[CTcard]

On the Fox offside: on the TV replay he didn't look anywhere near offside. I was puzzled by that one.

Saw that too. He was a foot or so behind the black line. Not even close. . . .

2Q 7:56:  The line overlaid digitally on the field has no bearing on on/offsides but it is often handy as a guideline.   He wasn't offsides by where the officials spotted the ball. When the center got to the ball, its center was at the forward edge of the black line indicating the line of scrimmage, about at 47.4 yard line.  Then the center moved it back so the ball's forward white stripe was on that same edge. That's when Fox initially lined up offside with his toe just short (1"?) of the edge of the black line. By the position of the ball at that time, he wasn't offsides (but he was by the original placement).  Then the center moved the ball forward so the back white stripe of the ball was on that same edge.  Fox pulled his foot back in response, enough so it wasn't offside by where the ball was placed by the official.  He then pulled his foot back even more (barely overlapping the yellow in the "O").  But if an official judged offsides by where the center moved the ball to, that would explain the call.  If someone judges it by the digital ball placement line, he wasn't anywhere close.  The actual truth was in the middle.
...

Don't get me started about officials placing the ball to give first downs.  Shudder that they'd ever measure for a first down again, no matter what the statistics might assure how often the proper placement as being too close to eyeball for the first down.  (Ever notice how improbably often the ball is spotted on a yard marker?)   Did I miss a rule change?  Who gave the officials the right (and apparently, the imperative) to place the ball other than where the rules say it should be placed?

Here is the play in question.
https://youtu.be/jl8ldVjPR9I?t=39m3s
As noted by MT, the black line is irrelevant. Looks to me that Fox's foot is clearly as deep as the ball. [Look at the live shot, the replay is not a helpful angle.]
Either way an inconsequential call as they got the first down anyway and this would have just made the long TD run on the next play 4 yds longer.

I also noted what seemed to be lots of poor spots (and of course I tended to notice the ones that went against us). But that is pretty much the case in every game. MT is also correct that the careful, ceremonial measuring for a first down is kind of a farce given the very large uncertainty in referee ball placement - but I guess they have to do something to determine first down or not.

Overall, despite some grumbling from time to time, the refereeing seemed alright.

[CTcard]

On the Fox offside: on the TV replay he didn't look anywhere near offside. I was puzzled by that one.

Saw that too. He was a foot or so behind the black line. Not even close. . . .

2Q 7:56:  The line overlaid digitally on the field has no bearing on on/offsides but it is often handy as a guideline.   He wasn't offsides by where the officials spotted the ball. When the center got to the ball, its center was at the forward edge of the black line indicating the line of scrimmage, about at 47.4 yard line.  Then the center moved it back so the ball's forward white stripe was on that same edge. That's when Fox initially lined up offside with his toe just short (1"?) of the edge of the black line. By the position of the ball at that time, he wasn't offsides (but he was by the original placement).  Then the center moved the ball forward so the back white stripe of the ball was on that same edge.  Fox pulled his foot back in response, enough so it wasn't offside by where the ball was placed by the official.  He then pulled his foot back even more (barely overlapping the yellow in the "O").  But if an official judged offsides by where the center moved the ball to, that would explain the call.  If someone judges it by the digital ball placement line, he wasn't anywhere close.  The actual truth was in the middle.
...

Don't get me started about officials placing the ball to give first downs.  Shudder that they'd ever measure for a first down again, no matter what the statistics might assure how often the proper placement as being too close to eyeball for the first down.  (Ever notice how improbably often the ball is spotted on a yard marker?)   Did I miss a rule change?  Who gave the officials the right (and apparently, the imperative) to place the ball other than where the rules say it should be placed?

Here is the play in question.
https://youtu.be/jl8ldVjPR9I?t=39m3s
As noted by MT, the black line is irrelevant. Looks to me that Fox's foot is clearly as deep as the ball. [Look at the live shot, the replay is not a helpful angle.]
Either way an inconsequential call as they got the first down anyway and this would have just made the long TD run on the next play 4 yds longer.

I also noted what seemed to be lots of poor spots (and of course I tended to notice the ones that went against us). But that is pretty much the case in every game. MT is also correct that the careful, ceremonial measuring for a first down is kind of a farce given the very large uncertainty in referee ball placement - but I guess they have to do something to determine first down or not.

Overall, despite some grumbling from time to time, the refereeing seemed alright.