So, watching that clip, you can see who has the ball, and he's all the way into the end zone before being pushed back out, so is this really in question that it's a TD?
Where is the "all the way into the endzone" coming from? His feet never get closer than about 24 inches outside the goal line. Obviously that doesn't mean that the ball never crosses the line, but it most certainly does prove that "all the way into the endzone"is incorrect.
Ball carrier, with ball, fully in end-zone.
Admittedly, I'd love to also have the side view from the right on this, but that looks like a TD to me.
EDIT: Taking a closer look at the screenshot, I see what you mean about his feet, but with the position of his torso and the ball, along with the positions of the other players, Vikings D feet, etc, I'd say that' pretty clearly a TD. Also, not like it changed the outcome of the game in any way, so, meh.
B1G refs... corrupt, or just incompetent?
Ball carrier, with ball, fully in end-zone.
Admittedly, I'd love to also have the side view from the right on this, but that looks like a TD to me.
EDIT: Taking a closer look at the screenshot, I see what you mean about his feet, but with the position of his torso and the ball, along with the positions of the other players, Vikings D feet, etc, I'd say that' pretty clearly a TD. Also, not like it changed the outcome of the game in any way, so, meh.
To use your picture to try and help my point. Do you think that #84 from the Jets is in the endzone? His head and shoulders appear to be over the goal line, when in reality His entire body is 5-8 feet short of the line.
Why the overhead camera isn't positioned directly above the goal line is beyond me. How can you tell definitively by looking at an offset camera? BTW, I do think he got in but just barely.
Why the overhead camera isn't positioned directly above the goal line is beyond me. How can you tell definitively by looking at an offset camera? BTW, I do think he got in but just barely.
This is the way I see it. Unless there is a more definitive view, I would label that as a "probable" touchdown. Trouble is, the call on the field was that he did not cross the goal line, so the default judgement should be no score.
Ball carrier, with ball, fully in end-zone.
Admittedly, I'd love to also have the side view from the right on this, but that looks like a TD to me.
EDIT: Taking a closer look at the screenshot, I see what you mean about his feet, but with the position of his torso and the ball, along with the positions of the other players, Vikings D feet, etc, I'd say that' pretty clearly a TD. Also, not like it changed the outcome of the game in any way, so, meh.
To use your picture to try and help my point. Do you think that #84 from the Jets is in the endzone? His head and shoulders appear to be over the goal line, when in reality His entire body is 5-8 feet short of the line.
If he had the ball in his chest...yes I would buy he was in the end zone. Tougher call than the actual play though obviously.
Ball carrier, with ball, fully in end-zone.
Admittedly, I'd love to also have the side view from the right on this, but that looks like a TD to me.
EDIT: Taking a closer look at the screenshot, I see what you mean about his feet, but with the position of his torso and the ball, along with the positions of the other players, Vikings D feet, etc, I'd say that' pretty clearly a TD. Also, not like it changed the outcome of the game in any way, so, meh.
To use your picture to try and help my point. Do you think that #84 from the Jets is in the endzone? His head and shoulders appear to be over the goal line, when in reality His entire body is 5-8 feet short of the line.
If he had the ball in his chest...yes I would buy he was in the end zone. Tougher call than the actual play though obviously.
Yeah, I don't really have a strong opinion or argument that it wasn't a touchdown. I was just amazed at the number of people who think that video above proves anything.
So, watching that clip, you can see who has the ball, and he's all the way into the end zone before being pushed back out, so is this really in question that it's a TD?
That shot isn’t close enough to the goal line to get a proper angle, but that one does show that the ball was in his left arm which was closest to the goal line. If you combine that with the other angles they showed you can tell he was easily in.
Is there a luckier team in the history of the league?
And I guess I don't agree with your take on the D either. Stats only matter in Fantasy Football.
Well wait, one stat matters 10-2!
Football is a matchup based game and stats lay out how those matchups will go. If your strength is their weakness that’s how you build your game plan.
Right and yet every week teams that have no business having success do and teamss that should dominate lay an egg. Games aren't played on computers and stat sheets they are played on the field. (Or in my tv!)
We can pretend the Vikes are just lucky, but history proves good teams make they own luck.
It's like we used to say about hockey polls...the only poll that matters is the one though use to hang your banner. The only start that matters in football is wins and losses.
That’s why there’s surprise outcomes every week, especially when we get later in the season. Teams break down film and look at stats to find exploitable matchups that we as fans aren’t gonna dig deep enough to see. They’re looking at stuff like “wow this team is getting consistently beaten with an LB on TE matchup” or “they are third worst team in the league against runs up the middle”. The stats point out the trends and that’s what results in wins.
They had a goal line view and you cannot see the ball cross the goal line. However, by using the overhead camera, you can see the ball is in his left hand. On the goal line view, you can clearly see his left shoulder across the goal line. By piecing the two together, it was a touchdown.
It reminds me of a play that happened in the NCAA tournament almost a decade ago now. I believe it was Notre Dame that got eliminated because of it. Overtime and a shot hit the goalie's left bad very low. You can't see the puck cross the goal line, but you can see how far the goalie's pad was in the net. Since you couldn't see the puck outside the goal line, it only made sense the puck was across the line and the goal was counted.
Yesterday, the Jets' receivers were always wide open on the 7yd (or so) slant to the middle, but Mike White is Mike White, and didn't really make good throws to those spots.Is there a luckier team in the history of the league?
And I guess I don't agree with your take on the D either. Stats only matter in Fantasy Football.
Well wait, one stat matters 10-2!
Football is a matchup based game and stats lay out how those matchups will go. If your strength is their weakness that’s how you build your game plan.
Right and yet every week teams that have no business having success do and teamss that should dominate lay an egg. Games aren't played on computers and stat sheets they are played on the field. (Or in my tv!)
We can pretend the Vikes are just lucky, but history proves good teams make they own luck.
It's like we used to say about hockey polls...the only poll that matters is the one though use to hang your banner. The only start that matters in football is wins and losses.
That’s why there’s surprise outcomes every week, especially when we get later in the season. Teams break down film and look at stats to find exploitable matchups that we as fans aren’t gonna dig deep enough to see. They’re looking at stuff like “wow this team is getting consistently beaten with an LB on TE matchup” or “they are third worst team in the league against runs up the middle”. The stats point out the trends and that’s what results in wins.
When you tell somebody somethin', it depends on what part of the United States you're standin' in... as to just how dumb you are.
I don’t mind the concept of going for it on 4th and 1 from your own 40 but not if you’re just gonna run a standard run play. There has to be some level of deception or use of speed…you only need a yard. Reagor or JJ racing to the outside are gonna be able to get 1 yard just on pure speed.
It didn’t matter but how do you miss that obvious face mask call on Cousins?
It didn’t matter but how do you miss that obvious face mask call on Cousins?
That was a ridiculously bad miss.
I don’t mind the concept of going for it on 4th and 1 from your own 40 but not if you’re just gonna run a standard run play. There has to be some level of deception or use of speed…you only need a yard. Reagor or JJ racing to the outside are gonna be able to get 1 yard just on pure speed.
That's what I said too. You're missing 2 starting OL and on 4th and almost 2 you do a shotgun run right up the gut? Then on the scoring drive they just capped off they use a jet sweep to KJ and a flip to Dalvin. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Either of those plays would have been better on 4th down than the one you ran.
I told my Lions friends today that Goff could feasibly throw for 400 yards today. Harrison Smith is out, Akayleb Evans is out. I know Dantzler is back but he's probably on a snap count.
Bynum and Metellus as the safeties today has gotta be a QB's dream (although I do like Bynum, I think he's benefitted greatly playing alongside Harrison).
I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate how NFL QBs are over protected.
Keep your stick on the ice...
Hockenson drops an easy first down. Ugh.
I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate how NFL QBs are over protected.
Except for the facemask they missed on Kirk 😉
That Goff slide was super super late (I went back and freeze-framed on when he started the slide, he was about 2 yards from Sullivan) but Sullivan didn't even attempt to lay off on the hit. The only positive thing he did was not go right at him with the helmet, basically.
Good challenge by KOC here. This should be pretty obviously a first down.
Good challenge by KOC here. This should be pretty obviously a first down.
No. We actually got a generous spot.
Good challenge by KOC here. This should be pretty obviously a first down.
and of course they can’t get the obvious call right
And of course the refs uphold the call on the field.
Nope, he came back and wasn’t touched until a yard short. In college it’s good, right? Lame.
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
Vikings defense sucks
Aloha!
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
It's a pretty simple rule
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
It's a pretty simple rule
Forward progress means he was being tackled and pushed backwards. He we backwards on his own accord. Same thing as if he was standing up and ran backwards. Just because he was on the ground doesn’t change anything. It’s pretty simple to understand.
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
It's a pretty simple rule
Forward progress means he was being tackled and pushed backwards. He we backwards on his own accord. Same thing as if he was standing up and ran backwards. Just because he was on the ground doesn’t change anything. It’s pretty simple to understand.
Yeah, kinda scary that an NFL head coach doesn't know the rule book
This is a stupid review. It’s obviously the right call, why stop the game.
This is a stupid review. It’s obviously the right call, why stop the game.
He was def OOB but they screw this one up too.
LOL
Vikings try to get cute on first and goa on the 3, Dalvin panics and drops the ball and now Detroit will have a 2 score lead at half.
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
It's a pretty simple rule
Forward progress means he was being tackled and pushed backwards. He we backwards on his own accord. Same thing as if he was standing up and ran backwards. Just because he was on the ground doesn’t change anything. It’s pretty simple to understand.
You can cry about the “rulebook” all you want, 9 out of 10 times if a receiver catches the ball and goes to the ground he is given forward progress. If that first down line is the end zone it’s called a TD every time, why would this be any different if he immediately goes to the ground. If you’re looking for consistency from NFL referees you’re gonna be disappointed. I’m not saying it’s not theoretically the right call but that’s not the way it’s usually called.
Wow Badgely missed. Only his second miss of the season.
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
It's a pretty simple rule
Forward progress means he was being tackled and pushed backwards. He we backwards on his own accord. Same thing as if he was standing up and ran backwards. Just because he was on the ground doesn’t change anything. It’s pretty simple to understand.
You can cry about the “rulebook” all you want, 9 out of 10 times if a receiver catches the ball and goes to the ground he is given forward progress. If that first down line is the end zone it’s called a TD every time, why would this be any different if he immediately goes to the ground. If you’re looking for consistency from NFL referees you’re gonna be disappointed. I’m not saying it’s not theoretically the right call but that’s not the way it’s usually called.
And you can "cry" about the officiating without actually knowing the rules. Comparing that play to a play that occurs in the endzone, just further demonstrates your lack of understanding of the rules.
KJ Osborne was just given forward progress even though he didn’t immediately go to the ground. No consistency.
Thielen obviously didn’t catch that, these refs are awful.
He didn’t get touched. He didn’t give himself up. His momentum brought him back. That’s the correct call.
He gets forward progress 9 out of 10 times but this crew has already blown or missed 3 calls. Just cause the analyst on the broadcast says something doesn’t mean it’s right.
It's a pretty simple rule
Forward progress means he was being tackled and pushed backwards. He we backwards on his own accord. Same thing as if he was standing up and ran backwards. Just because he was on the ground doesn’t change anything. It’s pretty simple to understand.
You can cry about the “rulebook” all you want, 9 out of 10 times if a receiver catches the ball and goes to the ground he is given forward progress. If that first down line is the end zone it’s called a TD every time, why would this be any different if he immediately goes to the ground. If you’re looking for consistency from NFL referees you’re gonna be disappointed. I’m not saying it’s not theoretically the right call but that’s not the way it’s usually called.
And you can "cry" about the officiating without actually knowing the rules. Comparing that play to a play that occurs in the endzone, just further demonstrates your lack of understanding of the rules.
Calling people who disagree with you dumb, the jerky go-to. I’m aware of the difference between an end zone call and a call on the field of play but there’s no reason why it should be called differently in this instance. I’m saying that’s not how it’s usually called and they’re not even calling it consistently in this game. That’s why KOC took a shot at getting it overturned.
I'm sure some math major can tell me why the team went for 2 there down by 8 with 17 minutes of the game left but that is an absolutely ridiculously bad decision by KOC there.
I was confused with the call as well. Had to blink a half dozen times to make sure I was seeing score correctly.
Keep your stick on the ice...
I can't think of a good defense to that decision unless they had seen something on tape that told them they were guaranteed to get it.
Why go for two there? Get the point after and your in a much better spot than if you miss the 2 pointer, and then it’s a bad play, way too slow by Theilen. But why take the chance at not getting the point after and be at 14? Detroit can still lose, they usually find a way.
No pass defense + No pass rush= Disaster
Now we're down 12 with 10:45 left and the defense hasn't seemed interested in stopping Goff all day.
KOC has over-coached this game right into an L. Simply terrible.
Yeah it’s hard to see the comeback coming in this one.
Unless they start dropping the ball a lot or Goff throws it back to the Vikes, they're cooked.