January 07, 2019

SportsFilter: The Monday Huddle:

A place to discuss the sports stories that aren't making news, share links that aren't quite front-page material, and diagram plays on your hand. Remember to count to five Mississippi before commenting in anger.

posted by huddle to general at 06:00 AM - 21 comments

cracksolutionz

posted by Colten192 at 09:21 AM on January 07

If that's a link for a full investigation into the officiating travesties that occurred in NFL games yesterday, I'll click on it. Otherwise, hail no.

posted by beaverboard at 09:30 AM on January 07

I'm interested in crack. I love crack. Like, really really *love* crack! I could use some right now

posted by NoMich at 09:41 AM on January 07

I stumbled across this video series that SBNation put together and it is fantastic.

It's a collection of short (~5 minutes) videos where two people discuss Weird Rules in sports. Why do they exist? Have they been broken? What are the unintended consequences?

posted by grum@work at 10:08 AM on January 07

That is definitely fpp material, right there grum. No need to bury it in a daily huddle

posted by NoMich at 10:18 AM on January 07

From @DownGoesBrown on Twitter:

Cody Parkey: Dear god please don't let this kick hit a bar here.

God: You said *a* bar, right?

posted by tommytrump at 10:40 AM on January 07

Dallas Seattle officiating was horrendous and decided the outcome of the game. The network choice of using Aikman as color commentary for his former club was also a big mistake.

posted by cixelsyd at 10:42 AM on January 07

I want a 30 for 30 on the drafting of the new rule "we know this was a fumble but no one bothered to pick it up so we're calling it an incomplete pass."

posted by rcade at 12:08 PM on January 07

The reason no one bothered to pick it up was because the back judge ran in waving his arms to kill the play and got in front of the ball to restrict access to it by the nearby players. He made it very clear that there was no point in recovering the ball. Then he picked it up himself, which sent the moment into another dimension.

This hurt both teams: an Eagle could have recovered the ball and run with it, and also Anthony Miller could have advanced it if he had recovered it, possibly scoring a touchdown. Because of the time remaining in the half, other Bears players could not have advanced it, but could have recovered it at the spot where it lay on the field.

The ruling after the review and the explanation were preposterous. I hope Bob Kraft calls for a "tampering with a live ball" investigation.

Advice to players: recover all loose balls regardless of what the refs say or do. Let the review and ruling process figure out the fine points after the fact.

Advice to officials: if in doubt, let play continue without intervention. Let the review and ruling process figure out the fine points after the fact.

Of course, no guarantee that the review process will provide the correct resolution, but it's better than what took place on the field.

posted by beaverboard at 12:41 PM on January 07

In football, and even in basketball and hockey, keeping the whistle in your pocket until you are sure of a call is good advice. But in these sports, you can look at replay, determine the correct call, and take the necessary action to put everything back to where it should be. This is not so much the case in baseball. The call must be made as soon as the action occurs. True enough, the call may be reviewed and overturned, but it is not so easy to put things right after a reversal. Also, what do you do when there's no way to review? For example, a line drive is hit to the outfield. The fielder dives and appears to have caught the ball, the umpire makes the out call, and the runners retreat to their bases. Now the fielder stands up, and there is the ball on the ground where his chest was. The umpires will huddle, reverse the call, and relying on their judgement will place the batter and runners where the umpires believe they would have been had the call not been made. It's called the "rule of equity", but it's not in any rule book that I have ever seen.

The situation in yesterday's game could not have been remedied in any manner that would have been satisfactory. If you award a catch, then a fumble must be called. If you call the fumble, then the actions by the referee that inhibited recovery of the ball by either team preclude any equable result. Fortunately, this was a one-in-a-million event, but it shows the need for full-time NFL game officials.

posted by Howard_T at 02:18 PM on January 07

Speaking of bad calls, the refs even got this one right on the field before they took a second look and screwed it up:

posted by bender at 02:59 PM on January 07

Yikes! Phillip looks like he bounced his head off the turf when he tried to push the runner out of bounds

posted by NoMich at 03:05 PM on January 07

Speaking of bad calls, the refs even got this one right on the field before they took a second look and screwed it up:

I think the final call was correct (down by contact short of the end zone). He was obviously tripped, and the moment his arm made contact with the ground he still had recognizable control of the football.

posted by grum@work at 07:50 PM on January 07

I think the final call was correct (down by contact short of the end zone). He was obviously tripped, and the moment his arm made contact with the ground he still had recognizable control of the football.

One of the closer replays showed that the ball was dislodged as he tripped. He may have regained it as he fell, but since it had come loose, losing it as he hit the ground would make it fumble.

posted by bender at 08:43 AM on January 08

I stumbled across this video series that SBNation put together and it is fantastic.

It's a collection of short (~5 minutes) videos where two people discuss Weird Rules in sports. Why do they exist? Have they been broken? What are the unintended consequences?

That is definitely fpp material, right there grum. No need to bury it in a daily huddle

I watched several of those yesterday evening, and they were quite fun!

posted by bender at 08:45 AM on January 08

Here's the video of the Kentucky goaltending on the free throw.

posted by NoMich at 09:13 AM on January 08

The reason no one bothered to pick it up was because

It wasn't a catch and both teams knew it. The NFL rulebook is my go-to source for not knowing what the hell a catch is and they nailed not knowing what a catch is in this instance again.

posted by tron7 at 10:22 AM on January 08

cracksolutionz

OK, rcade. I know you've addressed the spam element of this already, so now I'm extremely tempted to hit the link to see where it goes. But I won't do that unless you assure me that it no longer leads to a bot that will siphon my 401(k) into an Azerbaijani bank and sell my kidney(s) on the black market.

posted by tahoemoj at 11:51 AM on January 08

Here's the video of the Kentucky goaltending on the free throw.

Now, I watched that SBNation goaltending video yesterday, and I assumed that Georgia still had men on the lane. I don't actually see where Kentucky thought they were gaining an advantage by goaltending. It's plausible that they didn't know there would be a technical foul and additional free throw, the SBNation gave the impression that they understood this rule as written. As such, I would think that picking up the free throw rebound and heaving a 3/4-court shot has better odds than UGA missing both technical free throws and then UK executing a slightly closer buzzer-beater.

posted by bender at 12:55 PM on January 08

Black market kidneys are my new business model.

posted by rcade at 12:26 PM on January 09

Belichick has renewed his order to the team to always recover a loose ball regardless of the circumstances.

posted by beaverboard at 01:19 PM on January 09

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.