Has the league admitted screwing up by not reviewing Dak's TD?

[CowboyFrog]

Look at the replay. Or watch the end of the game. When they unpiled the bodies he was in the end zone as pictured in the link I sent the first reply.

Yes. You’d think they would’ve called it a td. They did not.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/lists/cowboys-patriots-dak-prescott-td-missed-by-refs


is after the refs moved guys off Dak's

Thats the argument MarcusRock can not overcome as I said before the only 2 logical calls would be TD from the fact not one Pats player hit him before the end zone or TD from the fact he was across the line after the pile was uncovered...there is no logical reason it was spotted short...not one.

 

[MarcusRock]

I already explained that. They saw the replays that were shown on TV and none of them showed the football. You couldn’t see the ball in any of them. If you can’t see the ball there’s no way to dispute the no call and call it a TD. They don’t care where the body is they have to see the ball. If some of you want to spend 15+ pages arguing this have fun! Lol

It's currently at 12 pages. Don't quit yet, bro. Lol.

 

[OmerV]

I think the issue was there was no clear shot at where the ball was
The goal line on a run play is really so congested you can see well
Technology could tell if the ball crossed the goal line but isn’t very valuable at telling you if a player is down

That's exactly it. Common sense tells you he scored because so much of his body was across the goal line, but we couldn't actually see the ball.

 

[MarcusRock]

The announcers were also wondering why there was no review.

Right. They asked Steratore what his thoughts are when reviewing the fumble and he said the following word for word as I listened just now:

"My thought, Jim, has to be that at no time did we see the football although we did see a couple of looks where it appeared that half of Dak’s upper torso was in or broke the goal line, you just never saw the football. That would be my guess on that."

Now, he's just the consultant commentator and not the official guys on the job so you can take from that what you will but it's what I've said from the beginning, which is they might have gone, "do we have something here?" and the answer was, "no clear shot of the football crossing."

 

[G2]

That's exactly it. Common sense tells you he scored because so much of his body was across the goal line, but we couldn't actually see the ball.

And that's a pretty significant issue if they're not in position to see in this day and age.

 

[MarcusRock]

This thread bothers me and I don't mean you @Runwildboys. It's a legit question. In my opinion, he absolutely scored. It's not a conspiracy but it seems like everyone is arguing with the one guy who thinks every call that does not benefit the Cowboys is correct. Happens every week.

Nah, bro. What happens every week is someone whines about 'spiracy, unfair, Goodell, Mara, Snyder, etc.when they typically have nothing to whine about, which is why I show up with video, etc. I've been wrong, and admit when I am, but constant grade school excuses for not getting one's way will always be something I oppose. Don't say you want a fairly called game and then whine even when evidence shows something was fairly called. Just say you want slant and then it's out in the open. Lol.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Nah, bro. What happens every week is someone whines about 'spiracy, unfair, Goodell, Mara, Snyder, etc.when they typically have nothing to whine about, which is why I show up with video, etc. I've been wrong, and admit when I am, but constant grade school excuses for not getting one's way will always be something I oppose. Don't say you want a fairly called game and then whine even when evidence shows something was fairly called. Just say you want slant and then it's out in the open. Lol.

I will say without hesitation I would like every call to go the Cowboys way..and as long as we are doing what I want, make other fans say "That was the right call" when it happens.

 

[DogFace]

Thats the argument MarcusRock can not overcome as I said before the only 2 logical calls would be TD from the fact not one Pats player hit him before the end zone or TD from the fact he was across the line after the pile was uncovered...there is no logical reason it was spotted short...not one.

Very true, but please keep in mind that Marcus is very likely an idiot and because of that he won’t be able to accept what most can see very clearly.

 

[G2]

Very true, but please keep in mind that Marcus is very likely an idiot and because of that he won’t be able to accept what most can see very clearly.

But maybe the ball was hidden in his sock?

 

[MarcusRock]

Thats the argument MarcusRock can not overcome as I said before the only 2 logical calls would be TD from the fact not one Pats player hit him before the end zone or TD from the fact he was across the line after the pile was uncovered...there is no logical reason it was spotted short...not one.

Yeah, the unpiling thing doesn't hold because Dak's after knee was down he continued to push forward. Even in the picture I posted, you actually can see a Pats player's hand on Dak's thigh which puts him down at that spot. You just can't see the ball go over the goal line to say, that's where the ball is and should be called down. Now I do agree that if you call him short, it was not by the margin they marked off and should probably have been right up to the goal line.

 

[MarcusRock]

Very true, but please keep in mind that Marcus is very likely an idiot and because of that he won’t be able to accept what most can see very clearly.

Ah, still bitter from the Dez "catch" whoopin' I gave you and your friends in debates I see. You're the only one that still holds on to that, you know. Makes sense since you were the only one unhinged enough to follow me into PMs with nasty messages when I ignored you. Imagine that much of a lack of control to do that. Lol.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Yeah, the unpiling thing doesn't hold because Dak's after knee was down he continued to push forward. Even in the picture I posted, you actually can see a Pats player's hand on Dak's thigh which puts him down at that spot. You just can't see the ball go over the goal line to say, that's where the ball is and should be called down. Now I do agree that if you call him short, it was not by the margin they marked off and should probably have been right up to the goal line.

And I would agree IF he was being touched by a pats player clearly..he was not..again the only logical call is to call it a TD because the only clear thing seen is he was across the line when he was unpiled...I know you defend the refs and I even admit I will error towards the Cowboys everytime..but in THIS instance you have to concede they blew the call...again it happens, this time it actually cost the team a TD.

 

[MarcusRock]

And I would agree IF he was being touched by a pats player clearly..he was not..again the only logical call is to call it a TD because the only clear thing seen is he was across the line when he was unpiled...I know you defend the refs and I even admit I will error towards the Cowboys everytime..but in THIS instance you have to concede they blew the call...again it happens, this time it actually cost the team a TD.

Well, I've already stated way before that Dak was probably in. What I contend is that it wasn't the slam dunk case everyone thought it was. Also, I just watched the replays again, and that Pats player who had a hand on Dak's thigh did CLEARLY touch Dak on the back as he jumped over the line before also touching the thigh so at the point Dak's knee hit, he was down at that spot regardless despite continuing to push forward. The problem is you can't see the ball and the only place you can is at a severe angle.

 

[droopdog7]

My official stance as a Dallas Cowboy fan:

-More likely than not that it was a touchdown
-Couldn’t see the ball or when his knee hit so there is a non zero chance that dak did not score. Remember seeing a replay from above where it looked like his knee hit early so…
-I’m constantly annoyed how much the fall on the field affects the outcome. Had he been called a touchdown, which is TOTALLY reasonable, they would not have overturned because you can’t see the ball. Oh, the irony.
-I’m a thousand percent sure that the someone looked at the play and decided not to buzz the refs for a formal review. So let’s not get confused that they didn’t look at it. Someone most definitely did. And on that, I’m also mildly surprised. Even though it wasn’t clearly, I say take the time to look at it in the field.

 

[MarcusRock]

And I would agree IF he was being touched by a pats player clearly..he was not.

Bentley (8) as he jumps over, touches Dak on the upper back AND on his butt.

 

[he-is-bonafide]

Yeah, the unpiling thing doesn't hold because Dak's after knee was down he continued to push forward. Even in the picture I posted, you actually can see a Pats player's hand on Dak's thigh which puts him down at that spot. You just can't see the ball go over the goal line to say, that's where the ball is and should be called down. Now I do agree that if you call him short, it was not by the margin they marked off and should probably have been right up to the goal line.

So in absence of clear evidence of knee and ball position while the play is ongoing you think the most logical decision for the refs on a QB sneak is to ignore the flow of the line of scrimmage, the flow of the ball carrier, and where the ball carrier with the ball is located within the pile and instead place ball for no gain? Or maybe to place ball where the refs think it might have been when ball carrier was touched?

In all my years of watching NFL I don't ever remember a QB sneak (anywhere on the field) where when the pile made it difficult to see exactly where the ball was when the knee went down that the refs completely discounted what they found when they undid the bodies. Especially when there was no evidence of the runner being stuffed or stacked up before reaching the line of scrimmage.

 

[Jipper]

Bentley (8) as he jumps over, touches Dak on the upper back AND on his butt.

That view just frustrates me so much, yes you can't see the ball but you can see the player and he's in the end zone

 

[MarcusRock]

So in absence of clear evidence of knee and ball position while the play is ongoing you think the most logical decision for the refs on a QB sneak is to ignore the flow of the line of scrimmage, the flow of the ball carrier, and where the ball carrier with the ball is located within the pile and instead place ball for no gain? Or maybe to place ball where the refs think it might have been when ball carrier was touched?

In all my years of watching NFL I don't ever remember a QB sneak (anywhere on the field) where when the pile made it difficult to see exactly where the ball was when the knee went down that the refs completely discounted what they found when they undid the bodies. Especially when there was no evidence of the runner being stuffed or stacked up before reaching the line of scrimmage.

Well, there was clear evidence, wasn't there? The pic I showed with the knee down is similar to the view at least 1 ref had. And as for the unpiling, a ref had already signaled 4th down before they cut to the shot of the players unpiling so they clearly weren't looking to make a determination based on that. Maybe that ref did see the knee down, and that Dak was touched before that as I posted above. We don't know because I haven't seen anyone ask those refs.

 

[he-is-bonafide]

Well, there was clear evidence, wasn't there? The pic I showed with the knee down is similar to the view at least 1 ref had. And as for the unpiling, a ref had already signaled 4th down before they cut to the shot of the players unpiling so they clearly weren't looking to make a determination based on that. Maybe that ref did see the knee down, and that Dak was touched before that as I posted above. We don't know because I haven't seen anyone ask those refs.

The pic you showed would only be evidence if Dak went from diving forward (easily seen) to standing straight up at moment of pic (no evidence of such either on video or as the eye viewed in real time) and then was able to lay back down horizontal into the end zone as the play finishes. The pic you showed is not evidence in support of what was called on the field.

 

[KJJ]

Look at the replay. Or watch the end of the game. When they unpiled the bodies he was in the end zone as pictured in the link I sent the first reply.

Yes. You’d think they would’ve called it a td. They did not.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/lists/cowboys-patriots-dak-prescott-td-missed-by-refs


is after the refs moved guys off Dak's

You can’t see the ball in any of the shots.