This Is The Freaking Worst...

[Slapstick]

[Moonie]

Ball across the nose!

[feltdizz]

Seems like the NFL is great at showing the worst angles for controversial plays. All these cameras and we can’t get a good angle?

[SteelBucks]

I thought it was clear that it hit him when the rotation of the ball changed slightly. I agree that the NFL has some of the worst angles for crucial reviews.

[Shoe]

Can anyone explain the play when Ben knocked the ball loose from Peppers on the 1, and it seemed to go out the endzone for a touchback. I was watching at a bar, so couldn't hear what happened. But they didn't seem to make an issue about it, which made it seem that it was clear-cut (i.e. not a turnover).

[Slapstick]

The fact that Peppers was touching the ball made it a dead ball out of bounds, whether or not he had possession.

[flippy]

I think the NFL refs would make the case that even that pic is no conclusive. We'd need to see it from the side angle to validate there is no space between the helmet and the ball.

On the other hand in watching the full play, you can see the player's head move, react to the ball hitting him. It's not conclusive either, but common sense tells me his head moved because he just got hit in the face with the ball.

Side note. They did mention on the broadcast that reviews will now lean more toward agreeing with the call on the field unless something is blatantly missed.

[Slapstick]

And this was blatantly missed...

A blatantly missed call benefiting the Pats** once again...

Hell, it didn’t improve for last night’s games...

[Northern_Blitz]

I think the NFL refs would make the case that even that pic is no conclusive. We'd need to see it from the side angle to validate there is no space between the helmet and the ball.

On the other hand in watching the full play, you can see the player's head move, react to the ball hitting him. It's not conclusive either, but common sense tells me his head moved because he just got hit in the face with the ball.

Side note. They did mention on the broadcast that reviews will now lean more toward agreeing with the call on the field unless something is blatantly missed.

And that's actually how replay is supposed to work.

While we got screwed in this one, I wish they applied the replay rule like this more often. They are only supposed to overturn calls that are conclusively wrong. Not if they think they were probably wrong. I think this falls into the second category.

The problem is that they don't use that standard consistently. I hope they will start doing so this year.

[flippy]

And that's actually how replay is supposed to work.

While we got screwed in this one, I wish they applied the replay rule like this more often. They are only supposed to overturn calls that are conclusively wrong. Not if they think they were probably wrong. I think this falls into the second category.

The problem is that they don't use that standard consistently. I hope they will start doing so this year.

I think it falls in the second category too. Unless I can see space between the ball and the player, it's not conclusive.

And this does beg the question, with all the cameras and technology watching the game, why can't they have another angle that makes this call crystal clear?

Another random thought. Would be cool if the replay judges could only look at the play from the exact view of the officials on the field. If the ref on the field can't see something, replay refs shouldn't be able to see it either. I like the idea of players being able to get away with things the refs can't see.

[Steel Maniac]

The ball also hit a browns foot too after that. That's why it was such a bad call to me.

[RuthlessBurgher]

Ball across the nose!

If Alberto Riveron did an instant replay of the Brady Bunch, he would determine that there was not conclusive evidence that the football broke Marcia's nose.

[pittpete]

Poor Doug Simpson.....LOL

[K Train]

ah right when the bleeding started

[Jigawatts]

Can anyone explain the play when Ben knocked the ball loose from Peppers on the 1, and it seemed to go out the endzone for a touchback. I was watching at a bar, so couldn't hear what happened. But they didn't seem to make an issue about it, which made it seem that it was clear-cut (i.e. not a turnover).

The ball looked like it was moving before he went out of bounds, but the announcers said something to the effect of the ball was on him while he was out of bounds, making the ball out of bounds. So I guess that makes sense.