A Zebra's Taint?
In the past, we've witnessed some lamentable team collapses, officiating, and games where the result was compromised...
this weekend had a gem in which a zeal of zebra's, in an attempt to correct or fix things, made a fine mess.
We've also Nattered in analytics or quant fashion at length regarding losing to Uncle TOM, aka Turn Over Margin, here, here and here.
By the end of this post the relevance of said discussions in relation to the seemingly innocuous outcome of last weekend's KC vs TEN affair, shall become readily apparent.
Following up on the KC vs TEN events chronicled in Wildcard Weekend Results...
To Err Is Human?
Despite those events, including the Chefs making like Elvis in the 2nd half, and the 6 to 10pts they failed to convert on, none of the above should have prevented the Chefs from winning this game.
Ultimately, the difference between winning and losing was decided by a crossing of zebra's, on three plays.
1. The gifted FG. 2:41 remaining 2Q, 3rd-4, Mariota was sacked and fumbled at the Chef 31, the Chefs recovered and could have advanced the ball for a TD.
But no, the play is blown dead, Mariota's forward progress was ruled to have been stopped before the QB fumbled. On 4th down Succop kicks a 49 yd FG. Net: TEN +3, KC -7 ??
2. The gifted TD. 6:44 remaining 3Q, 3rd-6 at the KC 6, prior to releasing the ball, Mariota advanced his hand and the ball past the line of scrimmage, attempting an illegal forward pass, the ball was deflected back to him, scoring a TD on a pass to himself.
But no, Mariota is ruled to have been behind the line and in a shotgun, and therefore an eligible receiver, both of which were completely irrelevant.
More on that irrelevance later. Had a proper ruling been made, the Tuxes would have kicked a FG on 4th down. Net: TEN +4
3. The 2 point annulment. 14:17 remaining 4Q, During a failed 2pt try, attempting to escape a tackler's grasp, Mariota runs backwards, fumbles, KC recovers and advances for 2 pts.
But no, even though Mariota is ambulating quite well, as soon as the ball pops out, once again his forward progress is ruled to have been stopped, negating the Chefs 58yd return for 2 pts. Net: KC -2
By definition, isn't that what happens when you get tackled for a loss or when attempting to escape such by running backwards, or reversing field??
Apparently, this dazzle of zebra's interpretation of the rules, would have ruled Marcus Allen's SBXVIII 74 yd running with the night, in the grasp and a dead play? More to come next week in Part 2.
this weekend had a gem in which a zeal of zebra's, in an attempt to correct or fix things, made a fine mess.
We've also Nattered in analytics or quant fashion at length regarding losing to Uncle TOM, aka Turn Over Margin, here, here and here.
By the end of this post the relevance of said discussions in relation to the seemingly innocuous outcome of last weekend's KC vs TEN affair, shall become readily apparent.
Following up on the KC vs TEN events chronicled in Wildcard Weekend Results...
To Err Is Human?
Despite those events, including the Chefs making like Elvis in the 2nd half, and the 6 to 10pts they failed to convert on, none of the above should have prevented the Chefs from winning this game.
Ultimately, the difference between winning and losing was decided by a crossing of zebra's, on three plays.
1. The gifted FG. 2:41 remaining 2Q, 3rd-4, Mariota was sacked and fumbled at the Chef 31, the Chefs recovered and could have advanced the ball for a TD.
But no, the play is blown dead, Mariota's forward progress was ruled to have been stopped before the QB fumbled. On 4th down Succop kicks a 49 yd FG. Net: TEN +3, KC -7 ??
2. The gifted TD. 6:44 remaining 3Q, 3rd-6 at the KC 6, prior to releasing the ball, Mariota advanced his hand and the ball past the line of scrimmage, attempting an illegal forward pass, the ball was deflected back to him, scoring a TD on a pass to himself.
But no, Mariota is ruled to have been behind the line and in a shotgun, and therefore an eligible receiver, both of which were completely irrelevant.
More on that irrelevance later. Had a proper ruling been made, the Tuxes would have kicked a FG on 4th down. Net: TEN +4
3. The 2 point annulment. 14:17 remaining 4Q, During a failed 2pt try, attempting to escape a tackler's grasp, Mariota runs backwards, fumbles, KC recovers and advances for 2 pts.
But no, even though Mariota is ambulating quite well, as soon as the ball pops out, once again his forward progress is ruled to have been stopped, negating the Chefs 58yd return for 2 pts. Net: KC -2
By definition, isn't that what happens when you get tackled for a loss or when attempting to escape such by running backwards, or reversing field??
Apparently, this dazzle of zebra's interpretation of the rules, would have ruled Marcus Allen's SBXVIII 74 yd running with the night, in the grasp and a dead play? More to come next week in Part 2.
Comments