Falcons at Lions ending: stupid radio hosts and callers
Sept 28, 2017 8:10:57 GMT
Xeliou66 likes this
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 8:10:57 GMT
I'm sick and tired of listening on Sirius XM NFL Radio, to talk show hosts and callers completely misunderstanding the "controversial" ending of the week 3 Falcons at Lions game.
Several idiots said that the refs should have allowed the Lions to spike the ball and go for another play. Spike the ball??? What are these half-wits talking about? If the Lions had spiked the ball, it would be fourth down and they'd have to turn the ball over to the Falcons on downs. There wouldn't be another play. The play did not result in a new set of downs, and wouldn't have resulted in one even if the 10-second run-off rule didn't exist.
Not to forget, 8 seconds is awful short even if the offensive line was standing then and there, and even if the officials had made the correct decision from the beginning, that the player was down before breaching the end zone line. Just until they figured out what happened, stood up, and shook up the inertia 4 seconds would have passed. Remember, the clock would have continued to run. I really doubt they'd be able to set up another play in 4 more seconds.
Maybe it would be possible... I doubt it, but that's not even the important aspect.
The important one is that there is an existing rule about the 10-second run-off. It's been in the books for the last three years. The refs got it right, regarding this part. They called the play by the rule book. There is no way to deny this fact.
Is the rule stupid? Yes, maybe the rule should instead say that if a call is reversed after video evidence is looked at, with, say, 3 or more seconds left, you do get to run another play. *But it's not what the rule currently says.* The rule as it now exists was actually a change precisely because in a Saints game they got an untimed play in a relatively similar situation, and it was considered unfair, then they implemented this 10-second thing.
If the rule is stupid and needs changing again, then this would have to go to the Rules Committee in the off-season, and the rule would have to be actually officially changed for this to happen. The Falcons-Lions game officials did not have the autonomy to change the rule then and there.
So, no, there is no real controversy. The Lions lost, period. They have only themselves to blame. They had plenty of opportunities to score that TD, and failed. The merit is the Falcons' defensive line's.
And I'm saying this, while I was rooting for the Lions to win that game. I'm not a Falcons fan, but rules are rules.
What baffles me is that professional talk show hosts didn't correct themselves and the callers, with this bullshit of spiking the ball. Can't they count downs?
Not a single time in the multiple times I heard this issue being talked about this week (I put NFL Radio on for my long commute to and from work), someone said "wait a moment, there wouldn't be a point in spiking the ball." WTF?
Several idiots said that the refs should have allowed the Lions to spike the ball and go for another play. Spike the ball??? What are these half-wits talking about? If the Lions had spiked the ball, it would be fourth down and they'd have to turn the ball over to the Falcons on downs. There wouldn't be another play. The play did not result in a new set of downs, and wouldn't have resulted in one even if the 10-second run-off rule didn't exist.
Not to forget, 8 seconds is awful short even if the offensive line was standing then and there, and even if the officials had made the correct decision from the beginning, that the player was down before breaching the end zone line. Just until they figured out what happened, stood up, and shook up the inertia 4 seconds would have passed. Remember, the clock would have continued to run. I really doubt they'd be able to set up another play in 4 more seconds.
Maybe it would be possible... I doubt it, but that's not even the important aspect.
The important one is that there is an existing rule about the 10-second run-off. It's been in the books for the last three years. The refs got it right, regarding this part. They called the play by the rule book. There is no way to deny this fact.
Is the rule stupid? Yes, maybe the rule should instead say that if a call is reversed after video evidence is looked at, with, say, 3 or more seconds left, you do get to run another play. *But it's not what the rule currently says.* The rule as it now exists was actually a change precisely because in a Saints game they got an untimed play in a relatively similar situation, and it was considered unfair, then they implemented this 10-second thing.
If the rule is stupid and needs changing again, then this would have to go to the Rules Committee in the off-season, and the rule would have to be actually officially changed for this to happen. The Falcons-Lions game officials did not have the autonomy to change the rule then and there.
So, no, there is no real controversy. The Lions lost, period. They have only themselves to blame. They had plenty of opportunities to score that TD, and failed. The merit is the Falcons' defensive line's.
And I'm saying this, while I was rooting for the Lions to win that game. I'm not a Falcons fan, but rules are rules.
What baffles me is that professional talk show hosts didn't correct themselves and the callers, with this bullshit of spiking the ball. Can't they count downs?
Not a single time in the multiple times I heard this issue being talked about this week (I put NFL Radio on for my long commute to and from work), someone said "wait a moment, there wouldn't be a point in spiking the ball." WTF?
