Again funny I thought it was a questionable pick
at the time man he sticks like a burdock .
That was a spectacular catch by White ..
Well anybody questioning the past two drafts
all this negative crap on DG have a nice dish of Crow .
it truly will be matter of opinion subject to the officials opinion if it was important enough to the game to overturn. Sorry, can't buy it. if the replay is ambiguous or not quite clear, be conservative and don't overturn. But that one was clearly, unambiguously against the rules.
So we're putting more on the refs' plates when it comes to subjective calls. Spot fouls that decide games are now up to the refs to decide if "it's import enough to the game to overturn"? So you're saying the refs now can't be consistent and have to go beyond what they see on the tape and decide whether the call is "important enough" to overturn?
The refs get a lot of shit but the league doesn't do them any favors, this is another example. That call was obvious but you can find by the book PI on almost every play, I don't want a football game decided by whether or not that ref wants to call it by the book or use his discretion based on game situation.
Heading. Getting contributions from our middle round picks is huge. We had nearly a decade of just not good drafts. The draft is more than the 1st and 2nd round and the Giants haven’t done that under Reeces tenure. Gentleman seems to be getting us on the right track. I see a more well rounded team here.
it truly will be matter of opinion subject to the officials opinion if it was important enough to the game to overturn. Sorry, can't buy it. if the replay is ambiguous or not quite clear, be conservative and don't overturn. But that one was clearly, unambiguously against the rules.
So we're putting more on the refs' plates when it comes to subjective calls. Spot fouls that decide games are now up to the refs to decide if "it's import enough to the game to overturn"? So you're saying the refs now can't be consistent and have to go beyond what they see on the tape and decide whether the call is "important enough" to overturn?
The refs get a lot of shit but the league doesn't do them any favors, this is another example. That call was obvious but you can find by the book PI on almost every play, I don't want a football game decided by whether or not that ref wants to call it by the book or use his discretion based on game situation.
You're misinterpreting that. I was replying to Fatman's assertion that it should only be called it its important enough to the game. I am definitely not in favor of that. It should be called if it is clearly shown to violate the rules … unambiguously.
it truly will be matter of opinion subject to the officials opinion if it was important enough to the game to overturn. Sorry, can't buy it. if the replay is ambiguous or not quite clear, be conservative and don't overturn. But that one was clearly, unambiguously against the rules.
So we're putting more on the refs' plates when it comes to subjective calls. Spot fouls that decide games are now up to the refs to decide if "it's import enough to the game to overturn"? So you're saying the refs now can't be consistent and have to go beyond what they see on the tape and decide whether the call is "important enough" to overturn?
The refs get a lot of shit but the league doesn't do them any favors, this is another example. That call was obvious but you can find by the book PI on almost every play, I don't want a football game decided by whether or not that ref wants to call it by the book or use his discretion based on game situation.
The league really doesn't do them any favors. They had a ref seminar at the combine one year and I asked why they didn't simplify the rules to be less subjective and I was told - "You're asking the wrong guy. That comes from the top".
I would try and do two things if I were put in charge of the rules:
1) Put an emphasis on calling blatant fouls that directly impact the action or point of attack
2) Have less subjectivity in rules, the catch rule for instance
Calling a minor brush of contact at the 6 yard zone on the opposite side of the field on a 3rd and 18 should never be called.
The goal should be to eliminate game-changing calls, not be perfect.
Tanney is the one auditioning for another team. Lauletta is Jones backup in another year. They gonna carry him. That was excellent work opening the route by selling his hips to the defender to fool him to cover the outside route.
get excited about the future...you can definitely see an improvement in the 2nd and 3rd tier players...imagine what another couple of good drafts could do
Tanney is the one auditioning for another team. Lauletta is Jones backup in another year. They gonna carry him. That was excellent work opening the route by selling his hips to the defender to fool him to cover the outside route.
At this point none of us knows which of them will go, perhaps not even the coach. I'm leaning toward keeping Tanney. I suspect they might want the mix of Eli, a good looking rookie draft choice in Jones, and an experienced veteran in Tanney rather than a second year guy who's never taken a regular season snap.
Very nice throw by Lauletta.
Human error is part of it, although you try to do the best you can.
On the interception, technically it probably should have been overturned as well since the first one was called.
This rule opens up a huge fan of worms
at the time man he sticks like a burdock .
That was a spectacular catch by White ..
Well anybody questioning the past two drafts
all this negative crap on DG have a nice dish of Crow .
And can return kicks too...pretty impressive for a guy coming from a small school.
So we're putting more on the refs' plates when it comes to subjective calls. Spot fouls that decide games are now up to the refs to decide if "it's import enough to the game to overturn"? So you're saying the refs now can't be consistent and have to go beyond what they see on the tape and decide whether the call is "important enough" to overturn?
The refs get a lot of shit but the league doesn't do them any favors, this is another example. That call was obvious but you can find by the book PI on almost every play, I don't want a football game decided by whether or not that ref wants to call it by the book or use his discretion based on game situation.
Great trade up, Jerry.
Great trade up, Jerry.
Was that his only trade up ffs?
yup, thought i saw the same
They'll stash him on IR
Quote:
it truly will be matter of opinion subject to the officials opinion if it was important enough to the game to overturn. Sorry, can't buy it. if the replay is ambiguous or not quite clear, be conservative and don't overturn. But that one was clearly, unambiguously against the rules.
So we're putting more on the refs' plates when it comes to subjective calls. Spot fouls that decide games are now up to the refs to decide if "it's import enough to the game to overturn"? So you're saying the refs now can't be consistent and have to go beyond what they see on the tape and decide whether the call is "important enough" to overturn?
The refs get a lot of shit but the league doesn't do them any favors, this is another example. That call was obvious but you can find by the book PI on almost every play, I don't want a football game decided by whether or not that ref wants to call it by the book or use his discretion based on game situation.
You're misinterpreting that. I was replying to Fatman's assertion that it should only be called it its important enough to the game. I am definitely not in favor of that. It should be called if it is clearly shown to violate the rules … unambiguously.
Quote:
it truly will be matter of opinion subject to the officials opinion if it was important enough to the game to overturn. Sorry, can't buy it. if the replay is ambiguous or not quite clear, be conservative and don't overturn. But that one was clearly, unambiguously against the rules.
So we're putting more on the refs' plates when it comes to subjective calls. Spot fouls that decide games are now up to the refs to decide if "it's import enough to the game to overturn"? So you're saying the refs now can't be consistent and have to go beyond what they see on the tape and decide whether the call is "important enough" to overturn?
The refs get a lot of shit but the league doesn't do them any favors, this is another example. That call was obvious but you can find by the book PI on almost every play, I don't want a football game decided by whether or not that ref wants to call it by the book or use his discretion based on game situation.
The league really doesn't do them any favors. They had a ref seminar at the combine one year and I asked why they didn't simplify the rules to be less subjective and I was told - "You're asking the wrong guy. That comes from the top".
I would try and do two things if I were put in charge of the rules:
1) Put an emphasis on calling blatant fouls that directly impact the action or point of attack
2) Have less subjectivity in rules, the catch rule for instance
Calling a minor brush of contact at the 6 yard zone on the opposite side of the field on a 3rd and 18 should never be called.
The goal should be to eliminate game-changing calls, not be perfect.
Game flow would be so much better too
TD Jones !!
Maybe just 3 way!
At this point none of us knows which of them will go, perhaps not even the coach. I'm leaning toward keeping Tanney. I suspect they might want the mix of Eli, a good looking rookie draft choice in Jones, and an experienced veteran in Tanney rather than a second year guy who's never taken a regular season snap.
Where within 5 yrds of LOS he should have pushed him into the backfield, allowing him to stay in better coverage while running to the SL