...

T-post Tom · 01-23-2019, 04:32 PM

With all of the controversies over the weekend, one lost in the wash was the overturn of Julian Edelman‘s muffed punt. No one is talking about it primarily because the Chiefs got the ball back two snaps later anyway with an interception.

“Ball don’t lie,” CBS analyst Tony Romo joked on the broadcast after Daniel Sorensen‘s interception.

But Cowboys owner Jerry Jones brought up the play when asked about the officiating in Sunday’s games. Jones still doesn’t understand what the NFL’s supervisor of officials, Al Riveron, saw on replay to overturn the fourth-quarter fumble, which the Chiefs recovered at the New England 28.

In other words, even replay sometimes leaves a question.

“The call on the punt, whether he touched it, you can never get it right, because it was called on the field as a touch and then later, you couldn’t see an angle that he definitely touched it,” Jones said, via Drew Davison of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “But the rule says you’re supposed to go with the call on the field if you can’t see an angle that he didn’t touch it. I don’t know if you can get everything [right].”

The Cowboys have lost postseason games where questionable calls played a role. In the 2014 playoffs, Dez Bryant‘s fourth-down reception in the fourth quarter was overturned on replay based on the catch rule at the time. And the Cowboys didn’t get an obvious pass interference call on 49ers cornerback Deion Sanders in coverage against Michael Irvin late in the fourth quarter of the 1994 NFC Championship Game.

“At the end of the day, it’s the official’s call and you live with that,” Jones said. “You depend on the integrity of the official, not necessarily his ability to make every call right or wrong. You assume that, and rightfully so, that there are no biases, and he’s just trying to make the right call. That’s part of sport.”

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/01/23/jerry-jones-wonders-why-julian-edelmans-muffed-punt-was-overturned/

**Rain Man** · 01-23-2019, 05:47 PM

The fumble in the end zone rule is addressing a very real problem that could exist without the rule. If I'm running down field and I know that I'm going to be caught on the 20, I just wind up a softball pitch forward. As long as I can fling the ball outside the end zone, I've got a first down on the one.

I don't like the touchback rule, but you have to do something to stop intentional fumbles forward. It seems extreme to give up the ball, especially when you're in the red zone to start with. Maybe you give the fumbling team the ball at the 50 or at their own 20 or something.

IowaHawkeyeChief · 01-23-2019, 05:48 PM

There was a lot more evidence to overturn the Hogan reception than the punt muff... However, they let the Hogan play stand. It was a horrible call that was nullified by the pick, but still a horrible, unexplainable reversal.

**Rain Man** · 01-23-2019, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renegade

I also hate the rule on a kickoff if the receiving team is standing out of bounds, and the ball touches the out of bounds player(or even if the player touches the ball), the ball is out of bounds, therefore ball is placed on the 40.

I believe this happened to us this year.

Yeah, I don't like that one, either. It seems like it should only count if the ball is untouched and goes out. If the ball is touched, it's placed where the ball went out of bounds. What's the downside of that? How could someone cheat it?

carcosa · 01-23-2019, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerm

That rule is asinine to me...even more so than a fumble into the endzone being a touchback.

It's a bad rule!

IowaHawkeyeChief · 01-23-2019, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man

The fumble in the end zone rule is addressing a very real problem that could exist without the rule. If I'm running down field and I know that I'm going to be caught on the 20, I just wind up a softball pitch forward. As long as I can fling the ball outside the end zone, I've got a first down on the one.

I don't like the touchback rule, but you have to do something to stop intentional fumbles forward. It seems extreme to give up the ball, especially when you're in the red zone to start with. Maybe you give the fumbling team the ball at the 50 or at their own 20 or something.

It's a turnover in the endzone, just like an interception. An offensive player should be penalized for fumbling or throwing a pick into the endzone. It's one of the biggest mistakes an offensive player can make and the result should be punative.

BlackOp · 01-23-2019, 05:52 PM

Does anyone truly believe if that same exact play happened only it was the Chiefs...the refs overt-turn it?

Or the Hogan catch stands?

Or a neutral zone infraction with :50 seconds left?

Warrick · 01-23-2019, 05:56 PM

Because Chiefs!

Reerun_KC · 01-23-2019, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackOp

Does anyone truly believe if that same exact play happened only it was the Chiefs...the refs overt-turn it?

Or the Hogan catch stands?

Or a neutral zone infraction with :50 seconds left?

No chance in hell

Sorry · 01-23-2019, 06:03 PM

Every single angle showed it didn’t touch him jfc wrong hill to die on.

Hogan was a catch. Literally more of a catch than the controversial fez Bryant catch.

Refs for the most part was what anyone would want in a playoff game. Refs let chiefs mug patriots .. let’s move on

Red Dawg · 01-23-2019, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Haglund's_Spirit

Correct, and it did.

Dan Fouts is so dumb he thought the Raiders goofed and caught a break by luck
Clearly it was done on purpose.

Mama Hip Rockets · 01-23-2019, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerm

That rule is asinine to me...even more so than a fumble into the endzone being a touchback.

I agree. What an absolutely nonsensical rule.

Warrick · 01-23-2019, 06:13 PM

Also refs involved in prior scandals regardless who is
at fault, shouldn't be allowed to participate in any game that pertains those two teams. (I.E inflategate)

**Bob Dole** · 01-23-2019, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackOp

Does anyone truly believe if that same exact play happened only it was the Chiefs...the refs overt-turn it?

Or the Hogan catch stands?

Or a neutral zone infraction with :50 seconds left?

Or someone patted Mahomes on the shoulder after a pass?

ricko1112 · 01-23-2019, 07:22 PM

Because, with so many angles, it was conclusive that JE never touched the ball. There was far more evidence that EE is a woman beating dirtbag...

dj56dt58 · 01-23-2019, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sorry

Every single angle showed it didn’t touch him jfc wrong hill to die on.

Hogan was a catch. Literally more of a catch than the controversial fez Bryant catch.

Refs for the most part was what anyone would want in a playoff game. Refs let chiefs mug patriots .. let’s move on

I dont think so. One angle it looks like hit touched his thumb, even the announcers thought it did. On the other angles it looks like it didnt. Which angle to you go by? Also did it hit his arm? Sure looks like it might have. A lot of uncertainty which means call should stand

01-23-2019, 04:32 PM
T-post Tom Threepeat! T-post Tom's Avatar Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Milk/Honey/Gazland	Jerry Jones wonders why Julian Edelman’s muffed punt was overturned With all of the controversies over the weekend, one lost in the wash was the overturn of Julian Edelman‘s muffed punt. No one is talking about it primarily because the Chiefs got the ball back two snaps later anyway with an interception. “Ball don’t lie,” CBS analyst Tony Romo joked on the broadcast after Daniel Sorensen‘s interception. But Cowboys owner Jerry Jones brought up the play when asked about the officiating in Sunday’s games. Jones still doesn’t understand what the NFL’s supervisor of officials, Al Riveron, saw on replay to overturn the fourth-quarter fumble, which the Chiefs recovered at the New England 28. In other words, even replay sometimes leaves a question. “The call on the punt, whether he touched it, you can never get it right, because it was called on the field as a touch and then later, you couldn’t see an angle that he definitely touched it,” Jones said, via Drew Davison of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “But the rule says you’re supposed to go with the call on the field if you can’t see an angle that he didn’t touch it. I don’t know if you can get everything [right].” The Cowboys have lost postseason games where questionable calls played a role. In the 2014 playoffs, Dez Bryant‘s fourth-down reception in the fourth quarter was overturned on replay based on the catch rule at the time. And the Cowboys didn’t get an obvious pass interference call on 49ers cornerback Deion Sanders in coverage against Michael Irvin late in the fourth quarter of the 1994 NFC Championship Game. “At the end of the day, it’s the official’s call and you live with that,” Jones said. “You depend on the integrity of the official, not necessarily his ability to make every call right or wrong. You assume that, and rightfully so, that there are no biases, and he’s just trying to make the right call. That’s part of sport.” https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/01/23/jerry-jones-wonders-why-julian-edelmans-muffed-punt-was-overturned/
Posts: 20,210

01-23-2019, 05:47 PM	#16
Rain Man NFL's #1 Ermines Fan Rain Man's Avatar Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house	The fumble in the end zone rule is addressing a very real problem that could exist without the rule. If I'm running down field and I know that I'm going to be caught on the 20, I just wind up a softball pitch forward. As long as I can fling the ball outside the end zone, I've got a first down on the one. I don't like the touchback rule, but you have to do something to stop intentional fumbles forward. It seems extreme to give up the ball, especially when you're in the red zone to start with. Maybe you give the fumbling team the ball at the 50 or at their own 20 or something.
Posts: 141,338

01-23-2019, 05:48 PM	#17
IowaHawkeyeChief In Search of a Life IowaHawkeyeChief's Avatar Join Date: Jan 2016	There was a lot more evidence to overturn the Hogan reception than the punt muff... However, they let the Hogan play stand. It was a horrible call that was nullified by the pick, but still a horrible, unexplainable reversal.
Posts: 26,615

01-23-2019, 05:52 PM	#21
BlackOp MVP BlackOp's Avatar Join Date: Oct 2012	Does anyone truly believe if that same exact play happened only it was the Chiefs...the refs overt-turn it? Or the Hogan catch stands? Or a neutral zone infraction with :50 seconds left?
Posts: 17,754	1 0

01-23-2019, 05:56 PM	#22
Warrick Starter Warrick's Avatar Join Date: Feb 2013	Because Chiefs!
Posts: 740

01-23-2019, 06:03 PM	#24
Sorry Banned Join Date: Dec 2018	Every single angle showed it didn’t touch him jfc wrong hill to die on. Hogan was a catch. Literally more of a catch than the controversial fez Bryant catch. Refs for the most part was what anyone would want in a playoff game. Refs let chiefs mug patriots .. let’s move on
Posts: 1,605	1 6

01-23-2019, 06:13 PM	#27
Warrick Starter Warrick's Avatar Join Date: Feb 2013	Also refs involved in prior scandals regardless who is at fault, shouldn't be allowed to participate in any game that pertains those two teams. (I.E inflategate)
Posts: 740

01-23-2019, 07:22 PM	#29
ricko1112 Rookie ricko1112's Avatar Join Date: Sep 2017	Because, with so many angles, it was conclusive that JE never touched the ball. There was far more evidence that EE is a woman beating dirtbag...
Posts: 17	0 5