Lost in all of the complaining, why wasn't it a safety?

[Forward_Lateral]

The refs clearly blew this call, and nobody seems to care. I do. It would've made the game 10-5, and we would've gotten the ball with great field position and a ton of momentum. Instead, the refs blew it, with the explanation that the holding penalty started on the one yard line. Anyone watching that game could clearly see that the lineman hauled Schoebel (I think it was him) down in the endzone. What a crap call, and I'm pissed about it. It may have cost us the game. I know the Bills didn't play well, but that was a huge missed call, and I think it deflated Buffalo.

Any thoughts? Am I way off, or do you guys see it this way too?

[Bulldog]

That call was complete crap. Schoebel pretty much got tackled in the end zone. I really don't care where the holding started, had Oaklands o-lineman not tackled Schoebel, it would have been a safety. I am not willing to go as far as saying it cost Buffalo the game, but it sure didn't help any.

[Pride]

The refs actually got this correct. Not to my liking, but it was correct.

Penalties occur the momen they are illegal, not for the continuation of the play.

So, in this instance, since shoebel was held immediately at the snap, he wasnt in the endzone when the penalty occurred. Of course, the play and penalty continued into the endzone, but the beginning of the infraction was not in the endzone.

[Ebenezer]

The refs actually got this correct. Not to my liking, but it was correct.

Penalties occur the momen they are illegal, not for the continuation of the play.

So, in this instance, since shoebel was held immediately at the snap, he wasnt in the endzone when the penalty occurred. Of course, the play and penalty continued into the endzone, but the beginning of the infraction was not in the endzone.
sadly, you are correct...

[don137]

I think it is a judgement call. IMO he was being blocked legally at the one and the hold did not occur until they were in the endzone. IMO it was a bad call but that is not why we lost...

[Forward_Lateral]

I don't think he was held until he was at the goal-line, holding doesn't occur until Schoebel gets outside of the lineman, at which point he pretty much clotheslined him and tackled him down. I didn't see holding until he got past the goal line. I wish I could see a replay.

[Michael82]

I agree. It was a safety. They actually had the same kind of play in the Browns/Cowboys game and it was ruled a safety for the Cowboys. :shakeno: But not for us....:mad: Plus, there were other questionable calls and no-calls. I don't care what anyone says, there's no way the Raiders could pick up every single one of our blitzes. There was some definite holding going on. However, like has been said before...good teams find a way to overcome these problems and still find a way to win.

[Ebenezer]

how many more days are we going to mentally masturbate this to death...fine...the NFL says it was a safety 13-12...happy now?? there are bigger fish to fry with this team...

[Patrick76777]

The thing is, it seems that the refs in the NFL hate awarding safeties. Ever notice on the running plays, if the back is anywhere near the goal line the refs will say he got out of the endzone. Same on this play, it was close, could have really gone either way.

[Michael82]

how many more days are we going to mentally masturbate this to death...fine...the NFL says it was a safety 13-12...happy now?? there are bigger fish to fry with this team...
if we got a safety...we could have gone for 2 when we got that TD....we make that...game tied 13-13...OT.

Anymore thoughts? :scratch:

[Michael82]

The thing is, it seems that the refs in the NFL hate awarding safeties. Ever notice on the running plays, if the back is anywhere near the goal line the refs will say he got out of the endzone. Same on this play, it was close, could have really gone either way.
The EXACT same play happened in the Browns/Cowboys game and they were awarded the safety. :mad:

[Patrick76777]

if we got a safety...we could have gone for 2 when we got that TD....we make that...game tied 13-13...OT.

Anymore thoughts? :scratch:



And if we would have gone for the FG on 4th and 1, that last TD ties it.

[BAM]

Too many what if's. The Bills lost this game straight up.

[Ebenezer]

Too many what if's. The Bills lost this game straight up.
thank you.

[Forward_Lateral]

how many more days are we going to mentally masturbate this to death...fine...the NFL says it was a safety 13-12...happy now?? there are bigger fish to fry with this team...


We aren't allowed to question calls here? Wasn't aware of that rule.

[pcnorth22]

I was 10 rows up at the 3 yard line.... and it was a safety...

the refs had no balls on that call...the black hole scared them...thought they'd get batteries thrown at them...

[Michael82]

I was 10 rows up at the 3 yard line.... and it was a safety...

the refs had no balls on that call...the black hole scared them...thought they'd get batteries thrown at them...
Thank you! :bf1:

Bills get screwed again...go figure. :mad:

[don137]

Every week games come down to a handful of critical plays. Oakland got the better of us in those plays. If we punched it in on 4th and 1, if we did not hold on special teams, give up the big play to Curry, etc maybe the outcome would be different. In my eyes it was a safety but that did not decide the game. The game was decided by the players and Oakland deserved to win.

[Ebenezer]

I was 10 rows up at the 3 yard line.... and it was a safety...

the refs had no balls on that call...the black hole scared them...thought they'd get batteries thrown at them...


check the rules again...Pride has it right...the block was initiated outside the endzone...no safety...

[justasportsfan]

thank you.
How many did you start this week? Cmon let those who wish to discuss the issue.

What if the guy didn't hold Shoebel and got the sack which would've turned it into a fumble and recovery in the endzone. TD Bills!!!! :snicker:

[Ebenezer]

Thank you! :bf1:

Bills get screwed again...go figure. :mad:
every loss is because the Bills get screwed??? please stop....should the '93 Bills give back the Houston comeback game?? Beebe was out of bounds on TD #2. Overcome any mistake or you don't deserve to win. It wasn't like Oakland had 35...they had 13...we got an oh, by the way TD when Oakland stopped blitzing because they knew we could not catch up...we lost. plain and simple. stop looking for excuses.

[Ebenezer]

How many did you start this week? Cmon let those who wish to discuss the issue.

What if the guy didn't hold Shoebel and got the sack which would've turned it into a fumble and recovery in the endzone. TD Bills!!!! :snicker:
what if the Oakland OL all got food poisoning and didn't play?? :rolleyes:


the point is that everybody wants to point to that one play and say it decided the whole game...funny, nobody from the Bills has said squat about it...

[justasportsfan]

what if the Oakland OL all got food poisoning and didn't play?? :rolleyes:


the point is that everybody wants to point to that one play and say it decided the whole game...funny, nobody from the Bills has said squat about it...
I have yet to read a post that says it definitely cost us the game. I agree with you though one play would not have decided the game. Too many errors on our part did us in. Just like the Jags game, we deserved to lose last Sunday.

[chernobylwraiths]

how many more days are we going to mentally masturbate this to death...fine...the NFL says it was a safety 13-12...happy now?? there are bigger fish to fry with this team...

I still can't get by the mentaly masterbating part. Wait, wait, wait, damn. Too quick again.

[chernobylwraiths]

Wasn't it Fletcher or Spikes taken down anyway? :D

[Ebenezer]

Wasn't it Fletcher or Spikes taken down anyway? :D
I believe you are correct...the penalty was calledd on the other side of the line...not Schobel's.

[chernobylwraiths]

I believe you are correct...the penalty was calledd on the other side of the line...not Schobel's.

That means that NOBODY knows what the hell they are talking about since everyone kept saying Schobel. :;

[pcnorth22]

check the rules again...Pride has it right...the block was initiated outside the endzone...no safety...

the hold has to be initiated outside the goal line...not the block...

to me it didn't look like the hold iniated outside the goal line

[pcnorth22]

Regardless...I don't think people are saying here that it cost us the game...

just bringing something up to discuss...we've got 2 weeks you know!

[finsrclowns]

I was upset at the call at the time. Truthfully I don't fully understand the call either way. Did our guy get touched before the end zone? Yes. Was he being held before the end zone? Don't think so. It appears the call was saying because the contact initiated before the end zone and he was eventually holding, we go by where the contact started. If that's the rule it's the rule but it makes about as much intuitive sense as the tuck rule. IMO it should be unless there was actual holding before the end zone it's a safety.

I'm not usually a conspiracy theorist but I was saying to myself as the refs conversation droned on like a bad movie, the longer this conversation continues, the less likely the decision is going our way.

BTW, I couldn't see any hold on Haagen on Clements punt return- THAT was a pivotal call. It seems refs have the flags out and their arm cocked on EVERY decent kick punt return looking for anything wrong. If the refs called offensive holding the way they call holding on punts/kicks you'd have a penalty on virtually every play <end of rant>.

[Canadian'eh!]

I think it is a judgement call. IMO he was being blocked legally at the one and the hold did not occur until they were in the endzone. IMO it was a bad call but that is not why we lost...



this is what i saw too.. it looked like a legal block until takeo started moving around to the guys right at which point he went from blocking to grabiing at jersey.... by the time he made that transition he was in the end zone... certainly what was going on at the 1 was NOT about to be called....

[Wraith]

I think the officials need to remove their heads from their asses and use a little common sense on this one. The play speaks for itself, Spikes got TACKLED in the endzone on his way, otherwise unimpeded, to the Quarterback. Yet they say the holding occurred on the 1. That's like only giving the offense 5 yards on a 60 bomb that was interferred with 60 yards downfield because the receiver's jersey was grabbed for an instant on his way by the cornerback at the beginning of the play. The NFL pays these guys to use some judgement, let's see some.

[Bulldog]

That means that NOBODY knows what the hell they are talking about since everyone kept saying Schobel. :;

Except for you almighty one. :bow: Sorry we couldn't remember who got tackled. Does it make a difference if it was Schobel or Spikes or Fletcher? Bottom line, it was holding, and it should have resulted in saftey. Again, I'm not saying thats what decided the game, but it sure didn't help.

[LABillzFan]

I think you're all missing the real critical part of this problem.

If Bledsoe wasn't such a piece of crap quarterback, we would've scored on the preceeding drive, then Lindell would have kicked off, the Raiders would have the ball at about the 28 yard line, and the chance of a holding call in the endzone would have never occurred.

Once again; Bledsoe's fault.

Oh, and if you look at the replay, they were initially engaged, but the actual holding took place in the endzone. Not that it would matter anyway. Bledsoe would have screwed up the ensuing drive anyway.

[Michael82]

I think you're all missing the real critical part of this problem.

If Bledsoe wasn't such a piece of crap quarterback, we would've scored on the preceeding drive, then Lindell would have kicked off, the Raiders would have the ball at about the 28 yard line, and the chance of a holding call in the endzone would have never occurred.

Once again; Bledsoe's fault.

Oh, and if you look at the replay, they were initially engaged, but the actual holding took place in the endzone. Not that it would matter anyway. Bledsoe would have screwed up the ensuing drive anyway.
Way to jump on the HATE Bledsoe bandwagon. :bf1:

:rofl:

[chernobylwraiths]

Except for you almighty one. :bow: Sorry we couldn't remember who got tackled.

If you looked at that little blinky guy at the end of my post you would realize that I was being sarcastic.

:calm: