Explain the logic

[RoaringRiot]

3 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

On that play there was absolutely zero risk of that at all.

I could make you a highlight reel of plays where I thought there was zero risk and they weren't overturned. The reward wasn't worth it IMO. 

[Nick_81]

It was unbelievably clear, that the pass was incomplete.  I don't see an issue with the challenge.  It is "a game of inches," as they say, and every yard is important.

[the butch]

Just now, thomas96 said:

On that play there was absolutely zero risk of that at all.

Sure in 1080p it was easy to see.  And maybe it was to Rivera on the sideline.  But those maybes aren't good enough to center a debate around.  Generally, NFL coaches are extremely risk averse.  This would be the equivalent of betting $100 to win $50.  Why risk more than the reward?  Regardless if it was the correct call, there is always a remote possibility of something going wrong.  When in the end, it's essentially the same outcome; +/- 5 yards wouldn't make a difference imo.  Much different scenario had the penalty come on the punt.

[t96]

1 minute ago, RoaringRiot said:

I could make you a highlight reel of plays where I thought there was zero risk and they weren't overturned. The reward wasn't worth it IMO. 

This play would never stand. No matter the refs looking at it or which team was paying them. Sure there are plays that seem clear but not like this.

[jdpanther5]

That was the easiest overturn I've ever seen, no risk in throwing the flag and gaining those extra yards. As has been said, if someone jumps offside it's a first down for Tampa.

Sent from my SM-N920V using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

[RoaringRiot]

3 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

This play would never stand. No matter the refs looking at it or which team was paying them. Sure there are plays that seem clear but not like this.

Yeah I guess. Just didn't seem necessary. Olsen didn't think so either. 

[ShutDwn]

2 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

On that play there was absolutely zero risk of that at all.

The risk all shifts to only having one guaranteed challenge left.

What if we win that challenge, lose the next one and then an actually important play happens but have no challenges left?

You could just not challenge 6 yards and have two challenges.

[SportsCrazie4172]

Luke ran over to Ron and yelled at him to challenge it. Luke was sure it wasn't a completed catch. Thats puts the bucs back 5 more yards to kick it and 5 yards less on our end to run it back..thus a longer punt..

[t96]

1 minute ago, Dick the Butcher said:

Sure in 1080p it was easy to see.  And maybe it was to Rivera on the sideline.  But those maybes aren't good enough to center a debate around.  Generally, NFL coaches are extremely risk averse.  This would be the equivalent of betting $100 to win $50.  Why risk more than the reward?  Regardless if it was the correct call, there is always a remote possibility of something going wrong.  When in the end, it's essentially the same outcome; +/- 5 yards wouldn't make a difference imo.  Much different scenario had the penalty come on the punt.

Well Rivera got the call from upstairs that it was clear, he didn't challenge it based on what his own eyes saw, or what Luke's saw. And unlike refs calls in game they do have that 1080p or whatever when they look at the play again and have al the angles. If I could bet $100 on that play getting overturned to win $50 I'd do it because it's a free $50. In my opinion there was a much greater chance of Ealy or another guy jumping offsides on the punt than that call not getting overturned.

[the butch]

1 minute ago, jdpanther5 said:

if someone jumps offside it's a first down for Tampa.

Sent from my SM-N920V using CarolinaHuddle mobile app
 

 

 

1 minute ago, ShutDwn said:

The risk all shifts to only having one guaranteed challenge left.

What if we win that challenge, lose the next one and then an actually important play happens but have no challenges left?

You could just not challenge 6 yards and have two challenges.

interesting dichotomy.  

[RoaringRiot]

I understand what literal value of +5 yards. It's the risk of having one challenge left or the risk (however slight it may be) of losing the challenge and a TO that made me think it wasn't worth it. 

[the butch]

3 minutes ago, thomas96 said:

Well Rivera got the call from upstairs that it was clear, he didn't challenge it based on what his own eyes saw, or what Luke's saw. And unlike refs calls in game they do have that 1080p or whatever when they look at the play again and have al the angles. If I could bet $100 on that play getting overturned to win $50 I'd do it because it's a free $50. In my opinion there was a much greater chance of Ealy or another guy jumping offsides on the punt than that call not getting overturned.

I understand the concept:  shooting fish in a barrel, right?  Easy money.  But what underscores fan angst on the subject is when you extrapolate the concept to a larger coaching philosophy.  What will Ron do next!?  So, sure, Ron was correct in this call, but it deservedly sparks a conversation about this aspect of his game management.

[RoaringRiot]

RR probably knew Ginn was going to return the punt horizontally and therefore thought the +5 yards was worth the risk. 

[Jimmy]

From the stands it might not have been as obvious but from home and watching the same replays as the booth sees it felt like a no-brainer to me.