Mass exodus of NFL refs & officials

[MarcusRock]

No, I said I couldn't tell where Dak was. I explained I can see Jarwin (8) outside and it may be Dak inside, BUT I can't tell, nor can I see the ball or how far forward his torso is.

If his knee is down and he's across the goalline it means nothing, expect touchdown.

You're the same guy that pics apart stills, are you not?

The video is a much better look at his momentum carrying him forward and across the plain.

No, in Post #96 you said "I never saw the knee down." That's what the still picture represents with the arrow. It was down. You can't get the answer to your doubt and then just ignore that answer. Who else's knee could it have been when you see the video? It's Dak's left knee that you can see buckle and coming down first in the video. The sideline view shows it clearly did hit and outside the endzone. Play is dead there. Just can't see where the ball is after it was clearly in his gut via the video. But if you really want to get into minutiae, look at the angle of Dak's quad in the still. It's not angled forward from a 90-degree angle like when pushing off but actually backward a little. From the video, Dak takes almost a direct hit from Judon from his right that Jarwin is late getting to which is what changes Dak's straight forward rush angle. If the ball is still in his gut why wouldn't it also go back the way his quad angle did? This is on top of what I've already pointed out. Doubt.

Both the video and picture are taken together. If you watch the video only, of course you think he scored because it doesn't show the knee actually hit turf but does show the ground impact motion that everyone ignores until you see the still that shows his knee down on the ground in that sequence which creates doubt. That's why I think the ref called him short if they're required to see both. Dak ended up way further ahead after his knee hit but if the ref saw the same thing the camera did from further away than he did then he ignored the remainder of that momentum because by rule it didn't count. And it didn't, despite where he ended up. Again, I'd have called him in but there are numerous logical happenings that would support calling him short which is why I can see the call made and not some evil intent or even a missed call. Don't remember why Dallas didn't challenge but video wouldn't have reversed either call because you just couldn't see the ball but you DO see Dak's knee down.

 

[MarcusRock]

I must have missed 60 Minutes. When have you ever posted that you were wrong?

Not often, but it's happened. There was a Seattle-Philly game one time where someone claimed a hold against a Philly OL was ignored. So I got video, blew it up, but focused on the wrong player. Once they pointed out who they were actually talking about, I admitted my mistake and that what they claimed to be a hold was in fact a hold that wasn't called. Strange days indeed.

 

[Point-of-the-Star]

I must have missed 60 Minutes. When have you ever posted that you were wrong?

 

[CWR]

No, in Post #96 you said "I never saw the knee down." That's what the still picture represents with the arrow. It was down. You can't get the answer to your doubt and then just ignore that answer. Who else's knee could it have been when you see the video? It's Dak's left knee that you can see buckle and coming down first in the video. The sideline view shows it clearly did hit and outside the endzone. Play is dead there. Just can't see where the ball is after it was clearly in his gut via the video. But if you really want to get into minutiae, look at the angle of Dak's quad in the still. It's not angled forward from a 90-degree angle like when pushing off but actually backward a little. From the video, Dak takes almost a direct hit from Judon from his right that Jarwin is late getting to which is what changes Dak's straight forward rush angle. If the ball is still in his gut why wouldn't it also go back the way his quad angle did? This is on top of what I've already pointed out. Doubt.

Both the video and picture are taken together. If you watch the video only, of course you think he scored because it doesn't show the knee actually hit turf but does show the ground impact motion that everyone ignores until you see the still that shows his knee down on the ground in that sequence which creates doubt. That's why I think the ref called him short if they're required to see both. Dak ended up way further ahead after his knee hit but if the ref saw the same thing the camera did from further away than he did then he ignored the remainder of that momentum because by rule it didn't count. And it didn't, despite where he ended up. Again, I'd have called him in but there are numerous logical happenings that would support calling him short which is why I can see the call made and not some evil intent or even a missed call. Don't remember why Dallas didn't challenge but video wouldn't have reversed either call because you just couldn't see the ball but you DO see Dak's knee down.

I also said I can't tell which player that is in the giant mass of flesh. Yes I see a knee down, I don't know who's it is or where the ball is, but the torso appeared to cross the plain.

I see your point with the angle of his quad, but there is too much there. No way I believe the ref was able to discern.

I continue to believe the logical thing was to pull them off and see where he was. Momentum appeared to carry him in. I'll take the footage over the still any day, and so will you when it suits your argument. I've seen it before.

 

[MarcusRock]

I also said I can't tell which player that is in the giant mass of flesh. Yes I see a knee down, I don't know who's it is or where the ball is, but the torso appeared to cross the plain.

I see your point with the angle of his quad, but there is too much there. No way I believe the ref was able to discern.

I continue to believe the logical thing was to pull them off and see where he was. Momentum appeared to carry him in. I'll take the footage over the still any day, and so will you when it suits your argument. I've seen it before.

Your logic of waiting to see where Dak ended up is against the rules that say a play stops when he's touched and a knee is down. By rule, there is no momentum past that point. If the camera caught it, the ref caught it. In a bunch formation at the goal line, the ref isn't going to have eyes trained on the RB, it'll be on the QB. He probably didn't see the ball after the bodies piled in but he most likely did see Dak's knee down behind the line and considered nothing beyond that, per the rules.

So you accuse me of using things to suit my argument when you admit to picking and choosing the footage that suits your argument here? Are you going to say "witch hunt" next? Lol. My evidence is presented as a pair, not as a pick and choose. The detail not shown in one is shown in the other and I debate using both. You're the one here trying to deny it's Dak's knee and that you can't tell whose it is. Well, based on the video you only want to consider, whose do you think it is? I asked you that previously. I don't have the game anymore and nothing on YouTube shows that sideline video replay I took the still shot from but I'll find the game and slice the sideline footage just for you, lol. I don't lie and I don't duck questions.

 

[CWR]

Your logic of waiting to see where Dak ended up is against the rules that say a play stops when he's touched and a knee is down. By rule, there is no momentum past that point. If the camera caught it, the ref caught it. In a bunch formation at the goal line, the ref isn't going to have eyes trained on the RB, it'll be on the QB. He probably didn't see the ball after the bodies piled in but he most likely did see Dak's knee down behind the line and considered nothing beyond that, per the rules.

So you accuse me of using things to suit my argument when you admit to picking and choosing the footage that suits your argument here? Are you going to say "witch hunt" next? Lol. My evidence is presented as a pair, not as a pick and choose. The detail not shown in one is shown in the other and I debate using both. You're the one here trying to deny it's Dak's knee and that you can't tell whose it is. Well, based on the video you only want to consider, whose do you think it is? I asked you that previously. I don't have the game anymore and nothing on YouTube shows that sideline video replay I took the still shot from but I'll find the game and slice the sideline footage just for you, lol. I don't lie and I don't duck questions.

Geez man AGAIN, you can't see both his knee down and where his body is due to the pile.

You keep going back to the knee, which means nothing if his torso and ball are across the goalline.

My logic is you either confirm both or go with what you see. The knee down doesn't matter at all if you don't know when it went down in relation to the ball crossing.

If the camera caught it? The camera only shows a knee down, not where the ball is. So it didn't catch it, and neither did the official. Bs.

I've actually read Dez "catch" posts where you've picked apart still frames. That is why I mention that. Do I need to dig for receipts or can we just be honest?

 

[Point-of-the-Star]

Geez man AGAIN, you can't see both his knee down and where his body is due to the pile.

You keep going back to the knee, which means nothing if his torso and ball are across the goalline.

My logic is you either confirm both or go with what you see. The knee down doesn't matter at all if you don't know when it went down in relation to the ball crossing.

If the camera caught it? The camera only shows a knee down, not where the ball is. So it didn't catch it, and neither did the official. Bs.

I've actually read Dez "catch" posts where you've picked apart still frames. That is why I mention that. Do I need to dig for receipts or can we just be honest?

Let it go bro. The guy's gonna argue when the Grim Reaper comes for him.

Give him credit tho, he's an ankle biting chihuahua with no quit.

 

[foofighters]

I'm sure it can't get any worse. Sorry state of affairs for the NFL office. Idiotic, guess Goodell wants another raise.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[MarcusRock]

Geez man AGAIN, you can't see both his knee down and where his body is due to the pile.

You keep going back to the knee, which means nothing if his torso and ball are across the goalline.

My logic is you either confirm both or go with what you see. The knee down doesn't matter at all if you don't know when it went down in relation to the ball crossing.

If the camera caught it? The camera only shows a knee down, not where the ball is. So it didn't catch it, and neither did the official. Bs.

I've actually read Dez "catch" posts where you've picked apart still frames. That is why I mention that. Do I need to dig for receipts or can we just be honest?

So you're saying it's Dak's knee then? That was never clear from you. I agree you can't see both. But if you see the knee, the play stops there in your head and you try to determine where the ball is. I'm saying the camera caught the knee down and so did the official, most likely. So then it becomes which side do you err on and I think they went conservative because you can't see the ball cross (you do see it in his gut), the knee is down behind the goal line enough that if the ball is still in his gut it creates doubt that it actually crossed, Judon gets almost a clean shot at Dak that stops him from going only straight forward, and Dak tripped over Biadsz before the whole thing got started so he couldn't drive forward with full force.

I never say stills aren't useful, only that they can't be used to determine a motion penalty like holding, PI, or facemask. They are very useful for showing a limited or specific action did happen like a foot out of bounds. As for the Dez catch, the only still I use is the one I pull out when people try to say the ball never hit the ground (because they know the rule that makes it not a catch). I have a big ol' still showing the ball pressed against the ground. So I'm not anti-still obviously because I do use them, lol.

 

[MarcusRock]

Let it go bro. The guy's gonna argue when the Grim Reaper comes for him.

Give him credit tho, he's an ankle biting chihuahua with no quit.

Hey, it's not me who even asked to discuss this. I'm just really, really good at answering. You know this.

 

[Point-of-the-Star]

Hey, it's not me who even asked to discuss this. I'm just really, really good at answering. You know this.

So you are claiming you were gut hooked?

Fastest way to end an unwinnable internet argument is to not respond but yet there you are chewing away at that ankle. Which is fine if that rocks your boat. It's your time!

My point about you is you'd rather argue against the Cowboys because "you're almost always right" than even drop it. At least the other guy is a fan (fanatic) for his Cowboys. I despise arrogance in people, even if they are right.

 

[CWR]

Let it go bro. The guy's gonna argue when the Grim Reaper comes for him.

Give him credit tho, he's an ankle biting chihuahua with no quit.

Lol, I know you're right. Ironically he thinks it was probably a touchdown but is still arguing it. I will give him credit for having conviction though.

 

[MarcusRock]

So you are claiming you were gut hooked?

Fastest way to end an unwinnable internet argument is to not respond but yet there you are chewing away at that ankle. Which is fine if that rocks your boat. It's your time!

My point about you is you'd rather argue against the Cowboys because "you're almost always right" than even drop it. At least the other guy is a fan (fanatic) for his Cowboys. I despise arrogance in people, even if they are right.

This where you've got it wrong about me again. It's not anti-Cowboys, it's anti-whine. This topic came up because in response to a missed call directly leading to us winning that game, someone mentioned the Dak goal line play as an example of how we got "screwed" by the refs when, as I've pointed out, there's legitimate reasons they may have ruled Dak short. I think he was probably in but can see why they ruled against it. But rather than let go of the "we were screwed" story, some folks continue to claim victim when the truth of the matter is refs blow calls against everyone, not just us. We ain't special that way unless it's needed as an excuse. I despise excuses, lol. Truth, baby. Get some!

 

[MarcusRock]

Lol, I know you're right. Ironically he thinks it was probably a touchdown but is still arguing it. I will give him credit for having conviction though.

I'd rather have credit for the points made since they led to the conviction. Were they not awesome points? I mean, I'm no investigator but dang maybe I could be after retirement.