Author Topic: More Mike Carey Questions (Read 12995 times)

GAHSUMPIRE · « **on:** January 16, 2016, 04:52:56 PM »

More questions from Mike Carey's rules interpretations in the NE v. KC game.

Tom Brady scrambles toward the pylon. Ruled out at the 1/2 yd line. NE challenges. Mike Carey says he would reverse it because Brady's hip hit the pylon (When that happened the ball was behind him and had not crossed the goal line.)

I was under the impression- from previous threads on this board- that the pylon was out of bounds, so as soon as you hit the pylon, you are out of bounds (correct call on the field - incorrect interpretation by Mike Carey).

Am I wrong?

Legacy Zebra · « **Reply #1 on:** January 16, 2016, 05:22:16 PM »

I'm wondering if that's an NFL rule/interpretation because Pereira said the same thing on Twitter.

BrendanP · « **Reply #2 on:** January 16, 2016, 09:43:19 PM »

I thought the pylon isn't out of bounds, and that it serves as a visual, imaginary extension of the ground. It looked from one angle like he got in, from another that he didn't, and you couldn't tell for sure from any of the others.

Kalle · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2016, 02:56:10 AM »

The pylon is out of bounds behind the goal line. The angles are not conclusive (that's why they had to let the call stand) but I think that when Brady hit the pylon his body was turned so that the ball did break the plane of the goal line between the pylons (best seen in the view from behind and other side of the field). Tough call both on the field and in IR.

goodgrr · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2016, 06:16:17 AM »

Quote from: Legacy Zebra on January 16, 2016, 05:22:16 PM

I'm wondering if that's an NFL rule/interpretation because Pereira said the same thing on Twitter.

Doesn't look like the pylon is OOB, here's the two rule definitions for Touchdown and OOB

"ARTICLE 1. TOUCHDOWN PLAYS. A touchdown is scored when:
(a) the ball is on, above, or behind the plane of the opponents’ goal line (extended) and is in possession of a runner who has advanced from the field of play into the end zone
(b) a ball in possession of an airborne runner is on, above, or behind the plane of the goal line, and some part of the ball passed over or inside the pylon
(c) a ball in player possession touches the pylon, provided that, after contact by an opponent, no part of the player’s body, except his hands or feet, struck the ground before the ball touched the pylon
(d) any player who is legally inbounds catches or recovers a loose ball (3-2-4) that is on, above, or behind the opponent’s goal line"

"SECTION 21 OUT OF BOUNDS, INBOUNDS, AND INBOUNDS SPOT
ARTICLE 1. PLAYER OR OFFICIAL OUT OF BOUNDS. A player or an Official is Out of Bounds when he touches a boundary line, or when he touches anything that is on or outside a boundary line, except a player, an official, or a pylon."

--------------

I don't think there's clear evidence that the ball crosses over the pylon, hence why they said the play sands. However he wouldn't have been OOB when he hit the pylon.

Kalle · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2016, 06:25:42 AM »

Quote from: goodgrr on January 17, 2016, 06:16:17 AM

Doesn't look like the pylon is OOB, here's the two rule definitions for Touchdown and OOB

Actually, in NFL, it seems that the pylon is OOB but a player touching the pylon isn't (unlike NCAA).

Section 21, article 3, Ball out of bounds:

Item 2: Loose Ball. A loose ball is out of bounds when it touches a boundary line or anything that is on or outside such line, including a player, an official, or a pylon.

goodgrr · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2016, 06:41:48 AM »

Interesting contradiction

Kalle · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2016, 06:48:31 AM »

Quote from: goodgrr on January 17, 2016, 06:41:48 AM

Interesting contradiction

Well, NCAA has a similar contradiction in that a loose ball touching a player or an official out of bounds is out of bounds but a player isn't. It's just definitions, nothing too strange.

It actually kinda makes sense as the pylons may move during the play, so you don't have to worry about do they cause the player to be out of bounds, and an accidental brush on a pylon doesn't make a receiver out of bounds.

GAHSUMPIRE · « **Reply #8 on:** January 18, 2016, 10:53:19 AM »

Quote from: goodgrr on January 17, 2016, 06:16:17 AM

Doesn't look like the pylon is OOB, here's the two rule definitions for Touchdown and OOB

"ARTICLE 1. TOUCHDOWN PLAYS. A touchdown is scored when:
(a) the ball is on, above, or behind the plane of the opponents’ goal line (extended) and is in possession of a runner who has advanced from the field of play into the end zone
(b) a ball in possession of an airborne runner is on, above, or behind the plane of the goal line, and some part of the ball passed over or inside the pylon
(c) a ball in player possession touches the pylon, provided that, after contact by an opponent, no part of the player’s body, except his hands or feet, struck the ground before the ball touched the pylon
(d) any player who is legally inbounds catches or recovers a loose ball (3-2-4) that is on, above, or behind the opponent’s goal line"

"SECTION 21 OUT OF BOUNDS, INBOUNDS, AND INBOUNDS SPOT
ARTICLE 1. PLAYER OR OFFICIAL OUT OF BOUNDS. A player or an Official is Out of Bounds when he touches a boundary line, or when he touches anything that is on or outside a boundary line, except a player, an official, or a pylon."

--------------

I don't think there's clear evidence that the ball crosses over the pylon, hence why they said the play sands. However he wouldn't have been OOB when he hit the pylon.

I don't disagree with the call on the field, or the Replay review, I just didn't understand Mike Carey's opinion that it was a touchdown because his hip hit the pylon. If the pylon is out of bounds, his hip hitting it would make him out of bounds, not score a touchdown. If the pylon is in bounds, his hip hitting it still has no bearing on whether or not the ball crossed the goal line and a touchdown was scored.

goodgrr · « **Reply #9 on:** January 19, 2016, 04:10:42 AM »

Quote from: GAHSUMPIRE on January 18, 2016, 10:53:19 AM

I don't disagree with the call on the field, or the Replay review, I just didn't understand Mike Carey's opinion that it was a touchdown because his hip hit the pylon. If the pylon is out of bounds, his hip hitting it would make him out of bounds, not score a touchdown. If the pylon is in bounds, his hip hitting it still has no bearing on whether or not the ball crossed the goal line and a touchdown was scored.

I'm guessing however one explanation for his comment could be that his hip hitting the pylon by NFL rules wasn't OOB, therefore after that and before his leg hit in the white the ball crossed the pylon and would therefore make it a touchdown.

Ralph Damren · « **Reply #10 on:** January 19, 2016, 08:07:11 AM »

Remember, fellow NFHSers, that in our code touching the properly placed pylon would put the runner OOB. Question of the hour : Where was the ball when the runner went OOB? Remember "goal line extended" only applies while runner is still touching inbounds, otherwise it's where was the ball when it breaks the sideline plane when runner is airborne.

Personally, I was happy with the non-reversal of the call.

Personally, I would not have been happy with the non-reversal of the call IF Brady had fumbled next.

Fandom trumps officiating in such instances

.

Kalle · « **Reply #11 on:** January 19, 2016, 08:09:15 AM »

Quote from: Ralph Damren on January 19, 2016, 08:07:11 AM

Remember "goal line extended" only applies while runner is still touching inbounds, otherwise it's where was the ball when it breaks the sideline plane when runner is airborne.

I'm unable to find the definition for the goal line extension in the NFL rules, so I'm guessing that it is always extended (perhaps this is one of those VP/O definitions that don't make the book...).

Ralph Damren · « **Reply #12 on:** January 19, 2016, 01:03:50 PM »

Quote from: Kalle on January 19, 2016, 08:09:15 AM

I'm unable to find the definition for the goal line extension in the NFL rules, so I'm guessing that it is always extended (perhaps this is one of those VP/O definitions that don't make the book...).

In the NFHS Case Book, it's covered in 2.26.3.

Kalle · « **Reply #13 on:** January 19, 2016, 02:07:43 PM »

Quote from: Ralph Damren on January 19, 2016, 01:03:50 PM

In the NFHS Case Book, it's covered in 2.26.3.

Yes, and in NCAA it is the rule 8-2-1-a, but I don't see it anywhere in the NFL book.

VALJ · « **Reply #14 on:** January 20, 2016, 08:13:27 AM »

My only issue was saying that he would have overturned it because "in his opinion" Brady was in. Replay is supposed to need indisputable evidence to overturn, and an "opinion" sure doesn't sound like it qualifies to me.

goodgrr · « **Reply #15 on:** January 20, 2016, 10:02:55 AM »

Quote from: VALJ on January 20, 2016, 08:13:27 AM

My only issue was saying that he would have overturned it because "in his opinion" Brady was in. Replay is supposed to need indisputable evidence to overturn, and an "opinion" sure doesn't sound like it qualifies to me.

Yes but remember, this is Mike Carey's opinion we are discussing :-)

bossman72 · « **Reply #16 on:** January 20, 2016, 12:36:16 PM »

Is Mike Carey ever right? haha

goodgrr · « **Reply #17 on:** January 23, 2016, 04:34:20 AM »

Blandino covers the play in this week's media video...

http://operations.nfl.com/the-officials/inside-nfl-gameday-central/media-officiating-videos/

VALJ · « **Reply #18 on:** January 25, 2016, 09:39:42 AM »

He does a great job on that muffed punt that he shows as the last play.

VALJ · « **Reply #19 on:** January 28, 2016, 12:38:47 PM »

In the interest of both side of the story...

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/01/mike-carey-cbs-officiating-expert-accuracy

Ralph Damren · « **Reply #20 on:** February 08, 2016, 11:09:37 AM »

After Mike Carey got his first guess wrong early in the game yesterday, did he guess anymore during the game ??

Today we remember Cam deciding not to get muddy and going after the loose fumble at his feet.

Two years ago, we may dimly remember Payton deciding not to get muddy and go after a snap that had sailed over his head into the end zone.

....it must be a quarterback thing

Rulesman · « **Reply #21 on:** February 08, 2016, 11:46:57 AM »

Quote from: Ralph Damren on February 08, 2016, 11:09:37 AM

After Mike Carey got his first guess wrong early in the game yesterday, did he guess anymore during the game ??

Unless I missed it, they never called on him again. I found that interesting.

VALJ · « **Reply #22 on:** February 08, 2016, 12:49:45 PM »

I only remember one other challenge, and that was an obvious one.

bkdow · « **Reply #23 on:** February 08, 2016, 04:02:49 PM »

You had Peyton down by contact and the catch/no-catch. I believe the rest were both reviews initiated on scoring plays.

Kalle · « **Reply #24 on:** February 09, 2016, 08:22:19 AM »

I think all but the first review were obvious to everybody. I wasn't surprised that the first replay was inconclusive, I *think* it should have been overturned but the NFL mantra is that it has to really obvious, which it wasn't from the angles available.

I think Carey's "fault" is that he goes too much with the gut feeling, whereas Perreira has learned that the replays are very careful in overturning.