Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Patriots getting gifts

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:46 am
  • Patriots getting gifts. Anybody see that "reversal" of that touchdown. One of the worst rulings I've EVER seen.
    Last edited by Hollandhawk on Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
    Hollandhawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 216
    Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 3:53 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:49 am
  • Wow, what complete bullshit. "Fumbled the ball, regained control, then fumbled it in to the end zone. It's a touchback, New England ball."


    What a crock.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy

    http://ivotuk.com/
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 16325
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:52 am
  • Yeah, utter crap. "Legacy team" call.
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 23038
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:54 am
  • The ball came loose in Austin Sefarian-Jenkins hands, but he regained control.

    That was a touchdown.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy

    http://ivotuk.com/
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 16325
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:55 am
  • Even if it was a fumble out of the end zone they would have needed sufficient evidence to overturn the original TD call, no way in hell they had that.
    User avatar
    jhawk91
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1224
    Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:44 am
    Location: Newberg, Oregon


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:07 pm
  • Worst call I’ve seen in a long time.
    ITS A GREAT TIME TO BE A SEAHAWK FAN !
    User avatar
    pmedic920
    * .NET Official Stache *
     
    Posts: 16432
    Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:37 am
    Location: On the lake, Livingston Texas


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:25 pm
  • Terrible terrible call.

    NE always benefits from these.
    SixSeahawk
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 228
    Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 11:23 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:47 pm
  • Awful call...another affirmation that the Pats control the NFL and Kraft is the devil.
    User avatar
    RockinHawks
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 671
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:52 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:00 pm
  • Legacy team.. Legacy team...legacy team. No way they can have the pats at 3-3. Shit like this makes me want to turn the channel to something else on sundays. Same teams always get the benefit of the suspicious bs calls that results in a win
    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions 2014.02.02 Seahawks 43 Broncos 8
    User avatar
    Cyrus12
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4741
    Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 10:20 am
    Location: BC Canada


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:27 am
  • A fumble occurs when the ball carrier loses control of the ball. If the ball goes out of bounds in the endzone, then it's a touchback. This is not much different than the Gurley fumble last week.
    User avatar
    Mindsink
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 227
    Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:29 am


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:46 am
  • Hopefully the NFL looks at this. Defense should only get a touchback when they recover the ball in the end zone.

    They could change the rule to force the offense to have 1st and goal from the 10 (or even the 20) when a ball is fumbled out of the endzone. Doesn't make too much sense for rewarding the defense in a situation where they don't recover the ball
    Ramfan128
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 585
    Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 11:46 am


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:52 am
  • Mindsink wrote:A fumble occurs when the ball carrier loses control of the ball. If the ball goes out of bounds in the endzone, then it's a touchback. This is not much different than the Gurley fumble last week.


    Yep. Exactly.

    If people have a problem with this they have a problem with the rule, not with the call.

    That he regained possession of the ball while already out of bounds is neither here nor there.

    That said, that the defense gets possession of a ball fumbled out of the endzone, is I think, a bad rule. They made it that way because of the intentional fumble through the endzone way, way back by the Raiders, I think. In any case, I don't see any reason why they don't at least try to approximate something closer to the regular fumble out of bounds rule, in which the fumbling teams retains possession. If you want to put THEM on the 20 fine, whatever, but giving the defense the ball when they never possessed it doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

    Also, the 'legacy team' fluff is exhausting. Rodgers just got his collarbone broken on what could have been called a late hit (and after that what could have been called unnecessary roughness for driving after the tackle) and there was no call. That's the best QB in the league playing on the NFL's most historic legacy team which was also likely the best team in its division and there wasn't a call. To be clear I'm perfectly fine for the no-call on that play, but the 'legacy team' truthers don't want to talk about it because it's a knife to the heart for their conspiracy theory.
    User avatar
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4339
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 10:46 am
  • He didn't fumble the ball out of bounds, or anywhere. It came loose in his hands, and he regained control.

    This is completely different from the Gurley call. Gurley fumbled the ball, completely.

    Their interpretation of sufficient evidence, and the rule needs to be addressed.

    That was NOT a late hit on Aaron Rodgers. A late hit is when the defender takes several steps after the ball has left the QBs hands. It's a poor argument that uses invalid facts.

    What the LB should have been penalized for is driving Rodgers in to the ground, and he probably will be. But at game speed, it would hard to tell if that was driving him in to the ground. As fans, we have the benefit of several angles and slow motion. It took a couple of shots before I could determine if he drove him in to the ground, and it was borderline.

    Not surprised that there was no penalty, but there should be a fine.

    Legacy teams receiving benefits is true. Just look at Superbowel Movement *XL.

    Look at the Brady rule. Lots of QBs have had their knee destroyed, (Carson Palmer when he was kicking Stealer butt in the playoffs), yet no rule change until it happens to Tom Brady.

    Look at the Roy Williams (Dallas Cowboys)P rule. Horse collar was not a rule until it happened to a Cowboy.

    What about the Tony Romo rule? The kicker ball? After Seattle beat the Cowboys because Romo fumbled a new, slick abll, the rules were changed.

    The rule changes made for Legacy Teams are endless.

    Have you ever seen a rule change because of something negative that happened to the Seahawks?
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy

    http://ivotuk.com/
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 16325
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:04 am
  • ivotuk wrote:He didn't fumble the ball out of bounds, or anywhere. It came loose in his hands, and he regained control.


    Loss of ball control is literally the definition of a fumble. It doesn't need to touch the ground. Regaining control of the ball after he loses it simply means he recovered his own fumble. And in this case, recovered out of bounds in the side of the endzone.
    User avatar
    Mindsink
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 227
    Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:29 am


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:32 am
  • I didn't see this live, but I have seen replays of it, and I have come to the conclusion that I hate the rule, but not the ruling. I think they, by rule, got the call right, and that is really all I ever ask of the replay system. I do think they need to look at this in the off season though, because I really think that by the eye test, this really should be a TD. As long as the rule stays as is though, I would want them to continue to call it the same as they just did.
    Image

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

    :les: Check your PM's....We miss you :les:
    User avatar
    kidhawk
    * NET Moderator *
     
    Posts: 21892
    Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:00 pm
    Location: Anchorage, AK


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 3:17 pm
  • Mindsink wrote:
    ivotuk wrote:He didn't fumble the ball out of bounds, or anywhere. It came loose in his hands, and he regained control.


    Loss of ball control is literally the definition of a fumble. It doesn't need to touch the ground. Regaining control of the ball after he loses it simply means he recovered his own fumble. And in this case, recovered out of bounds in the side of the endzone.


    I've looked and the only angle I've seen is the one from the back corner of the end zone. From this angle, the ball is not visible from shortly after he loses possession until well after he hits out of bounds. The first sighting of the ball after hitting out of bound shows clear possession, but what happened with the ball during the half-second/full-yard of inbounds travel is not seen anywhere on film.

    Is there "incontravertible evidence" that he did not regain possession prior to being out of bounds?

    I have not seen any such evidence.

    The touchdown call should not have been overturned according to NFL rules.
    User avatar
    renofox
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 618
    Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 1:20 pm
    Location: Reno, NV


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:42 pm
  • Yes we have benefited from that rule! Earl both time plus Kam and megatron. Remember kaperinik throwing a pick six and the dang defender goes to the end one and Kaep tackles him and he fumbles out of endzone so 49 ers get ball right back o the 20 like nothing's ever happened. That's bs to overturn that td call tho.
    User avatar
    evergreen
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 471
    Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 4:56 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:08 pm
  • My problem with this overturn is that you cant clearly see that he didnt regain posession. You can clearly see he lost control of the ball, but the appears to have possibly regained control. The video evidence is not indisputable, therefore the original call should stand.
    User avatar
    XxXdragonXxX
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1749
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:40 am
    Location: Enumclaw, WA


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Mon Oct 16, 2017 8:23 pm
  • Popeyejones wrote:That said, that the defense gets possession of a ball fumbled out of the endzone, is I think, a bad rule. They made it that way because of the intentional fumble through the endzone way, way back by the Raiders, I think. In any case, I don't see any reason why they don't at least try to approximate something closer to the regular fumble out of bounds rule, in which the fumbling teams retains possession. If you want to put THEM on the 20 fine, whatever, but giving the defense the ball when they never possessed it doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

    This has to be the dumbest rule in existence. I cannot stand it.
    User avatar
    JimmyG
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:42 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:56 am
  • JimmyG wrote:
    Popeyejones wrote:That said, that the defense gets possession of a ball fumbled out of the endzone, is I think, a bad rule. They made it that way because of the intentional fumble through the endzone way, way back by the Raiders, I think. In any case, I don't see any reason why they don't at least try to approximate something closer to the regular fumble out of bounds rule, in which the fumbling teams retains possession. If you want to put THEM on the 20 fine, whatever, but giving the defense the ball when they never possessed it doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

    This has to be the dumbest rule in existence. I cannot stand it.


    Go back to January 1987, Meadowlands, NJ....49ers @ Giants NFC Divisional Playoff Game...

    First drive of the game, second or third play.....Montana finds Rice on a slant. Rice takes the slant and is going to get a touchdown for sure until he mysteriously fumbles the ball and it goes out of the end zone....touchback.

    What could have been 7-0 SF, eventually became 49-3 NYG.

    Now, not a guarantee SF wins the game or anything, but talk about a huge break.

    Ball IMO should be brought back to the point of fumble, just like it would be if you merely fumbled it out of bounds with the ball rolling forwards.

    If *anything*......only compromise for it being a touchback is if the defense forced the fumble. Rewarding the defense for something they did not contribute to seems asinine.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1403
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 7:06 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:00 am
  • BTW, I think the NFL should review many of these questionable rules each offseason, esp. without the prompting of controversial calls.

    For the league's benefit, it will be seen as trying to do the right thing instead of indirectly admitting mistake.

    The NFL I think was ok with implementing the "Navorro Bowman Rule" because the 49ers did get a divine intervention turnover on the very next play. But had they not, the league never would have been able to save face and change it.
    NINEster
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1403
    Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 7:06 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:09 pm
  • ivotuk wrote:
    The rule changes made for Legacy Teams are endless.

    Have you ever seen a rule change because of something negative that happened to the Seahawks?

    The return of Instant Replay post Vinny's helmet touchdown?
    Image
    User avatar
    Osprey
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 856
    Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:06 pm
    Location: Portland Oregon


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Tue Oct 17, 2017 2:48 pm
  • Osprey wrote:
    ivotuk wrote:
    The rule changes made for Legacy Teams are endless.

    Have you ever seen a rule change because of something negative that happened to the Seahawks?

    The return of Instant Replay post Vinny's helmet touchdown?
    Image

    The football on the jets logo of the helmet crossed the line, so Touchdown!
    - The NFL
    SEATTLE SEAHAWKS SUPERBOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS!

    May the spirit of our friend The Radish live on forever!

    I SO do not care about your fantasy team and who's on it!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 23038
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 4:36 pm
    Location: The pit


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:55 pm
  • ivotuk wrote:Look at the Brady rule. Lots of QBs have had their knee destroyed, (Carson Palmer when he was kicking Stealer butt in the playoffs), yet no rule change until it happens to Tom Brady.


    You don't know what you are talking about.

    The rule about low hits on a QB, unless a player happened to be blocked in the the QB was passed because of the low hit on Carson Palmer by Kimo Van Oelhoffen in 2006. The G.O.A.T. was hurt in 2008, and the Brady Rule was passed in 2009 - and the Brady rule was just an expansion of the Carson Palmer rule specifying that a player could not lunge into the knees of a qb.
    User avatar
    Pape
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 22
    Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:15 pm


Re: Patriots getting gifts
Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:57 pm
  • ivotuk wrote:Look at the Roy Williams (Dallas Cowboys) rule. Horse collar was not a rule until it happened to a Cowboy.


    Actually, that rule is called that in reference to Cowboys Safety Roy Williams, not their wide receiver. Safety Roy Williams was notorious for tackling that way. After the rule was implemented, he was half the player he used to be. That rule killed his game. He also was suspended for his continual violation of the rule.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse-collar_tackle
    "Soon, the super karate monkey death car would park in my space. But Jimmy has fancy plans, and pants to match."

    - Excerpt from Jimmy James: Macho Business Donkey Wrestler
    User avatar
    Maulbert
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3541
    Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:44 pm




It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:24 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online