Whats the Rule on Instant Replay?

[ConstantReboot]

This has been bothering me for quite some time why Dez's catch was overturned.

What are the rules for reversals? If there was insufficient evidence then why was it overturned?

I thought the responsibility of a review was to make sure that the ref on the field did not make the wrong call and that if there is not enough evidence to overturn, than the plays stands, right?

The booth review is not allowed to make interpretations on the rules and that the call on the field should trump whatever the booth is suggesting. Mainly the booth cannot override a call unless there is sufficient evidence to do so.

McCarthy challenged the call because he thought Dez bobbled the ball. Upon further review it showed that Bryant didn't bobble the ball, he caught it clean and took 3 steps. Thus the challenge should be nullified and the play should have stand.

The booth did not have the rights to make an interpretation on their own and overturn the play, PERIOD.

Thus why was this play overturned?

 

[Doomsday101]

I think the big question is was it a "football move" after the catch before Dez went the ground. I do see the ball pop up once Dez hits the ground and I think the focus was more on that then did he make a football move? What I saw was Dez making the catch then took 3 steps towards the goal line and extended the ball out which in my view constituted a football move

 

[ConstantReboot]

I think the big question is was it a "football move" after the catch before Dez went the ground. I do see the ball pop up once Dez hits the ground and I think the focus was more on that then did he make a football move? What I saw was Dez making the catch then took 3 steps towards the goal line and extended the ball out which in my view constituted a football move

Yes and even though that booth disagree it should have been left to the discretion of the ref on the field to make the call, which didn't happen.

The challenge flag was that Dez bobbled the ball and thus should have been ruled an incomplete. But he didn't bobble it, took 3 steps and lunged forward. Nothing can be more obvious. Thus the challenge flag should have been nullified.

The challenge had nothing to do with football moves or CJ rules, etc. The challenge was did Dez bobble the ball and he didn't. Thus the call should have stayed a catch.

 

[tyke1doe]

If McCarthy doesn't have a challenge, then the refs never would have reviewed the play. Scoring plays are automatically reviewable. But plays in the field of play aren't automatically challenged.

McCarthy lost a challenge in the first half and wouldn't have been able to challenge any other controversial call in the first half. But in the second half, coaches are given another challenge. But if I'm wrong, someone will correct my understanding of the challenge system.

 

[Doomsday101]

Yes and even though that booth disagree it should have been left to the discretion of the ref on the field to make the call, which didn't happen.

The challenge flag was that Dez bobbled the ball and thus should have been ruled an incomplete. But he didn't bobble it, took 3 steps and lunged forward. Nothing can be more obvious. Thus the challenge flag should have been nullified.

The challenge had nothing to do with football moves or CJ rules, etc. The challenge was did Dez bobble the ball and he didn't. Thus the call should have stayed a catch.

Once the challenge is made and GB made the challenge based on the ball popping up after Dez hit the ground. I do not agree with them, I think Dez made the catch, made a football move going to the goal line as he hit the ground the ball did hit the ground and popped up.

 

[Derinyar]

This has been bothering me for quite some time why Dez's catch was overturned.

What are the rules for reversals? If there was insufficient evidence then why was it overturned?

I thought the responsibility of a review was to make sure that the ref on the field did not make the wrong call and that if there is not enough evidence to overturn, than the plays stands, right?

The booth review is not allowed to make interpretations on the rules and that the call on the field should trump whatever the booth is suggesting. Mainly the booth cannot override a call unless there is sufficient evidence to do so.

McCarthy challenged the call because he thought Dez bobbled the ball. Upon further review it showed that Bryant didn't bobble the ball, he caught it clean and took 3 steps. Thus the challenge should be nullified and the play should have stand.

The booth did not have the rights to make an interpretation on their own and overturn the play, PERIOD.

Thus why was this play overturned?

The quote from Steratore basically sounds like he set out looking to confirm the call as opposed to over turn it. He said he looked for a football move and didn't see one. He used the wrong criteria for a replay question, from my understanding. The problem is that you're having to prove a negative for what he had to do, and that's very hard to do with judgement calls to any extent.

I think the overturn is more likely if its not called a catch and you review it then how they did it. It's easier to find the affirmative proof then to find the negative proof. Basically I'm at the point of saying Steratore isn't a good ref because he doesn't really apply the rules correctly.

 

[craig71]

I will always believe that the field judge had the best view of the play and there was not indisputable video evidence to overturn the call on the field. Another thing that chaps my posterior is how the league instructs the referee to see how decisive the official is in making the original ruling. In this case the field judge was decisive in ruling it a catch and marking Dez down at the 1 or so. What you did not see is an official who paused in anyway as to indicate that he was unsure of anything that he saw. At the end of the day though they let the packers hang around and put themselves in a position to where one play determined the outcome.


Craig

 

[Dave_in-NC]

Another 15 pager?

 

[ConstantReboot]

The quote from Steratore basically sounds like he set out looking to confirm the call as opposed to over turn it. He said he looked for a football move and didn't see one. He used the wrong criteria for a replay question, from my understanding. The problem is that you're having to prove a negative for what he had to do, and that's very hard to do with judgement calls to any extent.

I think the overturn is more likely if its not called a catch and you review it then how they did it. It's easier to find the affirmative proof then to find the negative proof. Basically I'm at the point of saying Steratore isn't a good ref because he doesn't really apply the rules correctly.

But was there sufficient evidence to overturn it? I don't think so.

Looking at it from their point of view they know its a catch but they WANTED to overturn it. Then they would justify with the RULESBOOK later.

 

[Derinyar]

I will always believe that the field judge had the best view of the play and there was not indisputable video evidence to overturn the call on the field. Another thing that chaps my posterior is how the league instructs the referee to see how decisive the official is in making the original ruling. In this case the field judge was decisive in ruling it a catch and marking Dez down at the 1 or so. What you did not see is an official who paused in anyway as to indicate that he was unsure of anything that he saw. At the end of the day though they let the packers hang around and put themselves in a position to where one play determined the outcome.


Craig

To some extent I think you can argue that Steratore helped in that some also. Confirming what appeared to be a blatant bounce on the Cobb catch on the Packers final drive of the 1st half. I think there's at least some argument that the Refs are somewhat responsible for a 10 point swing in the game. That's enough to change the outcome of probably 90% of NFL games.

 

[Derinyar]

But was there sufficient evidence to overturn it? I don't think so.

Looking at it from their point of view they know its a catch but they WANTED to overturn it. Then they would justify with the RULESBOOK later.

That's what I'm saying. They had to have absolute evidence of a negative to over turn it. I don't think it was really possible to find absolute evidence of Dez not completing the process in that play. Their initial statements pretty much confirmed that in basically saying, I don't think he did enough to constitute a football move. And I do think that they set out to prove the catch happened as opposed to the catch didn't happen. Its sorta like putting the burden of proof on the defense in a criminal trial. He's guilty, now prove he isn't.

 

[Kevinicus]

If McCarthy doesn't have a challenge, then the refs never would have reviewed the play. Scoring plays are automatically reviewable. But plays in the field of play aren't automatically challenged.

McCarthy lost a challenge in the first half and wouldn't have been able to challenge any other controversial call in the first half. But in the second half, coaches are given another challenge. But if I'm wrong, someone will correct my understanding of the challenge system.

They get 2, but it has nothing to do with the halves. They can use both in the first minute of the game if they want.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Steratore needs to go. The NFL should just reassign him to "other duties" and never let him make a call concerning a game ever again.

 

[ConstantReboot]

That's what I'm saying. They had to have absolute evidence of a negative to over turn it. I don't think it was really possible to find absolute evidence of Dez not completing the process in that play. Their initial statements pretty much confirmed that in basically saying, I don't think he did enough to constitute a football move. And I do think that they set out to prove the catch happened as opposed to the catch didn't happen. Its sorta like putting the burden of proof on the defense in a criminal trial. He's guilty, now prove he isn't.

Which that evidence never surfaced. It was like they took out their rulebook and say were going by this to overturn it because they ABSOLUTELY have no evidence whatsoever. The problem with their statement is the "I dont think" statement. Thats nothing more than interpretation. The ruling on the field call trumps an interpretation by the booth.

So all of this is based on interpretation? Sounds very fishy.....

 

[craig71]

To some extent I think you can argue that Steratore helped in that some also. Confirming what appeared to be a blatant bounce on the Cobb catch on the Packers final drive of the 1st half. I think there's at least some argument that the Refs are somewhat responsible for a 10 point swing in the game. That's enough to change the outcome of probably 90% of NFL games.

Funny how that call stood with the ball appearing to bounce around like a pinball isn't it. If that wasn't indisputable evidence for Skeletor to overturn the ruling on the field how can the Dez catch be overturned? On the other hand clock/play mismanagement resulted in green bay getting the ball back with that much of the clock left in the first half. At the end of the day it is a damn shame that a potentially great game was tarnished by an idiotic ruling.


Craig

 

[Derinyar]

Funny how that call stood with the ball appearing to bounce around like a pinball isn't it. If that wasn't indisputable evidence for Skeletor to overturn the ruling on the field how can the Dez catch be overturned? On the other hand clock/play mismanagement resulted in green bay getting the ball back with that much of the clock left in the first half. At the end of the day it is a damn shame that a potentially great game was tarnished by an idiotic ruling.


Craig

The other thing that gets lost in the relay of the Dez call is that the process of it wasn't even fully handled correctly. It's not a real game issue, but they didn't reset the clock correctly out of it. If its an incomplete pass then its a change of possession and an onfield time out, so the game clock should have been reset till right after the incompletion was ruled. They lost, IIRC, about 30 seconds of clock.

 

[craig71]

Steratore needs to go. The NFL should just reassign him to "other duties" and never let him make a call concerning a game ever again.

Dude will likely get some sort of promotion before all is said and done.


Craig

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Dude will likely get some sort of promotion before all is said and done.


Craig

Most likely. They will stick behind him yada yada yada, to show support for their officiating crews...

and also, all those friends he has back home right now, Love Him. Love him!!!

 

[craig71]

The other thing that gets lost in the relay of the Dez call is that the process of it wasn't even fully handled correctly. It's not a real game issue, but they didn't reset the clock correctly out of it. If its an incomplete pass then its a change of possession and an onfield time out, so the game clock should have been reset till right after the incompletion was ruled. They lost, IIRC, about 30 seconds of clock.

You are right about that. I thought it was a 36 second runoff when all was said and done. If I didn't know better I would have though the replacement refs were back in town.


Craig

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Most likely. They will stick behind him yada yada yada, to show support for their officiating crews...

and also, all those friends he has back home right now, Love Him. Love him!!!

But all my "theories" and what not, are just theories.

For the record. The call this official made to overturn this play, is the worst call I have ever seen. And action should be taken against this employee based off that alone. He should be judged as . not good enough. - I am serious about that.