Stafford didn't get in

[AbeBeta]

I don't believe that's what happened.

The 2 officials whose job it is to spot the ball both called him down short. So what made them magically change their minds 20 seconds later?

Maybe discussion with others who had a clearer angle? You know, like how it is supposed to work.

 

[csirl]

I don't believe either sideline official saw the ball cross the plane. Both officials will mirror each other in going into the middle of the field even if neither got the spot - this is the mechanics they are thought.

If neither sees the ball, the procedure is as follows:

1. Confer with Umpire on final position of the ball/player - Umpire is nearest to the pileup.

2. Take the position of the ball when all the bodies are peeled off.

They went with either #1 or #2.

You can't really blame anyone for not getting a clear view given the number of bodies in the way.

 

[Nav22]

Maybe discussion with others who had a clearer angle? You know, like how it is supposed to work.

You clearly have no clue how it's supposed to work.

Again: there are 2 officials who line up by each pylon and whose job it is to spot the ball accurately. They are the ones with the very best angle on whether or not the ball crossed the plane.

They called Stafford down short of the goalline, then changed their minds 20 seconds later.

 

[AbeBeta]

You clearly have no clue how it's supposed to work.

Again: there are 2 officials who line up by each pylon and whose job it is to spot the ball accurately. They are the ones with the very best angle on whether or not the ball crossed the plane.

They called Stafford down short of the goalline, then changed their minds 20 seconds later.

Yes. The officials aren't supposed to confer.

Yes. I'm the clueless one.

 

[Nav22]

Yes. The officials aren't supposed to confer.

Yes. I'm the clueless one.

LOL "confer" with the officials who have a different job altogether than to spot the ball?

Yep, you're clueless.

 

[AbeBeta]

LOL "confer" with the officials who have a different job altogether than to spot the ball?

Yep, you're clueless.

One whose job it was didn't signal anything - and he gave his info to the crew chief so as not to appear to overturn the other guy at the goal line. Allows the boss to make the call.

That's him not being an #$&. Wouldn't expect you to understand that.

 

[Nav22]

One whose job it was didn't signal anything - and he gave his info to the crew chief so as not to appear to overturn the other guy at the goal line. Allows the boss to make the call.

That's him not being an #$&. Wouldn't expect you to understand that.

LOL! Utterly clueless.

 

[AbeBeta]

LOL! Utterly clueless.

Yes. If I'm the crew chief, I'd totally discourage a discussion. What on earth do you think happened there? Some sort of conspiracy?

Maybe the 2nd linesman wanted to verify if the other blew the play dead. That certainly would affect his call.

And that's clearly worth a discussion. Unless you are clueless, then you make it out to be a plot against us.

 

[BoysWin]

I thought he clearly got in

Only after the whistle........ I too thought the time for no forward progress was an exaggerated amount of time. Poor officiating. Stafford was stopped short of the LOS, with real refs.

 

[guag]

Yea. I have a habit of fast forwarding the dvr The instant the other team scores so I don't see their celebration and stuff and after one review I quickly fast forwarded

Lol I'm the same way.

 

[Kevinicus]

Yes. He got in.

But I've taken no liberties in how I explained it above... it was 3 full seconds after the whistles began blowing that that happened. Don't take my word for it, tho... watch the replay yourself.

I just watched the replay. It appears the whistle is well after the ball crossed the plane.

 

[TheHerd]

I just watched the replay. It appears the whistle is well after the ball crossed the plane.

Yes, we can argue the whistle should have been blown earlier, but it wasn't.

That's been a trend all year, with the refs letting the pile move around well after the whistle would have been blown in the past, but letting the pile move for an extended period didn't start with this play. TD.

What the team has to take away from this is to keep shoving the pile backwards and for all the lookers on to join the scrum and push it back. Leave no doubt. This could very well come up later, as NE loves the QB sneak.

 

[_sturt_]

Two days later, he watched the replay.

*facepalm* *chuckle* *smh*

And amazingly, comes to the same conclusion.

*lol*

 

[flosho]

It's pretty clear he got the football across before evidence of a whistle or stop of forward progress.


Im also not concerned about the refs discussing the call before making a final judgement. If the umpire or one of the other refs has clear visual they should confer to make the correct call.

 

[Doomsday101]

We fuss at officials on these calls yet can't agree on the calls ourselves. lol I thought he got in after watching replay. Thankfully TD are automatic reviews so no loss of timeouts in reviewing it.

 

[Kevinicus]

Two days later, he watched the replay.

*facepalm* *chuckle* *smh*

And amazingly, comes to the same conclusion.

*lol*

Yes, I did. I was at the game Monday night and drove back home to Kansas City yesterday. I'm sorry I didn't have the time to watch a good replay prior to now. Highlights on TV weren't good enough as there was no audio. Did you watch the replay? If so, I have to question where you came up with the notion that the whistle was blown prior to the ball crossing the plane? It was not even close.



Go to the 1:50 mark for the play.

 

[mahoneybill]

The one clear view from the goal line that there is before he gets covered up, Stafford was turned sideways, and the ball was essentially where the line judge was marking it.

(Until he wasn't marking it there any more.)

Don't recall us seeing an angle on the play from the side where the line judge came running in , to me signaling short...

 

[_sturt_]

So, I finally felt ticked-off enough by this whole "of course he got in" mantra that I sat here the last 5 minutes and went frame by frame full screen.

Only to find that I was wrong.

I hate being wrong, but I hate worse to be one of those intellectually dishonest people who won't own up to being wrong.

Now, saving face just a little bit, I find it doubtful that anyone else bothered to do what I just did, and moreover, save me the "it was obvious, I didn't need to slow it down frame by frame" retorts.

But, indeed, this frame is evidence that I was wrong, others were right. And yes, I did go back and found that the whistles had not blown just yet.

The concerns that some have voiced about how the refs handled it, of course, remain undeterred. The ruling on the field was the ruling on the field based on what the refs saw.... it should have been overturned based on this evidence, but let the process play itself out.