Does instant replay review even work?

[Freemanm]

Hate to sound paranoid, but something's up with the officiating. First, I wasn't rooting for either the Panthers or the Broncos and I truly didn't care who won. But this is the second game in a row in the playoffs where I saw one team get a bit favored by the refs, and in this game, it was the Broncos. In the 1q, Jerricho Cotchery clearly had a catch. The instant replay showed it, and even Phil Simms and the retired ref said it was a catch, yet the refs mysteriously announced that it wasn't, even though the replay clearly showed that it was. The next play Denver had the fumble/TD, so if the refs made the right call on the Cotchery catch, the complexion of the whole game might have been different. 

I also saw this in the AFCCG, when Amendola on the Patriots made a catch and clearly fumbled the ball in the 2q. There was a replay review, which showed that Amendola clearly caught the football, made a football move, and then fumbled it. Even the announcers and the retired ref/analyst said so. The Broncos won the game anyway, but I'm still wondering how the refs, who favored the Pats that whole game, didn't call that a fumble. 

Why even bother with replay review when the refs still get the call wrong?

[The Troll]

Phil Simms and the retired ref are both confirmed to be absolute morons and wrong far more than they are right.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TuscanyTile2]

Pretty sure it was the retired head of refs.  And absolutely the replay guy made a terrible call.  

[JohnnyLV]

Wow, the Cotchery non-catch was one they actually got right. By the rule as currently written they got it right. Cut and dry right.

Couple things. FIrst, it should be a catch and second the rule is incredibly dumb.

With Cotchery going to the ground he has to maintain control of the ball throughout. It does not matter (by the rule, not any logic) that the ball never hit the ground, because he never completed the catch by rule.

Carey should be fired, and the rule HAS to be changed. Simms and Carey are idiots for not knowing the rule. But the play was judged correctly.

 

[SayNoToDMC]

When I'm agreeing with Mike Carey it's weird. I normally just enjoy him coming on TV to laugh, but the fact the NFL gave him a SB says everything. I thought that was a catch

[SayNoToDMC]

18 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Wow, the Cotchery non-catch was one they actually got right. By the rule as currently written they got it right. Cut and dry right.

Couple things. FIrst, it should be a catch and second the rule is incredibly dumb.

With Cotchery going to the ground he has to maintain control of the ball throughout. It does not matter (by the rule, not any logic) that the ball never hit the ground, because he never completed the catch by rule.

Carey should be fired, and the rule HAS to be changed. Simms and Carey are idiots for not knowing the rule. But the play was judged correctly.

 

I clearly don't understand the rule then because if he had the ball and it never hit the ground, I assume catch. I get he didn't have control till the end of the play but why isn't that a catch? I thought the maintain sh*t was going out or the endzone

[j4jets]

25 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Wow, the Cotchery non-catch was one they actually got right. By the rule as currently written they got it right. Cut and dry right.

Couple things. FIrst, it should be a catch and second the rule is incredibly dumb.

With Cotchery going to the ground he has to maintain control of the ball throughout. It does not matter (by the rule, not any logic) that the ball never hit the ground, because he never completed the catch by rule.

Carey should be fired, and the rule HAS to be changed. Simms and Carey are idiots for not knowing the rule. But the play was judged correctly.

 

I agree completely. Not sure why people are even complaining. The ball hit the ground n it moved. End of story. 

[Smashmouth]

5 hours ago, johnnysd said:

Wow, the Cotchery non-catch was one they actually got right. By the rule as currently written they got it right. Cut and dry right.

Couple things. FIrst, it should be a catch and second the rule is incredibly dumb.

With Cotchery going to the ground he has to maintain control of the ball throughout. It does not matter (by the rule, not any logic) that the ball never hit the ground, because he never completed the catch by rule.

Carey should be fired, and the rule HAS to be changed. Simms and Carey are idiots for not knowing the rule. But the play was judged correctly.

 

that's only when out of bounds that does not apply to the middle of the field

[TuscanyTile2]

6 hours ago, j4jets said:

I agree completely. Not sure why people are even complaining. The ball hit the ground n it moved. End of story. 

I didn't see that (nor did Mike Carey) but obviously the replay refs did so you must have a point.

[rillo]

I thought it was a catch, but really it could've gone either way IMO.

[BowlesMovement]

9 hours ago, Freemanm said:

Hate to sound paranoid, but something's up with the officiating. First, I wasn't rooting for either the Panthers or the Broncos and I truly didn't care who won. But this is the second game in a row in the playoffs where I saw one team get a bit favored by the refs, and in this game, it was the Broncos. In the 1q, Jerricho Cotchery clearly had a catch. The instant replay showed it, and even Phil Simms and the retired ref said it was a catch, yet the refs mysteriously announced that it wasn't, even though the replay clearly showed that it was. The next play Denver had the fumble/TD, so if the refs made the right call on the Cotchery catch, the complexion of the whole game might have been different. 

I also saw this in the AFCCG, when Amendola on the Patriots made a catch and clearly fumbled the ball in the 2q. There was a replay review, which showed that Amendola clearly caught the football, made a football move, and then fumbled it. Even the announcers and the retired ref/analyst said so. The Broncos won the game anyway, but I'm still wondering how the refs, who favored the Pats that whole game, didn't call that a fumble. 

Why even bother with replay review when the refs still get the call wrong?

I don't even think it was close to being a catch, I don't know what people are saying. The nose of the ball clearly hit the ground, and he did not have clear posession before or after the nose hit the ground. It was as clear of a no catch as you can get. Simms is an idiot, and the retired ref must not have had enough time to see the nose of the ball touch the ground. I also thought the 15 yard taunting call on Talib was total BS. The refs are awful, absolutely awful, but I don't think that game was decided by the refs, it was decided by the Broncos defense and Cams sucktitude.

[nyjets782]

Did I think it was a catch?  Yes.  Do I think it is evidence that replay doesn't work when horrendous calls are routinely overturned season after season?  No.

[faba]

No matter what any issue involving a good catch or not is going to be judgemental-you can not take the human element out of it

[nyjunc]

I hate replay, it takes too long and they still screw up way too many calls.  I'd rather they screw it up in realtime and play continues.

[Bleedin Green]

I wasn't surprised by this at all.  The refs have been pretty adamant this year that plays are hardly ever going to be overturned anymore, unless it is proven with 100% certainty.  Even something as simple as the camera view not being perfect keeps them from overturning calls these days.  As soon as it looked like there was a chance that the ball might have skimmed against the ground, it wasn't getting overturned.  While Panthers fans certainly had no reason to like the decision, in the end when it is one play in the first quarter, it can hardly be cried about as a game-deciding call.

[nyjunc]

20 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

I wasn't surprised by this at all.  The refs have been pretty adamant this year that plays are hardly ever going to be overturned anymore, unless it is proven with 100% certainty.  Even something as simple as the camera view not being perfect keeps them from overturning calls these days.  As soon as it looked like there was a chance that the ball might have skimmed against the ground, it wasn't getting overturned.  While Panthers fans certainly had no reason to like the decision, in the end when it is one play in the first quarter, it can hardly be cried about as a game-deciding call.

they did have almost the whole game to overcome but it did lead to the biggest play of the game and that was the fumble return for a TD.  w/o that play Denver may not win w/ the way their offense played.

[j4jets]

2 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I didn't see that (nor did Mike Carey) but obviously the replay refs did so you must have a point.

It was pretty obvious 

[Bleedin Green]

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

they did have almost the whole game to overcome but it did lead to the biggest play of the game and that was the fumble return for a TD.  w/o that play Denver may not win w/ the way their offense played.

This is true, but given that it was the next play, not that play itself, it really doesn't give Carolina any excuses.  For all we know, it could have ended up being the same outcome on the next play even if they did get the completion, with just a longer fumble return TD.  Perhaps not as likely, but who knows?  I don't in any way expect Carolina fans to be happy about the call, but there's also plenty more things for them to be unhappy about than just that.

[BowlesMovement]

4 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

I didn't see that (nor did Mike Carey) but obviously the replay refs did so you must have a point.

 

[TuscanyTile2]

6 minutes ago, BowlesMovement said:

 

Wow, I honestly didn't see that yesterday.  That definitely looks like the ball is on the ground.

[nyjunc]

8 minutes ago, Bleedin Green said:

This is true, but given that it was the next play, not that play itself, it really doesn't give Carolina any excuses.  For all we know, it could have ended up being the same outcome on the next play even if they did get the completion, with just a longer fumble return TD.  Perhaps not as likely, but who knows?  I don't in any way expect Carolina fans to be happy about the call, but there's also plenty more things for them to be unhappy about than just that.

Carolina had plenty of time to come back. 

[JoJoTownsell1]

13 hours ago, Freemanm said:

Hate to sound paranoid, but something's up with the officiating. First, I wasn't rooting for either the Panthers or the Broncos and I truly didn't care who won. But this is the second game in a row in the playoffs where I saw one team get a bit favored by the refs, and in this game, it was the Broncos. In the 1q, Jerricho Cotchery clearly had a catch. The instant replay showed it, and even Phil Simms and the retired ref said it was a catch, yet the refs mysteriously announced that it wasn't, even though the replay clearly showed that it was. The next play Denver had the fumble/TD, so if the refs made the right call on the Cotchery catch, the complexion of the whole game might have been different. 

I also saw this in the AFCCG, when Amendola on the Patriots made a catch and clearly fumbled the ball in the 2q. There was a replay review, which showed that Amendola clearly caught the football, made a football move, and then fumbled it. Even the announcers and the retired ref/analyst said so. The Broncos won the game anyway, but I'm still wondering how the refs, who favored the Pats that whole game, didn't call that a fumble. 

Why even bother with replay review when the refs still get the call wrong?

FIrst off, the refs got the call right. Just because you and Mike Carrey don't know what a catch is, isn't grounds to  ban instant replay. 

Second,  even if Instant Replay sometimes gets a call wrong, they get far more right and correct many HUGE mistakes. Knowing how often the Jets have gotten screwed by bad calls, it's nice to know that there is a review process for awful calls. As for the time replay takes, who cares? As a fan of the game, I am fine with games going an extra 5-10 minutes. What are all of you people doing immediately after these games that can't wait a couple of minutes?  

[nyjunc]

33 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

FIrst off, the refs got the call right. Just because you and Mike Carrey don't know what a catch is, isn't grounds to  ban instant replay. 

Second,  even if Instant Replay sometimes gets a call wrong, they get far more right and correct many HUGE mistakes. Knowing how often the Jets have gotten screwed by bad calls, it's nice to know that there is a review process for awful calls. As for the time replay takes, who cares? As a fan of the game, I am fine with games going an extra 5-10 minutes. What are all of you people doing immediately after these games that can't wait a couple of minutes?  

we still get screwed when obvious calls are reviewed like the Marshall lateral vs. Philly.  instead of getting screwed in real time we get to agonize over it for 5-10 minutes.

[Freemanm]

5 hours ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

FIrst off, the refs got the call right. Just because you and Mike Carrey don't know what a catch is, isn't grounds to  ban instant replay. 

Second,  even if Instant Replay sometimes gets a call wrong, they get far more right and correct many HUGE mistakes. Knowing how often the Jets have gotten screwed by bad calls, it's nice to know that there is a review process for awful calls. As for the time replay takes, who cares? As a fan of the game, I am fine with games going an extra 5-10 minutes. What are all of you people doing immediately after these games that can't wait a couple of minutes?  

I don't have a problem with the time it takes to review the play, and never said I did. But the refs got the call wrong-the fact that the ball never hit the ground until the play was over makes it a catch. Do you remember Seahawks' receiver Jermaine Kearse's catch at the end of SB49?  He never had control of the ball either until he was down. Under the same guidelines, that shouldn't have been a catch either. 

It it was just an awful call, anyway you look at it.

[Freemanm]

By the way, the lowlight of the SB for me was the mere sight of Roger the Tool Goodell. The highlight was Beyonce's booty

[jetscrazey]

All I know is: Cotchery made a catch

[JoJoTownsell1]

12 minutes ago, Freemanm said:

I don't have a problem with the time it takes to review the play, and never said I did. But the refs got the call wrong-the fact that the ball never hit the ground until the play was over makes it a catch. Do you remember Seahawks' receiver Jermaine Kearse's catch at the end of SB49?  He never had control of the ball either until he was down. Under the same guidelines, that shouldn't have been a catch either. 

It it was just an awful call, anyway you look at it.

It's amazing that you still think it was a good catch after this photo was posted in this thread and the fact that after the ball clearly hit the ground here, the ball moves up in his hands. Even if the ball just scraped the ground the fact that the ball moves afterwards means its NO catch. Even if it MAY be a catch, the ruling on the field was NO catch so you need conclusive proof to overturn the call. From this pic, there is ZERO chance you could overturn the call on the field. 

 

 

 

With all of this said, in my personal opinion, plays like that should be a catch. Just like Dez Bryants catch/non-catch in last years playoffs should have been a catch. The NFL should err on the side of allowing these plays be ruled completions. 

[Bocajetfan]

5 minutes ago, jetscrazey said:

All I know is: Cotchery made a catch

Not in today's NFL. All season long this has bin a weekly issue. No two officiating crews or replay officials have made constant determination on these calls. 

[Freemanm]

6 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

It's amazing that you still think it was a good catch after this photo was posted in this thread and the fact that after the ball clearly hit the ground here, the ball moves up in his hands. Even if the ball just scraped the ground the fact that the ball moves afterwards means its NO catch. Even if it MAY be a catch, the ruling on the field was NO catch so you need conclusive proof to overturn the call. From this pic, there is ZERO chance you could overturn the call on the field. 

 

 

 

With all of this said, in my personal opinion, plays like that should be a catch. Just like Dez Bryants catch/non-catch in last years playoffs should have been a catch. The NFL should err on the side of allowing these plays be ruled completions. 

Ok but can we all still agree that the sight of Beyonce's booty was the real highlight?

[Larz]

6 hours ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Wow, I honestly didn't see that yesterday.  That definitely looks like the ball is on the ground.

that doesn't matter.  the ball can touch the ground, it just can't bobble while doing so

[Larz]

the suspicious part, of course, is now the NY HQ is involved under the hood

opens up a huge conspiracy angle