Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Bills vs. Chiefs GDT, Awkward Edition
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Buffalo Bills
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who Yah Got?
Thad to the Bone/Tuel Time/Duh..Flynning!
40%
 40%  [ 2 ]
Alex "They love me, they really really love me" Smith
60%
 60%  [ 3 ]
Total Votes : 5

Author Message
LeeEvans


Moderator
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 19506
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Piquel wrote:
LeeEvans wrote:
Maybe I don't understand the rules but so what if he shifted the ball once he hit the ground? The ball was still not on the ground so wouldn't it be considered a live football or at least in play? That just doesn't make sense to me, if he went down with the ball, has it in his arm, readjusts it all without the ball coming in contact with the ground I just don't see how it isn't a catch. There is no saying we would have scored after that catch but the game was essentially lost on that call.



I don't think the people who wrote the rule even understand it.


The refs had to think the ball hit the ground at some point (even if Goodwin had it secured and that is what caused it to move from his hands to "tucked" between elbow and chest. In that micro second where the ball is touching ground, and migrating from hands to "tucked" is where it gets ruled incomplete.

To take it to extremes to make point....
Imagine a player dives fully extended to make a catch. He secures the ball in both hands on the way to the ground. When he/ball hit the ground the ball bounces off ground and pops out of players hands 5 feet up into the air (ala kinda like a spike does) Even if someone catches the ball before it hits ground the second time it will still be ruled incomplete because of the split second the ball is touching ground and leaving the players control.

The refs think something like that happened on Goodwin's catch, but instead of the ball bouncing 5 feet up into air, it moved 6 inches from Goodwin's hands to in between his body and elbow.

Again that's not what I saw, just what I think refs saw. I think Goodwin was tucking the ball(on purpose) as he was headed to ground and kept it secured.
I agree with you and I think it should have been a catch. It's just so disappointing to see a game come down to such a questionable call.

The fact the ref who was right near the catch initially ruled a catch only to be overruled by another ref who was farther away is even more baffling.
_________________

The night is dark and full of terrors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tk3


Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 2206
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LeeEvans wrote:
Piquel wrote:
LeeEvans wrote:
DKTurtle51 wrote:
bigbadbuff23835 wrote:
[
By the way,

"Sal Capaccio ‏@SalSports 1m
Marrone said he was told the first time Goodwin bounced off turf he lost the ball. OK, am I the only one who never saw anything like that?!"

Now what.
Do they mean lose it as in bobble it? He did bobble it when he first hit if I recall correctly.
It was still in his possession and never touched the ground, then he readjusted it while he was lying on the ground with a Chief player on top of him.



Good hard fought game guys.


About Goodwin catch/no catch........
From rewatching it a few times (Love DVR, First NFL season with it)

If refs are calling it incomplete because of when he lost complete control of the ball, IE "Seconds" after he hit and rolled on ground, Then it was a complete blown call. Maybe one of the worst ever!

But what I saw and think Sal's quote backs up is that ball was in receivers hands but after he hit ground it shifted ?somehow? and was tucked between his elbow and body. I think refs made a judgement call that he bobbled it. They tend to error towards incomplete pass if their is any movement of the ball from where it was before hitting the ground vs where it is after. The ball never hitting the ground didn't even come into play here. If Goodwin would've had the ball securely in his hands and the ball was the first thing to hit the ground, and Goodwin keeps it secured the whole time through the fall it would be ruled a catch. But if the ball moves any even without hitting the ground it will be ruled incomplete. I hate the rule. I also think that Goodwin had the ball secured and was tucking it as he fell and it should've been ruled a catch. But it wasn't a terrible call, just a bad one. In game speed it is hard to tell if he lost control or not. All angles I seen didn't show conclusive evidence of anything. If it would've been ruled a catch on the field IR wouldn't of overturned it.



Things I learned about the Bills.
You guys have the best OL KC's played this year.
You're D is good.
Something funny is up with your RB's stiff arms. They were shrugging off KC Defenders like flys.
Tuel is not a good QB. When people play the KC has played 3rd stringers I will coincide the point for Tuel. I can't defend much of his play as good.
Maybe I don't understand the rules but so what if he shifted the ball once he hit the ground? The ball was still not on the ground so wouldn't it be considered a live football or at least in play? That just doesn't make sense to me, if he went down with the ball, has it in his arm, readjusts it all without the ball coming in contact with the ground I just don't see how it isn't a catch. There is no saying we would have scored after that catch but the game was essentially lost on that call.


A catch is different than a player running with the ball.. The instant a player who already had the ball touches the ground the play is over and the resulting fumble doesn't matter..

A player has to keep the ball "through the catch" meaning he can roll on the ground for 10 minutes without the ball touching and it would not be a catch until he truly secures the ball..
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LeeEvans


Moderator
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 19506
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tk3 wrote:
LeeEvans wrote:
Piquel wrote:
LeeEvans wrote:
DKTurtle51 wrote:
bigbadbuff23835 wrote:
[
By the way,

"Sal Capaccio ‏@SalSports 1m
Marrone said he was told the first time Goodwin bounced off turf he lost the ball. OK, am I the only one who never saw anything like that?!"

Now what.
Do they mean lose it as in bobble it? He did bobble it when he first hit if I recall correctly.
It was still in his possession and never touched the ground, then he readjusted it while he was lying on the ground with a Chief player on top of him.



Good hard fought game guys.


About Goodwin catch/no catch........
From rewatching it a few times (Love DVR, First NFL season with it)

If refs are calling it incomplete because of when he lost complete control of the ball, IE "Seconds" after he hit and rolled on ground, Then it was a complete blown call. Maybe one of the worst ever!

But what I saw and think Sal's quote backs up is that ball was in receivers hands but after he hit ground it shifted ?somehow? and was tucked between his elbow and body. I think refs made a judgement call that he bobbled it. They tend to error towards incomplete pass if their is any movement of the ball from where it was before hitting the ground vs where it is after. The ball never hitting the ground didn't even come into play here. If Goodwin would've had the ball securely in his hands and the ball was the first thing to hit the ground, and Goodwin keeps it secured the whole time through the fall it would be ruled a catch. But if the ball moves any even without hitting the ground it will be ruled incomplete. I hate the rule. I also think that Goodwin had the ball secured and was tucking it as he fell and it should've been ruled a catch. But it wasn't a terrible call, just a bad one. In game speed it is hard to tell if he lost control or not. All angles I seen didn't show conclusive evidence of anything. If it would've been ruled a catch on the field IR wouldn't of overturned it.



Things I learned about the Bills.
You guys have the best OL KC's played this year.
You're D is good.
Something funny is up with your RB's stiff arms. They were shrugging off KC Defenders like flys.
Tuel is not a good QB. When people play the KC has played 3rd stringers I will coincide the point for Tuel. I can't defend much of his play as good.
Maybe I don't understand the rules but so what if he shifted the ball once he hit the ground? The ball was still not on the ground so wouldn't it be considered a live football or at least in play? That just doesn't make sense to me, if he went down with the ball, has it in his arm, readjusts it all without the ball coming in contact with the ground I just don't see how it isn't a catch. There is no saying we would have scored after that catch but the game was essentially lost on that call.


A catch is different than a player running with the ball.. The instant a player who already had the ball touches the ground the play is over and the resulting fumble doesn't matter..

A player has to keep the ball "through the catch" meaning he can roll on the ground for 10 minutes without the ball touching and it would not be a catch until he truly secures the ball..
Right, so if he Goodwin hits the ground and then properly secures the football once he is on the ground what does it matter? The fact of the matter is he secures the ball on the ground, has a Chief player land on top of him, gets flipped over by a Chief player after being firmly on the ground and touched down, and then has the ball knocked out of his hand.

If being flipped over after having your chest lying flat on the ground doesn't count as knocking out the ball after the play I don't know what does.
_________________

The night is dark and full of terrors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jsnydes


Joined: 19 Mar 2007
Posts: 1643
Location: Bethlehem PA
PostPosted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was clearly a catch but the referee made the right call in the current NFL. It has to be conclusive evidence to overturn. The NFL has a lot of dumb rules but you must live by them. I mean, If he catches the ball.... its a catch. Don't tell me, "There is a 1% chance that the ball touched the ground and knocked it loose." You see it with your eyes, it looks like a catch, ITS A CATCH! More a problem with the NFL.... not the referee.
_________________


TommyC376^^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Tk3


Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 2206
PostPosted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LeeEvans wrote:
Tk3 wrote:
LeeEvans wrote:
Piquel wrote:
LeeEvans wrote:
DKTurtle51 wrote:
bigbadbuff23835 wrote:
[
By the way,

"Sal Capaccio ‏@SalSports 1m
Marrone said he was told the first time Goodwin bounced off turf he lost the ball. OK, am I the only one who never saw anything like that?!"

Now what.
Do they mean lose it as in bobble it? He did bobble it when he first hit if I recall correctly.
It was still in his possession and never touched the ground, then he readjusted it while he was lying on the ground with a Chief player on top of him.



Good hard fought game guys.


About Goodwin catch/no catch........
From rewatching it a few times (Love DVR, First NFL season with it)

If refs are calling it incomplete because of when he lost complete control of the ball, IE "Seconds" after he hit and rolled on ground, Then it was a complete blown call. Maybe one of the worst ever!

But what I saw and think Sal's quote backs up is that ball was in receivers hands but after he hit ground it shifted ?somehow? and was tucked between his elbow and body. I think refs made a judgement call that he bobbled it. They tend to error towards incomplete pass if their is any movement of the ball from where it was before hitting the ground vs where it is after. The ball never hitting the ground didn't even come into play here. If Goodwin would've had the ball securely in his hands and the ball was the first thing to hit the ground, and Goodwin keeps it secured the whole time through the fall it would be ruled a catch. But if the ball moves any even without hitting the ground it will be ruled incomplete. I hate the rule. I also think that Goodwin had the ball secured and was tucking it as he fell and it should've been ruled a catch. But it wasn't a terrible call, just a bad one. In game speed it is hard to tell if he lost control or not. All angles I seen didn't show conclusive evidence of anything. If it would've been ruled a catch on the field IR wouldn't of overturned it.



Things I learned about the Bills.
You guys have the best OL KC's played this year.
You're D is good.
Something funny is up with your RB's stiff arms. They were shrugging off KC Defenders like flys.
Tuel is not a good QB. When people play the KC has played 3rd stringers I will coincide the point for Tuel. I can't defend much of his play as good.
Maybe I don't understand the rules but so what if he shifted the ball once he hit the ground? The ball was still not on the ground so wouldn't it be considered a live football or at least in play? That just doesn't make sense to me, if he went down with the ball, has it in his arm, readjusts it all without the ball coming in contact with the ground I just don't see how it isn't a catch. There is no saying we would have scored after that catch but the game was essentially lost on that call.


A catch is different than a player running with the ball.. The instant a player who already had the ball touches the ground the play is over and the resulting fumble doesn't matter..

A player has to keep the ball "through the catch" meaning he can roll on the ground for 10 minutes without the ball touching and it would not be a catch until he truly secures the ball..
Right, so if he Goodwin hits the ground and then properly secures the football once he is on the ground what does it matter? The fact of the matter is he secures the ball on the ground, has a Chief player land on top of him, gets flipped over by a Chief player after being firmly on the ground and touched down, and then has the ball knocked out of his hand.

If being flipped over after having your chest lying flat on the ground doesn't count as knocking out the ball after the play I don't know what does.


Okay, so I guess we agree on the interpretation of the rule, but not the interpretation of the play..

In my opinion he never got that control.. I would have to watch another replay..
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yibbyl


Joined: 21 Apr 2011
Posts: 2335
Location: Redding, CA
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tk3 wrote:
DKTurtle51 wrote:
You guys are ridiculous, it wasn't a catch. Be mad at Tuel for not getting the ball out there. Be mad at Goodwin for not hanging on. Don't be mad at the refs for making the right call.

Tuel handed the Chiefs this game with a couple picks and a number of underthrown open deep balls.


I am with you on this one.. Some people here are putting the blame in all the wrong places..

The fact is, we have a 3rd string UDFA rookie QB who played an awful game.. Period.. That is why we lost..

The season is over - we just have to take the rest of the season to find out who can play and who cant..

Id like to see EJ back ASAP and see if he can hack it better than the early season..

Pretty much in agreement with both of you guys...except, I'd say that it was a catch. Wink That's not so important though that it cost us the game. Our UDFA 3rd string rookie QB played like a 3rd string UDFA rookie QB and that's why we lost. Still, this was absolutely a very winnable game for us! This loss was insanely frustrating, but on the positive side, we have the ability to be a real threat to whoever we play! I don't even remember the last time I felt that way about this team! Hopefully the veterans continue to buy in to this program and agree to see it through for another season or two.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TommyC376


Joined: 08 Feb 2008
Posts: 10266
Location: Capital Wasteland
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As bad as Tuel played, our Defense is legit. Now that EJ is back, or if Thad plays Sunday, I think we have a great chance vs Pitt.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DubiDo0


Joined: 08 Jun 2009
Posts: 416
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TommyC376 wrote:
As bad as Tuel played, our Defense is legit. Now that EJ is back, or if Thad plays Sunday, I think we have a great chance vs Pitt.


Defensive ranks:

16th in rush D
15th in pass D
3rd in sacks
3rd in INTs
13th overall


Not bad at all.
_________________
Let's Go Buffalo!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Thelonebillsfan


Joined: 22 Jan 2009
Posts: 10985
Location: In the ether
PostPosted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DubiDo0 wrote:
TommyC376 wrote:
As bad as Tuel played, our Defense is legit. Now that EJ is back, or if Thad plays Sunday, I think we have a great chance vs Pitt.


Defensive ranks:

16th in rush D
15th in pass D
3rd in sacks
3rd in INTs
13th overall


Not bad at all.


Especially compared to last year, AND the fact that to start the year we did give up some large yardage totals.
_________________
Adopt a Bill: WR, Robert Woods 5 rec, 86 Yards, 1 TD's
Adopt a Bill: DE/OLB, Mario Williams 8 TKLS, 4.5 Sacks, 4.5 TFL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LeeEvans


Moderator
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 19506
Location: Maryland
PostPosted: Fri Nov 08, 2013 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TommyC376 wrote:
As bad as Tuel played, our Defense is legit. Now that EJ is back, or if Thad plays Sunday, I think we have a great chance vs Pitt.
I would certainly hope we have a good chance to beat a 2-6 Steelers team. If we can limit big plays and shut down Bell I think we are in a really good spot. Our d-line should dominate their offensive line.
_________________

The night is dark and full of terrors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Buffalo Bills All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16
Page 16 of 16

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group