The 2 pt conversion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Cntrygal
    Visually stunning but camera-shy.
    • Jul 2002
    • 44883

    The 2 pt conversion

    What happened there? I was at the bar and didn't get to hear the experts explain that call.
    Originally posted by notacon
    The biggest thing we learned from the Bills is that they are a resilient bunch and did what they had to do to win instead of past years where they fold like a cheap lawn chair.

    For news, articles and other "stuff"... BillsZone.com
  • Block "O"
    lowering the bar with every post
    • Sep 2008
    • 879

    #2
    Re: The 2 pt conversion

    The Beeee-illls didn't convert on that 2 point conversion - Solomon Wilcox

    Comment

    • Joe Fo Sho
      Making Spirits Bright
      • Mar 2006
      • 6194

      #3
      Re: The 2 pt conversion

      Illegal formation

      I think one of the WR's covered up one of our TE's on the LOS. I really don't know who the culprits were, but I'd guess Hardy covered up Royal.

      Comment

      • Cntrygal
        Visually stunning but camera-shy.
        • Jul 2002
        • 44883

        #4
        Re: The 2 pt conversion



        Well, that explanation is clear as mud, sounds like that guy is brilliant - do you have a link? Old Soloman couldn't say WHY it wasn't "converted"?
        Originally posted by notacon
        The biggest thing we learned from the Bills is that they are a resilient bunch and did what they had to do to win instead of past years where they fold like a cheap lawn chair.

        For news, articles and other "stuff"... BillsZone.com

        Comment

        • The Spaz
          Registered User
          • Mar 2003
          • 19066

          #5
          Re: The 2 pt conversion

          Originally posted by Cntrygal


          Well, that explanation is clear as mud, sounds like that guy is brilliant - do you have a link? Old Soloman couldn't say WHY it wasn't "converted"?
          Huh? It was a penalty which is why it didn't count.

          Comment

          • Block "O"
            lowering the bar with every post
            • Sep 2008
            • 879

            #6
            Re: The 2 pt conversion

            Originally posted by Cntrygal


            Well, that explanation is clear as mud, sounds like that guy is brilliant - do you have a link? Old Soloman couldn't say WHY it wasn't "converted"?
            sorry I tivoed it and I would have to go rewatch it I'm getting the wisconsin/michigan and Bills/rams 2 pt conversion mixed up in my mind.

            Comment

            • Cntrygal
              Visually stunning but camera-shy.
              • Jul 2002
              • 44883

              #7
              Re: The 2 pt conversion

              Originally posted by The Spaz
              Huh? It was a penalty which is why it didn't count.
              I should've quoted Block O's post for that reply. I know there was a penalty - but couldn't hear what it was (bar noise and all).
              Originally posted by notacon
              The biggest thing we learned from the Bills is that they are a resilient bunch and did what they had to do to win instead of past years where they fold like a cheap lawn chair.

              For news, articles and other "stuff"... BillsZone.com

              Comment

              • Block "O"
                lowering the bar with every post
                • Sep 2008
                • 879

                #8
                Re: The 2 pt conversion

                Originally posted by Cntrygal
                I should've quoted Block O's post for that reply. I know there was a penalty - but couldn't hear what it was (bar noise and all).
                I also apologize, I simply enjoy making fun of solomon.

                Comment

                • Michael82
                  Registered User
                  • Jul 2002
                  • 82330

                  #9
                  The only thing that I heard was an illegal formation on #84

                  Comment

                  • Ingtar33
                    Dances With Buffaloes
                    • Sep 2002
                    • 15469

                    #10
                    Re: The 2 pt conversion

                    they claimed royal didn't cover the tackle... and it was a mistake. from what i saw he did...


                    but it's no big deal
                    My wife told me that if I had a dollar for every girl who found me unattractive, girls would find me VERY attractive.

                    MY WIFE SAID THAT!!!

                    Comment

                    • madness
                      Registered User
                      • Apr 2003
                      • 13690

                      #11
                      Re: The 2 pt conversion

                      Originally posted by Block "O"
                      The Beeee-illls didn't convert on that 2 point conversion - Solomon Wilcox
                      I could hear his voice when I read this.

                      Comment

                      • Coach Sal
                        Registered User
                        • Aug 2006
                        • 2475

                        #12
                        Re: The 2 pt conversion

                        Originally posted by Ingtar33
                        they claimed royal didn't cover the tackle... and it was a mistake. from what i saw he did...
                        That's not what they called.

                        A WR - I believe Lee Evans - covered Royal. And since Royal wears a # in the 80s, he cannot be covered.

                        Eligible numbers must be in eligible positions and ineligible numbers must be in ineligible positions. If they want to change their status, they must report to the referee who will then notify the other team. Obviously, the Bills didn't do that.
                        Click to listen:

                        Buffalo Bills Now! and NFL Now! podcasts
                        And every Saturday at 11am on WGR



                        "A good name is more desirable than great riches, and high esteem is better than silver and gold."

                        Class Character Commitment Consistency Courage

                        Comment

                        • Dr. Lecter
                          Zero for Zero!
                          • Mar 2003
                          • 67930

                          #13
                          Re: The 2 pt conversion

                          Originally posted by Coach Sal
                          That's not what they called.

                          A WR - I believe Lee Evans - covered Royal. And since Royal wears a # in the 80s, he cannot be covered.

                          Eligible numbers must be in eligible positions and ineligible numbers must be in ineligible positions. If they want to change their status, they must report to the referee who will then notify the other team. Obviously, the Bills didn't do that.
                          I am not sure that is correct.

                          If Royal is covered he becomes ineligible, but the formation is not illegal. If Royal goes downfield, it can be an ineligible man downfield call, but the formation is legal.

                          Or is the rule different than in college, where a similar thing happened in the Michigan game and Wisconsin was called for ineligible man downfield.

                          This morning on 97 Rock, Mark Kelso said he looked through the rulebook and what the Bills did was legal, but he will continue to look for clarification and thet he thinks the ref screwed up.
                          Originally posted by mysticsoto
                          Lecter is right in everything he said.

                          Comment

                          • Coach Sal
                            Registered User
                            • Aug 2006
                            • 2475

                            #14
                            Re: The 2 pt conversion

                            OK. Sorry to bring this back up, but I finally found it in the rule book. Assuming Royal WAS covered by a WR, the official made the correct call:


                            Section 3 Changes in Position
                            Article 1 An offensive player wearing the number of an ineligible pass receiver (50-79 and 90-99) is permitted to line up in the position of an eligible pass receiver (1-49 and 80-89), and an offensive player wearing the number of an eligible pass receiver is permitted to line up in the position of an ineligible pass receiver, provided that he immediately reports the change in his eligibility status to the Referee, who will inform the defensive team.







                            Click to listen:

                            Buffalo Bills Now! and NFL Now! podcasts
                            And every Saturday at 11am on WGR



                            "A good name is more desirable than great riches, and high esteem is better than silver and gold."

                            Class Character Commitment Consistency Courage

                            Comment

                            • Cntrygal
                              Visually stunning but camera-shy.
                              • Jul 2002
                              • 44883

                              #15
                              Re: The 2 pt conversion

                              Thanks!
                              Originally posted by notacon
                              The biggest thing we learned from the Bills is that they are a resilient bunch and did what they had to do to win instead of past years where they fold like a cheap lawn chair.

                              For news, articles and other "stuff"... BillsZone.com

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X