The botched coin toss thread

[shabazz]

Where in the rule book did you see, "The captain can only answer twice, and the latter being the final answer."?

USPS Rule Book, chapter 11, section 3; " The Postman Always Rings Twice"

 

[Proximo]

Are people really debating this?
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, it is CZ, after all.

I’m just not seeing the alleged controversy-
We won the coin toss, right?
And we wanted to defer, right?
And that’s ultimately what happened, right?

Where is the controversy again?

Why would the team who won the coin toss get screwed because of a very minor misunderstanding or miscommunication?

Like the guy said during the broadcast, at some point you just have to execute common sense.

 

[Runwildboys]

If they're going to be robots about it then ask the Coin flip winner, "Choose or Defer" get one or the other... then ask the team with the choice what their choice is.

I think "kick or receive" would be the most infallible way to ask, and make it part of the rule that whoever receives the first kickoff must kick the second half kickoff, and vise versa.

 

[Runwildboys]

Are people really debating this?
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, it is CZ, after all.

I’m just not seeing the alleged controversy-
We won the coin toss, right?
And we wanted to defer, right?
And that’s ultimately what happened, right?

Where is the controversy again?

Why would the team who won the coin toss get screwed because of a very minor misunderstanding or miscommunication?

Like the guy said during the broadcast, at some point you just have to execute common sense.

Agreed, but if there was no audio evidence, or New York chose not to insert themselves, the Rams would have received both kickoffs.

 

[Proximo]

Agreed, but if there was no audio evidence, or New York chose not to insert themselves, the Rams would have received both kickoffs.

And the Rams would’ve caught one heck of a break had that been the case.
Thankfully, common sense prevailed.

 

[Runwildboys]

It has happened in the past where a team kick twice due to wind factors. That why the rules is still in place for rare situations.

You're gonna have to come up with a link for that claim, my horny little friend.

 

[Proximo]

You're gonna have to come up with a link for that claim, my horny little friend.

It does happen, rarely.
I recall a Jets/Pats game, where it was incredibly windy, and it went into overtime. The Pats won the OT coin toss, and everyone was pretty surprised when they opted to choose which goal to defend instead of choosing to receive the kickoff.
So, they got the wind to their backs (which was apparently more important to them than receiving the kickoff in that situation).
And the Jets got the ball to start OT.

 

[Runwildboys]

It does happen, rarely.
I recall a Jets/Pats game, where it was incredibly windy, and it went into overtime. The Pats won the OT coin toss, and everyone was pretty surprised when they opted to choose which goal to defend instead of choosing to receive the kickoff.
So, they got the wind to their backs (which was apparently more important to them than receiving the kickoff in that situation).
And the Jets got the ball to start OT.

But that's not the same as choosing to start both halves kicking away. I've never heard of anyone ever doing that.

 

[Proximo]

But that's not the same as choosing to start both halves kicking away. I've never heard of anyone ever doing that.

Yea that would make zero sense.

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

But that's not the same as choosing to start both halves kicking away. I've never heard of anyone ever doing that.

Already checked online earlier. There isn't a single mention of this happening anywhere online. Those referencing the '85 bears doing it are intentionally grabbing a single instance that happened before the internet was being used so their comment can't be refuted.

 

[Runwildboys]

Already checked online earlier. There isn't a single mention of this happening anywhere online. Those referencing the '85 bears doing it are intentionally grabbing a single instance that happened before the internet was being used so their comment can't be refuted.

Even if it did happen, I'm sure the official said, "You wanna do WHAT?...Okay, let me make sure I understand this. You wanna kickoff now, and then kickoff again at the start of the second half??.....Let me check and see if that's legal."

 

[MarcusRock]

Already checked online earlier. There isn't a single mention of this happening anywhere online. Those referencing the '85 bears doing it are intentionally grabbing a single instance that happened before the internet was being used so their comment can't be refuted.

This article mentions it happening in college twice, not the pros. And it was an error that didn't get corrected.

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2019/12/15/21023265/cowboys-coin-toss-defer-dak-prescott-rams

 

[MarcusRock]

The League's explanation.



Honestly, for one who administers the rules, I'd think you wouldn't paraphrase rules you're talking about just so there's no doubt about the rule in question and how it's being applied.

 

[dogunwo]

Its an antiquated rule. Get rid of it. It should be as simple as which half do you want to receive, first or second?

 

[Kaiser]

Are people really debating this?
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, it is CZ, after all..

The thread was started by the guy that spent several pages of a thread arguing Witten tripped over his own feet in the Minnesota game and that he didn't fall just because he was tackled by a Vikings DB.

 

[lurkercowboy]

It does happen, rarely.
I recall a Jets/Pats game, where it was incredibly windy, and it went into overtime. The Pats won the OT coin toss, and everyone was pretty surprised when they opted to choose which goal to defend instead of choosing to receive the kickoff.
So, they got the wind to their backs (which was apparently more important to them than receiving the kickoff in that situation).
And the Jets got the ball to start OT.

That happened in the final regular season game in 1981. Landry picked the goal to defend instead of taking the ball at the after winning the OT coin toss against the Giants.

 

[MarcusRock]

The thread was started by the guy that spent several pages of a thread arguing Witten tripped over his own feet in the Minnesota game and that he didn't fall just because he was tackled by a Vikings DB.

Still bitter because I busted you lying repeatedly, Fan Boi? (LINK 1; LINK 2) Lol.

What's funny is you come in here trying to again cry CONSPIRACY! about the Butler penalty which you know nothing about. But once you get busted lying about a conspiracy (Link 1), your word means nothing. Can't blame you for trying though. But yeah, I follow YOU around as you say. Exhibit A to another lie.

 

[Kaiser]

What's funny is you come in here trying to again cry CONSPIRACY! about the Butler penalty which you know nothing about.

Yes, Einstein, the Butler penalty was just something I made up today. You got me.

I would take you seriously if anyone here had agreed with your posts since Dak Prescott joined the team.

 

[ClappingCarrot]

For once, and I mean once for the first time ever, I agree with what Rex Ryan had to say on the subject.

This is just the brilliant dentist that is Walt Anderson wanting to show the world how smart he is (as it relates to interpreting the rules) and heard what he wanted to hear. Surprised that the NFL ended up getting this right, because history has shown us the past 10-15 years that every bizarre NFL rule or technicality goes against us.

 

[mrmojo]

Ok so if you win the opening coin toss and say your gonna kick, then the opposing team automatically has the choice to kick or receive in the 2nd half? But if you win the opening toss and say your gonna defer, then the opposing team has no choice but to kickoff in the 2nd half?

Clear as mud..........