I saw this on r/Bengals and thought it would do well to be posted here. Just a good, rational response to everything.

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/bengals-steelers-referees-vontaze-burfict-antonio-brown-joey-porter/

(01-11-2016, 05:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I saw this on r/Bengals and thought it would do well to be posted here. Just a good, rational response to everything.

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/bengals-steelers-referees-vontaze-burfict-antonio-brown-joey-porter/

I wonder if the author really doesn't know why Shazier wasn't awarded an TD?  This section makes me think he doesn't and is using that ruling to make the non-call even worse than it was.: 

"The cynical truth is that if Shazier’s hit was clean as officials decided, then it should have been called a Pittsburgh touchdown because Shazier ran untouched to the end zone.

Instead, they just gave the ball to Pittsburgh at the spot of the recovery because … just because."

(01-11-2016, 05:31 PM)GMDino Wrote: I wonder if the author really doesn't know why Shazier wasn't awarded an TD?  This section makes me think he doesn't and is using that ruling to make the non-call even worse than it was.: 

"The cynical truth is that if Shazier’s hit was clean as officials decided, then it should have been called a Pittsburgh touchdown because Shazier ran untouched to the end zone.

Instead, they just gave the ball to Pittsburgh at the spot of the recovery because … just because."

Yeah, that part did bug me some. Showed a lack of understanding of how that played out.

Pretty good article. I think that game exposed a lot that's wrong with how these games are handled. I think it was Belicheck who proposed giving coaches 2 extra challenges specifically for penalties. This needs to be done.

(01-11-2016, 05:31 PM)GMDino Wrote: I wonder if the author really doesn't know why Shazier wasn't awarded an TD?  This section makes me think he doesn't and is using that ruling to make the non-call even worse than it was.: 

"The cynical truth is that if Shazier’s hit was clean as officials decided, then it should have been called a Pittsburgh touchdown because Shazier ran untouched to the end zone.

Instead, they just gave the ball to Pittsburgh at the spot of the recovery because … just because."

Which is why refs should not be so quick with the whistle.  Especially when all turnovers/touchdowns are reviewed.  Blowing it dead provides no correction to the play, other than awarding the ball to the recovering team.

(01-12-2016, 11:13 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Which is why refs should not be so quick with the whistle.  Especially when all turnovers/touchdowns are reviewed.  Blowing it dead provides no correction to the play, other than awarding the ball to the recovering team.

Should have been a yellow flag anyways...

(01-12-2016, 11:20 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: Should have been a yellow flag anyways...

I agree....however that was not the discussion.

(01-12-2016, 11:13 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Which is why refs should not be so quick with the whistle.  Especially when all turnovers/touchdowns are reviewed.  Blowing it dead provides no correction to the play, other than awarding the ball to the recovering team.

And for the better part of two seasons they have been saying they are letting plays go for that reason...except when they don't for no reason.

But that's just ANOTHER example of the inconsistency in the NFL from official to official and crew to crew.

(01-11-2016, 05:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I saw this on r/Bengals and thought it would do well to be posted here. Just a good, rational response to everything.

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/bengals-steelers-referees-vontaze-burfict-antonio-brown-joey-porter/

This is an example of the entire play in this case should have been reviewable. I suggest if they make the hit (determine if it is legal and the rest of the play all should be reviewable) also reviewable when they review anything. If they want to get it right, in this case, it would have been a flag on Shazier, possible ejection and Bengals ball inside the 10 yard line. The competition committee needs to get things like this reviewable and since they are reviewing plays, any illegal activity should also be fair game in my opinion so changes are needed.

(01-12-2016, 11:13 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Which is why refs should not be so quick with the whistle.  Especially when all turnovers/touchdowns are reviewed.  Blowing it dead provides no correction to the play, other than awarding the ball to the recovering team.

It seems they've made an effort to do that...allow the play to continue, if it's not clear one way or another, as opposed to past years. Taking out the questioning of the hit, just for the play itself, it was definitely a premature whistle.

It's a lot easier to take a TD off the board if it's incomplete or the player is down than it is to give a TD that would have been if the whistle had not blown.

(01-11-2016, 05:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I saw this on r/Bengals and thought it would do well to be posted here. Just a good, rational response to everything.

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/bengals-steelers-referees-vontaze-burfict-antonio-brown-joey-porter/

Interesting.

It seems NBC Sports took down that link.

If they let him run for a TD, wouldn't the hit also be reviewed so the Bengals would have got the ball and the penalty.

So the Steelers only get the ball if the play is blow dead?

(01-13-2016, 01:47 AM)tigerseye Wrote: If they let him run for a TD, wouldn't the hit also be reviewed so the Bengals would have got the ball and the penalty.

So the Steelers only get the ball if the play is blow dead?

No... they don't add flags after challenges.

Just echoing some sentiments here....the officiating has been wildly inconsistent all year long across the board. The rule book is nuts anymore, in their defense, it has to be a nightmare out there at the speed the game is played these days. So, what to do?

Reviews? Challenges? Make them full time, where they can study scenarios and make calls in the film room to practice getting it right? I don't know what the answer is, but there is no excuse for them to be as bad as the replacements were.

And this morning I hear talking head say the problem is TOO MANY reviews making the officials skittish to make a wrong call.

Awww....are they expected to do their PART TIME JOB correctly?!?!

Cripes. EVERYONE makes mistakes. That is why most places have checks and balances to catch as much as possible. If Dr. Smith and Atty Jones feel that their PART TIME $100,000 A YEAR JOB is just to stessful maybe they should go back to being DOCTORS AND LAWYERS!

(01-13-2016, 11:44 AM)GMDino Wrote: And this morning I hear talking head say the problem is TOO MANY reviews making the officials skittish to make a wrong call.

Awww....are they expected to do their PART TIME JOB correctly?!?!

Cripes.  EVERYONE makes mistakes.  That is why most places have checks and balances to catch as much as possible.  If Dr. Smith and Atty Jones feel that their PART TIME $100,000 A YEAR JOB is just to stessful maybe they should go back to being DOCTORS AND LAWYERS!

Why the hell would they be skittish to make the wrong call? Because it hurts their arbitrary grade card to the NFL and they might miss a free trip to the Super Bowl?

**** that. Either put every questionable play under the microscope and have it reviewed with the possibility of a late flag or throw no flags because it's becoming more and more obvious that certain refs have certain biases (and this goes beyond Saturday's shit show in Cincy) and that damages the integrity that Goodell is so adamant about keeping.

He called it a hit with the helmet on Burfict which was actually a shoulder hit. Wrong on that one.

Also, when Shazier took the ball from Gio after he attempted to murder him, was he not actually laying on him? Looked like he was, which meant down by contact and this whole goofy notion of how it should have been a TD is completely wrong.

(01-19-2016, 12:18 PM)McC Wrote: He called it a hit with the helmet on Burfict which was actually a shoulder hit.  Wrong on that one.

Also, when Shazier took the ball from Gio after he attempted to murder him, was he not actually laying on him?  Looked like he was, which meant down by contact and this whole goofy notion of how it should have been a TD is completely wrong.

Just go watch the hit again.  Shazier collects the ball with his left hand at least a foot or two away from Gio.  

So Shazier's hit was attempted murder and Burfict was actually a shoulder hit...LOL

(01-19-2016, 12:51 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Just go watch the hit again.  Shazier collects the ball with his left hand at least a foot or two away from Gio.  

So Shazier's hit was attempted murder and Burfict was actually a shoulder hit...LOL

He's pointing out that Burfict lead with his shoulder and hit Brown in the head. Not helmet to helmet. 

(01-19-2016, 12:51 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Just go watch the hit again.  Shazier collects the ball with his left hand at least a foot or two away from Gio.  

So Shazier's hit was attempted murder and Burfict was actually a shoulder hit...LOL

Burfict's was a shoulder hit.   He turned his shoulder into him.  He made contact with AB's helmet but not with his helmet.  You got video evidence to prove otherwise, I will gladly stand corrected.

Looked like Shazier had body contact with him on the ground.  Say he wasn't, how do you, laying on the ground, reach around someone to grab the ball without making contact with him?  Did he hover over him? 

Really irrelevant either way, though, it was blown dead.