Jerry Not Sure Why Edelman Fumble Overturned

[lukin2006]

They were talking about instant replay, and that play wasn’t reviewable.

I thought all the turnovers were reviewable. Turnovers on punts are not reviewable? The NFL making it up on the fly again, are they?

I do sometimes wish Jerry would be like other owners and just say nothing to the media.

 

[OmerV]

I thought all the turnovers were reviewable. Turnovers on punts are not reviewable? The NFL making it up on the fly again, are they?

I do sometimes wish Jerry would be like other owners and just say nothing to the media.

I thought you were talking about the missed pass interference call.

 

[lukin2006]

I thought you were talking about the missed pass interference call.

No problem. I personally thought the replay got that right.

 

[Bobhaze]

Certainly the evidence to overturn was not clear and convincing.

Had the refs ruled he didn't touch it, there wasn't evidence to overrule that either.

This was a case where the original call should have stood.

Maybe Jerry realizes that talking about the championship games is the closest he will ever get to them again.

 

[Ranched]

 

[Zordon]

Lol how can anyone watch the 50 replays with 10 different angles and come away that it was not clear it didn't touch him? It was obvious

You're right. But you know damn well that doesn't get reversed for us.

 

[conner01]

No.

It didn’t
From one angle I thought it did too. But when you look at all the angles he clearly didn’t touch it

 

[Rayman70]

shut YOUR MOUTH Jerry.

 

[conner01]

The call on the field should have stood because the video evidence was not conclusive. That being said, it would have been the incorrect call because the ball did not appear to touch him.

To me there was clear conclusive video showing he didn’t touch it. But from one angle it looks like he does. The other angle clearly shows he didn’t
But I sure see how an official thought he did
Replay got it right

 

[Hook'em#11]

Because, blind old man Jerry. It didn't touch Edelman? Pretty simple case there captain.

 

[DallasEast]

I could not care less about what may or may not have been called but lol at any suggestion of Jerry Jones not saying anything when anyone breathes in his direction. 'No comment' is not in his vocabulary.

 

[John813]

Yea, didn't touch unless you only saw one angle of the "muffed" return.

 

[Insomniac]

Jerry is just bitter that NE continues to put his franchise in the rear view mirror. He can't stand that he's not viewed as the owner of the league's best franchise.

And with the multitude of angles and zoom ins, it was clear as day that the ball never touched Edelman. The two camera angles from both sides of his hands showed the ball never got near either of his thumbs.

Well it missed him by about an inch so it was close.

 

[Aven8]

I didn’t think it his his thumb, I thought it hit his bicep.

 

[blueblood70]

Certainly the evidence to overturn was not clear and convincing.

Had the refs ruled he didn't touch it, there wasn't evidence to overrule that either.

This was a case where the original call should have stood.

I saw it 16 times from all angles they kept showing it was not touched...to me it was definitive enough to overturn as they should have never called it a muffed punt, its like being charged for crime and proving your innocence, it not right for ref to call stuff that you have to then hope they get right..why give KC a free scoring shot...the fact that Edelman never even chased after the ball or the runner who grabbed it and when realized they were allowing it a muff he was screaming at the Ref he did not touch it..jerry needs to shut it because for once they got something right and if you want them to have another Dez sistation let these ride..its all the missed PIs in the Saints game that put the Rams in when they didnt deserve it imagine if its Rams vs KC because of a controversial call, it would be the most scrutinized asterisk SB of all time..

they got it correct, 99% of those that watched it and talked about it Monday agreed, the saints calls all agreed was horrific mistake and the wrong team is in the SB..chew on that

which for us hoping that Brees retired and SP became available to us , we somehow got screwed in game we didnt play again by the refs,..

 

[OmerV]

I saw it 16 times from all angles they kept showing it was not touched...to me it was definitive enough to overturn as they should have never called it a muffed punt, its like being charged for crime and proving your innocence, it not right for ref to call stuff that you have to then hope they get right..why give KC a free scoring shot...the fact that Edelman never even chased after the ball or the runner who grabbed it and when realized they were allowing it a muff he was screaming at the Ref he did not touch it..jerry needs to shut it because for once they got something right and if you want them to have another Dez sistation let these ride..its all the missed PIs in the Saints game that put the Rams in when they didnt deserve it imagine if its Rams vs KC because of a controversial call, it would be the most scrutinized asterisk SB of all time..

they got it correct, 99% of those that watched it and talked about it Monday agreed, the saints calls all agreed was horrific mistake and the wrong team is in the SB..chew on that

which for us hoping that Brees retired and SP became available to us , we somehow got screwed in game we didnt play again by the refs,..

I agree it was clear enough on replay to overturn, but I disagree that the refs messed up making the original call they did. First, they can only call things based on what they believe they see, and sometimes what we think we see turns out wrong. That's the whole purpose of replay, to deal with that natural part of being human. But maybe more important, if they said he didn't touch it, and replay proved that he did, they very likely would have been left with neither team jumping on the ball, and therefore neither team establishing clear possession after the fumble. It's better to call it a fumble and let the teams fight over it, then reverse it if replay shows that to be appropriate, than to call it a no touch with neither team jumping on the ball or establishing possession, and then find out through replay it was a fumble.

 

[Denim Chicken]

 

[blueblood70]

I agree it was clear enough on replay to overturn, but I disagree that the refs messed up making the original call they did. First, they can only call things based on what they believe they see, and sometimes what we think we see turns out wrong. That's the whole purpose of replay, to deal with that natural part of being human. But maybe more important, if they said he didn't touch it, and replay proved that he did, they very likely would have been left with neither team jumping on the ball, and therefore neither team establishing clear possession after the fumble. It's better to call it a fumble and let the teams fight over it, then reverse it if replay shows that to be appropriate, than to call it a no touch with neither team jumping on the ball or establishing possession, and then find out through replay it was a fumble.

I can agree on most of that but the part that irritates me is iF they would have like JOnes is intimating said not enough evidence to overturn thats tragedy..they got this one correct but when you make the call on the field thats wrong but video cant get every angle right and bad call stays bad call , thats horrible in situations in big games like this..

 

[OmerV]

I can agree on most of that but the part that irritates me is iF they would have like JOnes is intimating said not enough evidence to overturn thats tragedy..they got this one correct but when you make the call on the field thats wrong but video cant get every angle right and bad call stays bad call , thats horrible in situations in big games like this..

I'm with you on Jerry's take. Jerry is wrong.

As for the general idea of a ref making the wrong call on the field and it stands because the replays are inconclusive, if multiple zoomed in slow motion replays from multiple angles are inconclusive, how can we blame the ref for the call he made?

 

[wecasa]

Don't spill your wine Jer . . .