Larry Fitzgerald Was Out of Bounds

But my dad and I were both surprised that Trufant wasn’t called for pass interference.

Please don’t get hurt again. We need you. Your capacity to engage multiple blockers and penetrate the offensive line is essential to our defensive success.

Love,
Seahawks

The one weekend I come to Seattle every year and this is the first year they’re on a road game. Damnit.

that PC challenged the Fitzgerald catch. As soon as I saw the replay I thought “don’t challenge that, too close to overturn”… I felt like he must’ve been throwing it from an emotional standpoint, a protest, as opposed to listening to the guys in his headset saying that the video evidence actually favors it.

The BMW fumble was pretty weird. The broadcasters kept saying it was a “bang bang” and not a catch. What the hell does that mean? I take it to mean that the player has to have possession for some minimum length of time. If this is the case, just say that, not this ridiculous “bang bang” drivel. Further, if the rule is a guy has to hold it for a specific amount of time, tell me what that length of time is. Make it two tenths of a second lets say. It would be possible to measure this with reasonable accuracy based on the number of frames of video that show the player in possession (since the frame rate is known). This “football move” shit is mystical and absurd. In this case it didn’t make a huge difference, but tell that to Calvin Johnson.

Challenges are pretty much useless, or at least a hell of a lot more useless than we think. It’s all great that the challenge allows the officials a second look at what happened on the field, but since the evidence in the replay must be “indisputable” it means that almost no challenge goes overturned.

Virtually every play that goes challenged is already a tough call. That’s fine. But I think this really gives the ref’s too much leeway to screw up the call in the first place… “meh, it kinda looked one way, so I’ll just call it out of bounds and see if the coach checks the replay”. Since it’s already a tough call, and replays very frequently don’t give us the right angle anyhow, it’s almost impossible to get enough evidence to overturn the call.

We end up basically with the same results as before, but have to deal with a big long delay that slows down the game AND gives the ref’s (who are constantly missing calls) a free pass. “Hey, we checked the replay, too bad if it’s not good enough to overturn the call”.

As soon as I saw Fitz come down with the ball I was like “wow, that was close, but it clearly looks to me like he was out”. The ref was right there and ruled it a catch… why? What did he see that I didn’t? The video evidence certainly didn’t support him, so why call it a catch in the first place?

What makes this whole situation even more ridiculous is the matter of losing your third challenge if you get one of the first two wrong. OK, so the ref completely fucks up a call and you challenge it, but the video evidence sucks, that’s your fault? So when the ref pulls an even BIGGER bone out of his pocket on the final drive of the game, it’s YOUR problem?

Stupid. This isn’t about the NFL making the game better, it’s about the NFL covering the asses of it’s part-time ref’s, some of whom clearly shouldn’t be anywhere close to a field.

OK, rant over.

It seems to me that certain teams always seem to get the call on the field. Then when it is challenged unless the evidence is indisputable the call stands.. For the Hawks it always seems to be the opposite.
Of course this is all based on zero evidence.

That was not called. It looked like the TE (Spach?) was rolling back on his heels significantly before the snap. Both ’Hawks on the Defensive right were pointing at him and looking to the ref, like “seriously?? call it already!”

And I think that was why Carroll was chewing out the ref. I think he was saying something like “2 guys in position to make that call, and neither ****ing one saw it? You are gonna get an earful from the league office on that one.”