the gray area and provide consistency.

The ultimate goal of an official is no flags on a game. I've never had a game as a crew with no flags, but I've had done with none. I'm an umpire so there's usually something procedural at least I have to flag. I only average 4-5 holding fouls in the course of the season (9-12 games) and I had 1 season with only 2 (and one I didn't like on video).

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
TUSCALOOSAHONOR said:
Just because a ball is caught doesn't mean a foul didn't happen. In the end result, which isn't what should determine a foul being called, the pass was caught. A flag should have been thrown.
Click to expand...
A foul is an advantage gained illegally by one team. What advantage did the defense gain on contact against a player the ball wasn't thrown to? It's one thing to know the rules. It's another to understand them. I'm trying to help with understanding them.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
IndyBison said:
On the photo of the action in the back of the end zone I believe someone said the ball was on the air to a different receiver. If that's the case and there is a restriction here, what advantage is gained by this defender? None so this wouldn't be a foul regardless of that other receiver catches it. Just another example of why a still picture doesn't tell the entire story.
Click to expand...

That is not the point.
Tua was throwing the ball to Najee (number 22), but Calvin Ridley "intercepted" the ball before it got to Najee. But Najee was clearly interfered with before the ball was touched by anyone so the flag should have been thrown and then declined by the result of the play was a touchdown. The advantage gained by the defender was that the intended receiver had his arms held down to his sides and the defender's chest was pushing the intended receiver away from the point where the intended receiver was going to catch the ball. It is about as clear a case of defensive pass interference as could be imagined.
 
IndyBison said:
A foul is an advantage gained illegally by one team. What advantage did the defense gain on contact against a player the ball wasn't thrown to? It's one thing to know the rules. It's another to understand them. I'm trying to help with understanding them.
Click to expand...
First you have to understand the pay in question.
Najee Harris (#22 in white) was the intended receiver.
Calvin Ridley (#3 in white "intercepted" the ball before it got to Najee.
This tweet shows the play.
https://twitter.com/SECNetwork/status/950590196655034369
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back