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

[KJJ]

You know damn well they didn't find the ball at Dak's feet. Your whole argument about them placing the ball where they find it is wrong. They place the ball where they think it was when the player was down, not where it is once the pile is removed. Possession of a fumble is what they look for when they pull the pile apart. As for players arguing about the spot, or signaling a TD, I wasn't really paying any attention to that, so I don't even know if that's true.

Buh-bye, find someone else to keep you entertained. Lol

 

[Runwildboys]

You wouldn’t have started this thread if we didn’t have a bye week. It took an entire week for this topic to come up because the Cowboys weren’t playing.

It took that long because I had just re-watched the game.

 

[G2]

You know damn well they didn't find the ball at Dak's feet. Your whole argument about them placing the ball where they find it is wrong. They place the ball where they think it was when the player was down, not where it is once the pile is removed. Possession of a fumble is what they look for when they pull the pile apart. As for players arguing about the spot, or signaling a TD, I wasn't really paying any attention to that, so I don't even know if that's true.

What does it matter how the players reacted? I don't know that proves anything either way. Maybe they thought it was clearly a score.
It's weird his argument was they spotted the ball short of the goal line because they "must have" seen it, but earlier admits he thinks it was a TD, there just wasn't any clear evidence.

 

[G2]

You wouldn’t have started this thread if we didn’t have a bye week. It took an entire week for this topic to come up because the Cowboys weren’t playing.

What is your obsession with fans, their threads and their posts that you continue to whine about it? Who cares if it's a bye week or not?

 

[Runwildboys]

What does it matter how the players reacted? I don't know that proves anything either way. Maybe they thought it was clearly a score.
It's weird his argument was they spotted the ball short of the goal line because they "must have" seen it, but early admits he thinks it was a TD, there just wasn't any clear evidence.

Right. He was saying they spot the ball where they find it after clearing the pile. Did you see the ball near Dak's feet? How did none of the Patriot's come up with it if it was all the way down there?..and I agree, the players' reactions mean nothing.

 

[G2]

Right. He was saying they spot the ball where they find it after clearing the pile. Did you see the ball near Dak's feet? How did none of the Patriot's come up with it if it was all the way down there?

Prescott isn't going to lay there, under a pile, let it get pulled apart and not attempt to get his hands on the ball if it weren't right in his hands on the other side of the goal line.

 

[Runwildboys]

Prescott isn't going to lay there, under a pile, let it get pulled apart and not attempt to get his hands on the ball if it weren't right in his hands on the other side of the goal line.

Very true!

The arguments were getting really flimsy there. Like I said multiple times, I don't even care whether they would've decided it was a TD, I just think it's odd they never gave it a good look.

 

[Whirlwin]

Was Zeke even fined by the NFL for calling out the officials after the game?

If Zeke didn't get fined, it's another sign how messed up and crooked this league is.

I don’t want to buy into the propaganda. But it just makes you wonder all this bull crap

 

[KJJ]

What is your obsession with fans, their threads and their posts that you continue to whine about it? Who cares if it's a bye week or not?

I haven’t whined about anything, I contributed to the thread giving my opinion. You and a few others are whining about my opinion. Lol I find it hilarious that despite the Cowboys having a great season a few of you are crying about a no call in a game they won and probably should have lost. While the rest of us are looking forward to the Vikings game the rest of you can continue bellyaching over that no call and my opinion about it.

 

[RonnieT24]

"Had they reviewed it"...which is the whole premise of the thread. They didn't review it, and they should have, regardless of what they would have determined the outcome to be, because it was too close to just dismiss it that quickly.

Not if you had money on the Pats to cover.

 

[DogFace]

I never said it wasn’t a touchdown I’m just explaining why they didn’t call it a touchdown. If we lost because of a clear touchdown I would be complaining just like everyone else. When they peeled off all the players the ball wasn’t in the endzone. I didn’t see one Cowboys player arguing with the spot. They obviously saw what the officials saw that the ball wasn’t in the endzone. There wasn’t anything clear about that play.

Yes. The ball was in the end zone when they peeled off players. Like you said the ball isn’t in the picture. But the refs could see the ball. We are supposed to assume that the refs thought he was holding the ball below is waste even though his arms were clearly above his waste.

This isn’t really just common sense. It’s deductive reasoning. It’s also within reason to assume the refs could see the ball and we know where the ball had to have been because we all understand how a football is held using one’s hands. We know that hands are at the end of arms and we can deduce where his hands are based on what we can see of his arms.


Somehow the ball was spotted at the 2ft?? line vs 2inch. Add that to the incompetence or whatever you want to call it.

 

[G2]

Very true!

The arguments were getting really flimsy there. Like I said multiple times, I don't even care whether they would've decided it was a TD, I just think it's odd they never gave it a good look.

Same page. We won, it's not HUGE!! But, it's still a legit topic to discuss.

 

[G2]

I haven’t whined about anything, I contributed to the thread giving my opinion. You and a few others are whining about my opinion. Lol I find it hilarious that despite the Cowboys having a great season a few of you are crying about a no call in a game they won and probably should have lost. While the rest of us are looking forward to the Vikings game the rest of you can continue bellyaching over that no call and my opinion about it.

The irony in this post is astounding. Great read, I couldn't put it down.

 

[G2]

Yes. The ball was in the end zone when they peeled off players. Like you said the ball isn’t in the picture. But the refs could see the ball. We are supposed to assume that the refs thought he was holding the ball below is waste even though his arms were clearly above his waste.

This isn’t really just common sense. It’s deductive reasoning. It’s also within reason to assume the refs could see the ball and we know where the ball had to have been because we all understand how a football is held using one’s hands. We know that hands are at the end of arms and we can deduce where his hands are based on what we can see of his arms.


Somehow the ball was spotted at the 2ft?? line vs 2inch. Add that to the incompetence or whatever you want to call it.

You can see Prescott's entire waist and down and his upper body crossing the line. The fact that the ball isn't visible illustrates that it's not at or below the waist.

 

[CowboyFrog]

When you look at this video angle, Dak is actually being touched by 3 Pats players (the NT touches him on the helmet first) and Judon on the other side pushes Dak's head towards the turf while he himself is being blocked by Jarwin. You see Dak's head get jerked downward which might actually be Bentley's first touch. So Dak wasn't being touched until the endzone? They were all over him before he got there and Judon is probably why he ended up sideways and not straight on. Like I said, this was way closer than people believe. When you look at this angle, he might not have gotten in before being down and struggled forward to end up in there from Jarwin and McGovern pushing afterwards.

Wait ..you see his knee clearly down in this video? cant have it both ways...if its not clear he is acroos the line then its definatley not clear his knee is down while this guy lays 2 fingers on him..

 

[MarcusRock]

Wait ..you see his knee clearly down in this video? cant have it both ways...if its not clear he is acroos the line then its definatley not clear his knee is down while this guy lays 2 fingers on him..

You're deflecting, bro. The knee down is from the other angle in the pic I posted from the beginning of all this. I'll post it below.

So first you say no Pats player touched him before the end zone.
Then you say no Pats player clearly touched him.
Then you say no Pats player touched him while his knee was down.
Now you're kinda (?) saying it's not clear a Pats player touched him when his knee was down.

In the video you quoted and the picture below, there are literally Pats all over Dak (Judon is pushing Dak's head to the ground in the video and you literally see Bentley's hand on Dak's thigh in the picture after HE touched Dak twice before that). And besides all this, only a single graze of Dak's jersey is necessary for him to be down by contact once he knee hits - and the pic is the angle the near side ref had. So it's not incredulous that the refs could mark him short, especially when they don't see the ball.

You said you'd agree with me if Dak was clearly touched. This is demonstrated quite clearly. You didn't answer my question before. Are you now backing off what you said when you said you'd agree with me? It's simply a yes or no question.

 

[CowboyFrog]

You're deflecting, bro. The knee down is from the other angle in the pic I posted from the beginning of all this. I'll post it below.

So first you say no Pats player touched him before the end zone.
Then you say no Pats player clearly touched him.
Then you say no Pats player touched him while his knee was down.
Now you're kinda (?) saying it's not clear a Pats player touched him when his knee was down.

In the video you quoted and the picture below, there are literally Pats all over Dak (Judon is pushing Dak's head to the ground in the video and you literally see Bentley's hand on Dak's thigh in the picture after HE touched Dak twice before that). And besides all this, only a single graze of Dak's jersey is necessary for him to be down by contact once he knee hits - and the pic is the angle the near side ref had. So it's not incredulous that the refs could mark him short, especially when they don't see the ball.

You said you'd agree with me if Dak was clearly touched. This is demonstrated quite clearly. You didn't answer my question before. Are you now backing off what you said when you said you'd agree with me? It's simply a yes or no question.

But your starting argument was what the refs could see...again if it takes mulitple angles to see what they are trying to call yet they did not call it a TD off the ONLY thing they all could see (he was in after the unpile)....how does that make the argument. They did not replay it so no way they used multiple angles to say he Couldve been down here..again this is all about why they didn't call it off the unpile, right?

 

[MarcusRock]

But your starting argument was what the refs could see...again if it takes mulitple angles to see what they are trying to call yet they did not call it a TD off the ONLY thing they all could see (he was in after the unpile)....how does that make the argument. They did not replay it so no way they used multiple angles to say he Couldve been down here..again this is all about why they didn't call it off the unpile, right?

Bro, yes or no. Are you now backing off what you said?

And the ref could see the pic I posted. Knee down and Pats all over him.

Are you backing off what you said about agreeing with me? Maybe a bookend approach will work.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Bro, yes or no. Are you now backing off what you said?

And the ref could see the pic I posted. Knee down and Pats all over him.

Are you backing off what you said about agreeing with me? Maybe a bookend approach will work.

Wait you see him clearly being touched in that picture..and yet you dont clearly see him over the line unless he is carrying it with his thighs? Yes or no you said they called it because they clearly saw he was down? same thing. you have not shown me how they could clearly see he was touched with his knee down before he got in...have you?

You see the defender 21..then a cowboys player with his helmet and right shoulder on the touchline..Dak is next and he is farther forward than that Cowboy..is he not?

And no you have not shown one angle showing he was touched while his knee was down before he got in....you have shown me 2 diferent angles that show he was touched before his knee was down and one with his knee down but cant see him touched and clearly based of the other players in that frame his is acrross the goaline to his waist.

 

[MarcusRock]

Wait you see him clearly being touched in that picture..and yet you dont clearly see him over the line unless he is carrying it with his thighs? Yes or no you said they called it because they clearly saw he was down? same thing. you have not shown me how they could clearly see he was touched with his knee down before he got in...have you?

You see the defender 21..then a cowboys player with his helmet and right shoulder on the touchline..Dak is next and he is farther forward than that Cowboy..is he not?

Welp, there you go. Out in the open. Provide you with documented proof you asked for and now you tap dance to avoid doing what you say. Asked you 3 separate times even after rehashing what you stated you needed to see as the goal posts moved.

@Crazed Liotta Eyes, this is what I meant and rail against whenever I get the chance. If they aren't outright lying, they're debating in bad faith even in the face of proof. Call it a crusade, but it's the one I've chosen. Lol.