No you're right,, it's clear as day. this wishy washy sentiment that "hey it was close so ok" is crap. Get rid of instant replay then.
You're absolutely correct his knee was down but the angle here doesn't show the ball until it is clearly out - but when? The other angle shows the ball coming loose at the first instant the tackler's helmet touched it. Looking at both together indicates the helmet hit the ball before the knee hit the ground. Does anyone here seriously believe there is an orchestrated plan to slant officiating against the Jets? If so, why?
You must have not read the hunger games books. They could fit a truck full of ill-conceived metaphors with that saga.
I said I don't think it is intentional but I have seen it way too many times so it is frustrating. There was another angle where it sure looked like his knee was down when the ball came out. so much so the former ref on CBS thought it would be so I can't be crazy, right?(at least not about this).
The discussion here is probably enough proof that the play was so close that until seventeen more views appear, we'll never know if the outcome was correct and probably not even then but it just seems so juvenile to so often hear the whining conspiracy theories. And I don't think I ever called anybody here crazy even though I'm sure it would be fitting for more than a few.
you need to read closer, nowhere have I said there was a conspiracy against us. I don't care what others say, it's clear as day his knee is down. it might be close but it is still clear.
Of course his knee was down; the question has always been when was his knee down with regard to when he lost control of the ball. Conspiracy was my word; your's were: "...the rule of thumb w/ replay is anything close usually goes against us..." and "That's one of those calls where if we are on D they overturn it." Maybe that's not conspiracy, it might be paranoia.
Does anybody have the game broadcast recorded who can pull out a clip of the other camera angle where the tackler's helmet is right on the ball?
he was touched and his knee was down before the ball came loose. it was a bad call, I'm glad that call and a few of the others didn't hurt us.
I have been a Jets fan since 67, and I'm a reasonably level headed individual (I know those two things don't really go hand in hand) but I swear to God, the Jets get screwed on close calls probably 80% of the time.
I actually disagree. Cameras are everywhere, and I'd say very rarely is a ref in position to make that call, let alone in the blink of an eye. We already have the human element with penalties. I wouldn't be opposed to giving the ref the ultimate decision, as in, if the video is inconclusive, asking the ref was he sure of his call. Turnovers and TDs are game changing plays, and to just say "the call stands" usually means "sorry, we've got nothing." and now they err on the side of turnover or TD so teams get free reviews anyway. If it's inconclusive, it always goes against the wrong team in my opinion now. So we're basically just going to continue to go with "we don't know, so we'll pretend like the ref that called it knows and didn't just go for the free review call." I stand by the idea of inconclusive video evidence, unless overruled by the ref who made the call, should not award a turnover for the defense and should not award TDs for offense.
