Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise
The "non" challenge - Printable Version

+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: The "non" challenge (/thread-33064.html)

Pages: 1 2

The "non" challenge - swilson3828 - 09-12-2022

I think anyone who knows anything about football pretty clearly saw Chase's right foot land on the goal line while he was still in bounds. Instant replay also showed Chase shifting the ball to his right hand when that happened. Clearly a TD that the dumb ref chose not to call. Why did Zac not throw a challenge? All that were watching saw what happened before the next play so those bums would have had to see it to. Zac calls that challenge, it's a TD, and all of this missed XP and missed FG stuff is no more. Instead they try to get cute and run a stupid QB draw on 1st and an inch for a TD and get stuffed in the backfield. Zac gave some bs reason for not calling the challenge but you could tell it was bs. An inexcusably stupid decision not made followed by an inexcusably stupid decision that was made..........cost Cincy the game. You halfway expect stupid things from the players, but you want to think the coaches are the ones to keep things in check. Then there is Zac

RE: The "non" challenge - TheCincinnatiKid - 09-12-2022

I think ZT really dropped the ball on the special teams stuff, but this one is one I let him off for. Burrow should know it's very close and give his staff some time to let Taylor know to challenge it. Instead we ran a hurry up play to try and stuff it in, which failed and limited our chance at challenging.

What shocked me most about this play is Chase not lobbying to throw the flag. He surely knew he was in. Unless I missed him doing so, but we dropped the ball not challenging it for sure.

RE: The "non" challenge - THE PISTONS - 09-12-2022

Yep. With that said, you gotta score from the 6 inch line.

RE: The "non" challenge - Nepa - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 10:56 AM)swilson3828 Wrote: I think anyone who knows anything about football pretty clearly saw Chase's right foot land on the goal line while he was still in bounds.  Instant replay also showed Chase shifting the ball to his right hand when that happened.  Clearly a TD that the dumb ref chose not to call.  Why did Zac not throw a challenge?  All that were watching saw what happened before the next play so those bums would have had to see it to.  Zac calls that challenge, it's a TD, and all of this missed XP and missed FG stuff is no more.  Instead they try to get cute and run a stupid QB draw on 1st and an inch for a TD and get stuffed in the backfield.  Zac gave some bs reason for not calling the challenge but you could tell it was bs.   An inexcusably stupid decision not made followed by an inexcusably stupid decision that was made..........cost Cincy the game. You halfway expect stupid things from the players, but you want to think the coaches are the ones to keep things in check.  Then there is Zac

It did not "cost Cincy the game." First (1), you assume "this missed XP and missed FG stuff is no more."  We don't know. Apparently, our long snapper was already out of action by that time. Second (2), Chase gave no indication that he though he scored, the announcers didn't bring it up until after the next play and indicated he was short, so it wasn't an obvious score at the time. Third, (3) if it had been ruled a TD, then there would be three minutes left. The Steelers, assuming the Bengals did score the extra point, would be in four-down plays, with 3 minutes, and multiple timeouts and only would need a field goal. How are you to know they would not have gone down and scored? They drove down twice in OT and without the urgency of needing to score or having four downs. 

As it was, the Bengals scored with almost no time on the clock (and if Chase misses that ball, the clock might have run out). 

I look back at life more than most, but even I don't look back on this one at all.

RE: The "non" challenge - StoneTheCrow - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 11:17 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yep. With that said, you gotta score from the 6 inch line.

I think they assumed they could get 6”. No need to hoard a challenge when anything questionable is going to go to booth review in another minute or so off the game clock. I don’t know why they assumed they’d walk in given the line play up to that point. Then they used a timeout a couple plays later. Mind boggling.

RE: The "non" challenge - Go Cards - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 11:17 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yep. With that said, you gotta score from the 6 inch line.

yep or even make a XP

Bengals had their chances

RE: The "non" challenge - Go Cards - 09-12-2022

It's my opinion as well that the play should have been reviewed by Refs anyway, they sure were checking the spots to see if Pittsburgh got a 1st down. That was for a TD and should have automatically been reviewed imo.

But if not, then Zac should have challenged.

RE: The "non" challenge - jwalker3853 - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 01:50 PM)Go Cards Wrote: yep or even make a XP

Bengals had their chances

We kick the XP.   make the field goal.    Not have 5 turnovers or 7 sacks.  

We were fortunate that we were playing a very poor Pittsburg team as this point.   If this had happened against a better team, we very likely are blown out and not talking about what ifs.  

At this point.   It is what it is.    We had a poor game and still had the gritt to come back and almost win it.   We just fell short in a game we had no business winning given the number of turnovers. 

Just need to work this week to improve - realizing that it isn't going to be fixed in a week - and get the win in Dallas this coming weekend.   Learn from this one and move on.  

RE: The "non" challenge - THE PISTONS - 09-12-2022

From Pittsburgh media:

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

RE: The "non" challenge - swilson3828 - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 11:26 AM)Nepa Wrote: It did not "cost Cincy the game." First (1), you assume "this missed XP and missed FG stuff is no more."  We don't know. Apparently, our long snapper was already out of action by that time. Second (2), Chase gave no indication that he though he scored, the announcers didn't bring it up until after the next play and indicated he was short, so it wasn't an obvious score at the time. Third, (3) if it had been ruled a TD, then there would be three minutes left. The Steelers, assuming the Bengals did score the extra point, would be in four-down plays, with 3 minutes, and multiple timeouts and only would need a field goal. How are you to know they would not have gone down and scored? They drove down twice in OT and without the urgency of needing to score or having four downs. 

As it was, the Bengals scored with almost no time on the clock (and if Chase misses that ball, the clock might have run out). 

I look back at life more than most, but even I don't look back on this one at all.

Lol well if you don't look back on it then you're looking to place blame on the non perfect play of non perfect players, and not a challenge that would have easily been reversed...Any and every single micsue the team made, including all of the turnovers and missed opportunities would have been for naught has Zac simply thrown the red flag.  The challenge is a choice, not a chance like each play is.  As far as Zac not having enough time to throw the flag.....if I can see the replay several times on TV before Burrow ever runs the next play then surely someone on the staff saw it.  Now you can talk the what if this and what if that ya ya, but the reality is that a TD was scored, the ref didn't spot it correctly, the replay was seen a fewl times even by announcers BEFORE the next play was ran because they were reviewing to see if it he was inbounds catch.  As the call on the field was that it was a catch inbounds and no TD the spot can't be reviewed unless challenged. Not to mention Chase didn't even hurry back to get a quick play off....he simply trotted almost like he had hurt himself, and not to mention that the coaching staff can talk to Burrow via Motorola or whatever communications system they use. Zac and the staff just blew it.  As far as Chase not fighting for the challenge I could understand that agrument.  Why he didn't I don't know.  What I do know is that was 1000% 6 points, possibly 7 not put on the board for the Bengals and it had ZERO to do with any player action as far running a play goes. The Bengals win the game on the TD throw to Chase with a couple seconds to go if that flag is throws even after all of the on field miscues.

RE: The "non" challenge - pally - 09-12-2022

<

RE: The "non" challenge - Nicomo Cosca - 09-12-2022



RE: The "non" challenge - pally - 09-12-2022



RE: The "non" challenge - swilson3828 - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 01:41 PM)StoneTheCrow Wrote: I think they assumed they could get 6”. No need to hoard a challenge when anything questionable is going to go to booth review in another minute or so off the game clock. I don’t know why they assumed they’d walk in given the line play up to that point. Then they used a timeout a couple plays later. Mind boggling.

What is more mind boggling is running a QB draw on 1st and inches against the Squealer defense.  I despise the squealers but I'm sure as hell not going to try to ram it down Heyward's throat.  Tom Brady, 10000000% of the time, would have ran 4 straight QB sneaks.

RE: The "non" challenge - swilson3828 - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 02:03 PM)jwalker3853 Wrote: We kick the XP.   make the field goal.    Not have 5 turnovers or 7 sacks.  

We were fortunate that we were playing a very poor Pittsburg team as this point.   If this had happened against a better team, we very likely are blown out and not talking about what ifs.  

At this point.   It is what it is.    We had a poor game and still had the gritt to come back and almost win it.   We just fell short in a game we had no business winning given the number of turnovers. 

Just need to work this week to improve - realizing that it isn't going to be fixed in a week - and get the win in Dallas this coming weekend.   Learn from this one and move on.  
I agree with everything you say, but, again, all of the things you say are gambles.  No guarantee anything you said would have worked out anyway.  10000% guarantee it is a TD if Zac challenges that.  The challenge was not a gamble, it was a sure thing had it been taken.

RE: The "non" challenge - swilson3828 - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 02:31 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: From Pittsburgh media:

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Yep

RE: The "non" challenge - THE PISTONS - 09-12-2022

Zac was worried the Steelers would challenge it as incomplete:

"That one just falls on me, to be quite honest with you," said Taylor, who says he should have called timeout even though he was down with less than three minutes left. "Just slow down. Slow down. What I could see was a bunch of incomplete hand signals. It's literally the worst field position in football for me to be able to see over there to that far pylon through a bunch of people. So just trying to gauge that we're not discussing an incomplete pass. We're discussing a possible touchdown. Slow it down, let us see the call. I can just do a better job of taking the information I'm hearing and giving it to Joe. I was quick to spit out, 'Hey, let's get on the ball and snap a play here to beat their challenge potentially before realizing that's not the issue. "

https://www.bengals.com/news/clark-harris-goes-to-ir-as-rookie-cal-adomitis-gets-call-in-bengals-notes

RE: The "non" challenge - Nepa - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 09:55 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Zac was worried the Steelers would challenge it as incomplete:

"That one just falls on me, to be quite honest with you," said Taylor, who says he should have called timeout even though he was down with less than three minutes left. "Just slow down. Slow down. What I could see was a bunch of incomplete hand signals. It's literally the worst field position in football for me to be able to see over there to that far pylon through a bunch of people. So just trying to gauge that we're not discussing an incomplete pass. We're discussing a possible touchdown. Slow it down, let us see the call. I can just do a better job of taking the information I'm hearing and giving it to Joe. I was quick to spit out, 'Hey, let's get on the ball and snap a play here to beat their challenge potentially before realizing that's not the issue. "

https://www.bengals.com/news/clark-harris-goes-to-ir-as-rookie-cal-adomitis-gets-call-in-bengals-notes

Watching the game on TV, I never got the impression that might have been a touchdown until after the next play was run. One of the announcers said just short of the goal line and that the ref was looking right down the line and he had the best view. After the play was run, then it was brought up. The original replay angles they gave us, from the upfield side, make it look short because Chase went out quite short. It became a controversy only after they ran the play.

Still, to count it as 7 points and a win is not accurate. Harris was out at the 13-minute mark and would not have been snapping. There were 3-minutes left and who knows what Pittsburgh would have done with 3 minutes and 3 time outs and only needing a field goal. And the Bengals ended up anyway scoring as the clock was running out. It was not, by any means, the make or break decision of that game.  The fact that they might have won, when they didn't, gnaws, but it was not "the Bengals would have won the game if they challenged." Won the challenge most likely, but no way to know on the game. Might even have lost to a field goal in regulation time. No one knows. And so not worth looking back.

RE: The "non" challenge - Essex Johnson - 09-12-2022

(09-12-2022, 10:56 AM)swilson3828 Wrote: I think anyone who knows anything about football pretty clearly saw Chase's right foot land on the goal line while he was still in bounds.  Instant replay also showed Chase shifting the ball to his right hand when that happened.  Clearly a TD that the dumb ref chose not to call.  Why did Zac not throw a challenge?  All that were watching saw what happened before the next play so those bums would have had to see it to.  Zac calls that challenge, it's a TD, and all of this missed XP and missed FG stuff is no more.  Instead they try to get cute and run a stupid QB draw on 1st and an inch for a TD and get stuffed in the backfield.  Zac gave some bs reason for not calling the challenge but you could tell it was bs.   An inexcusably stupid decision not made followed by an inexcusably stupid decision that was made..........cost Cincy the game. You halfway expect stupid things from the players, but you want to think the coaches are the ones to keep things in check.  Then there is Zac

I rewatched it several times, I did not see a td and chase did not help the cause by not even questioning it, it is 1st and goal at 1, we should have scored anyeay

RE: The "non" challenge - jwalker3853 - 09-13-2022

(09-12-2022, 09:50 PM)swilson3828 Wrote: I agree with everything you say, but, again, all of the things you say are gambles.  No guarantee anything you said would have worked out anyway.  10000% guarantee it is a TD if Zac challenges that.  The challenge was not a gamble, it was a sure thing had it been taken.

Don't disagree with you.   However, even if he challenges and wins, there isn't a guarantee that we don't have the issue with the extra point at that point in the game.   In fact, we likely do now that we know when Harris was injured. 

All that said, it's all a what if game of woulda coulda shoulda.   We can't change the results of a single play and just assume the rest of the game plays out as it did.   While it could, we are just assuming that it does.   Honestly, given how quickly the offense called and ran a play, I don't think anyone had any time to review and determine if we should challenge it or not.   Once folks knew, it was too late.    I realize Zac is saying that was his call (it is) but in all fairness, they didn't slow down and verify before they ran a play and removed the opportunity.   Again - that is also Zac's fault as the head coach and play caller.   Zac has a ton of blame for a loss in a game where the Bengals made it very difficult on themselves to win.    I heard someone else say in one of the other threads that the Bengals were playing against two opponents in that game - Pittsburg and themselves.    Hard to beat two teams, especially when you are playing against yourself.