Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 56redsox. Show 56redsox's posts

    Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    http://youtu.be/7SuV3-PPZsA

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    Well . . .  the video doesn't show anything . . .  but it's a nice shot of Ravens' fan reacting to something that very likely didn't actually happen.

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MichFan. Show MichFan's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    In response to p-mike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well . . .  the video doesn't show anything . . .  but it's a nice shot of Ravens' fan reacting to something that very likely didn't actually happen.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    In the NFL all that matters is what the refs and the replay official want to see.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    That's a very good point, Mich.

    I saw every replay NBC had of the kick and you can't tell anything from them, so it's really a moot point that the play was not reviewable. I don't understand why the NFL has bent over backwards to review every single scoring play, but somehow this particular call cannot be questioned. I guess it's because the camera can't really answer your question. The only guy who really knows is the guy who is standing under the upright . . .   and you've just got to take his word for it.

     

    Just one more of the myriad reasons why I hate instant replay. Officials screwing up is obviously part of the game, so I say just go ahead and let them screw up. Slowing everything down and replaying it over and over again so we can all see just how much and how often they screw up doesn't really increase the entertainment value for me. And we've already seen that reviewing (almost) everything still doesn't eliminate mistakes . . .  so I say chuck the whole thing.

     

    Who's with me?

     

     

     

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ClifordWasHere. Show ClifordWasHere's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    So the kick was bad.  Tell us something we didn't already know.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    Good shot. Great find. It missed.

     

    Hear the Raven's fan at the very end say, "I'll take it!". They had a straight on angle to the kick from that spot. Just about a perfect view.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    of course he missed....and that video has already been posted on here

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    In response to p-mike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    That's a very good point, Mich.

    I saw every replay NBC had of the kick and you can't tell anything from them, so it's really a moot point that the play was not reviewable. I don't understand why the NFL has bent over backwards to review every single scoring play, but somehow this particular call cannot be questioned. I guess it's because the camera can't really answer your question. The only guy who really knows is the guy who is standing under the upright . . .   and you've just got to take his word for it.

     

    Just one more of the myriad reasons why I hate instant replay. Officials screwing up is obviously part of the game, so I say just go ahead and let them screw up. Slowing everything down and replaying it over and over again so we can all see just how much and how often they screw up doesn't really increase the entertainment value for me. And we've already seen that reviewing (almost) everything still doesn't eliminate mistakes . . .  so I say chuck the whole thing.

     

    Who's with me?

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I keep wondering if there isn't an electronic solution to the ball going between the goal posts and inside the pylons.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 56redsox. Show 56redsox's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    In response to redsoxfan94's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    of course he missed....and that video has already been posted on here

    [/QUOTE]


    Did Not Know The Vid Was Posted, Read The Headliner.....

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to p-mike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    That's a very good point, Mich.

    I saw every replay NBC had of the kick and you can't tell anything from them, so it's really a moot point that the play was not reviewable. I don't understand why the NFL has bent over backwards to review every single scoring play, but somehow this particular call cannot be questioned. I guess it's because the camera can't really answer your question. The only guy who really knows is the guy who is standing under the upright . . .   and you've just got to take his word for it.

     

    Just one more of the myriad reasons why I hate instant replay. Officials screwing up is obviously part of the game, so I say just go ahead and let them screw up. Slowing everything down and replaying it over and over again so we can all see just how much and how often they screw up doesn't really increase the entertainment value for me. And we've already seen that reviewing (almost) everything still doesn't eliminate mistakes . . .  so I say chuck the whole thing.

     

    Who's with me?

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I keep wondering if there isn't an electronic solution to the ball going between the goal posts and inside the pylons.

    [/QUOTE]


    glenr, I posted this on the "Review question" thread, but here again...

     

     

    Prior to the time of "further review," all calls made by referees were judgment calls. I was fine with that. But once the NFL implemented replay-review, they made a landmark decision that technology could be used to aid the judgment of human beings. Since they have crossed that bridge, they ought to consider using it more, when appropriate.


    I would like to see the NFL outfit each field and the pigskin with technology to monitor the trajectory of the ball and its relation to the field. This would be useful in determining:

    • Whether the ball breaks the plane on touchdown dives
    • On punts that sail out of bounds while still high in the air, where the ball actually crossed the sideline
    • On plays like the famous Champ Bailey/Ben Watson interception/runback, whether a fumbled ball first passed the side line or the goal line
    • As in the Pats-Ravens game, whether field goals that pass high over the uprights passed within the goal posts

    These are the kind of judgment calls that are tough for humans, but easy for computers to make. As a retired army technology officer, I can tell you that implemeting such technology would not be a difficult thing. Like every new idea, there are pros and cons, but that shouldn't stop progress. For example, I like the new overtime rules...a long time coming, but I think they are much more fair.

    [And to the trolls who will say I'm suggesting this only because the Pats lost to the Ravens...not so. In my opinion, the kick should have been called good, according to the rule book. (Though, to be clear, I think the ball would have hit the upright if it had passed on a lower plane. But there is no guarantee that a ball that hits the upright will not pass between the goal posts...a football is an oddly shaped object that can bounce in funny ways.)]

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tanbass. Show tanbass's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    I think it's time the NFL either extends the post by 20 feet, and use some laser lights so there is no doubt. This isn't rocket science. Why they don't put an easy fix on this issue is beyond me.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to p-mike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    That's a very good point, Mich.

    I saw every replay NBC had of the kick and you can't tell anything from them, so it's really a moot point that the play was not reviewable. I don't understand why the NFL has bent over backwards to review every single scoring play, but somehow this particular call cannot be questioned. I guess it's because the camera can't really answer your question. The only guy who really knows is the guy who is standing under the upright . . .   and you've just got to take his word for it.

     

    Just one more of the myriad reasons why I hate instant replay. Officials screwing up is obviously part of the game, so I say just go ahead and let them screw up. Slowing everything down and replaying it over and over again so we can all see just how much and how often they screw up doesn't really increase the entertainment value for me. And we've already seen that reviewing (almost) everything still doesn't eliminate mistakes . . .  so I say chuck the whole thing.

     

    Who's with me?

     

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I keep wondering if there isn't an electronic solution to the ball going between the goal posts and inside the pylons.

    [/QUOTE]


    glenr, I posted this on the "Review question" thread, but here again...

     

     

    Prior to the time of "further review," all calls made by referees were judgment calls. I was fine with that. But once the NFL implemented replay-review, they made a landmark decision that technology could be used to aid the judgment of human beings. Since they have crossed that bridge, they ought to consider using it more, when appropriate.


    I would like to see the NFL outfit each field and the pigskin with technology to monitor the trajectory of the ball and its relation to the field. This would be useful in determining:

    • Whether the ball breaks the plane on touchdown dives
    • On punts that sail out of bounds while still high in the air, where the ball actually crossed the sideline
    • On plays like the famous Champ Bailey/Ben Watson interception/runback, whether a fumbled ball first passed the side line or the goal line
    • As in the Pats-Ravens game, whether field goals that pass high over the uprights passed within the goal posts

    These are the kind of judgment calls that are tough for humans, but easy for computers to make. As a retired army technology officer, I can tell you that implemeting such technology would not be a difficult thing. Like every new idea, there are pros and cons, but that shouldn't stop progress. For example, I like the new overtime rules...a long time coming, but I think they are much more fair.

    [And to the trolls who will say I'm suggesting this only because the Pats lost to the Ravens...not so. In my opinion, the kick should have been called good, according to the rule book. (Though, to be clear, I think the ball would have hit the upright if it had passed on a lower plane. But there is no guarantee that a ball that hits the upright will not pass between the goal posts...a football is an oddly shaped object that can bounce in funny ways.)]

    [/QUOTE]


    I do remember a thread or two over the years. It wasn't the kick that burned me anyway.

    There was the phantom PI call

    The needless measurement that was basically a free time out for the Ravens

    And most of all the complete lack of consistancy and what seemed to be a bunch of make up calls

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Not Sure If You Have Seen This Video, FG Behind The Goal Post....

    When the sport of tennis adopted a challenge-review policy, they didn't simply opt for slow-motion replay. They brought in spatial recognition technology to track exactly whether a small ball, traveling up to 140 miles per hour, landed within, on, or outside of a 3-inch line. It is much harder for human eyes to perform this task.


    The NFL should either abandon the use of technology or use it to it's full extent for calls in which the only consideration is, "Where, exactly, did the damn ball go?"

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share