# Facemask?



## Msguy (May 23, 2003)

Anyone see the facemask on Aaron Rodgers in Overtime when Arizona supposedly ran the ball in for the winning touchdown? Why wasn't that called?  Just for the record I am NOT a Green Bay fan by any means. Also during the game Arizona got away with many non calls.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Because the REFS were obviously wanting Arizona to win. There were several NON CALLS made which would have resulted in Green Bay 1st downs. I am totally disgusted. And I *AM* a Green Bay fan. Playing the same team 3 weeks in a row is BS in the first place.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

lol...Refs aren't why GB lost. The lack of D is why. AZ was not given anymore calls. Also, it was 2 weeks in a row and totally a fluke, not planned.


----------



## Sackchamp56 (Nov 10, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> lol...Refs aren't why GB lost. The lack of D is why. AZ was not given anymore calls. Also, it was 2 weeks in a row and totally a fluke, not planned.


Agreed


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Also, the ball was fumbled. On a fumble, when no one has possession, you can not have a penalty.


----------



## Movieman (May 9, 2009)

The most interesting part was that no one was talking about it. Not the announcers and none of the sports shows that I justed tuned to mentioned it.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

If someone was shoving their hand in my face, Id probably fumble too


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

He fumbled before the facemask occurred. The defenders hand hit the ball, then on his mask with the same hand.


----------



## njblackberry (Dec 29, 2007)

Non issue.
Green Bay lost. Pure and simple. Warner had a passing rating of 154.1; that's why Green Bay lost. Blame the defense. Not the refs.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> Also, the ball was fumbled. On a fumble, when no one has possession, you can not have a penalty.


Wrong. The ball still belonged to Green Bay--it had not yet been recovered and possessed by Arizona; the penalty would have been a personal foul facemask against Arizona, permitting GB to keep the ball with a 15-yard penalty benefit and automatic 1st down.

Penalties occur quite often when the ball is fumbled, and the penalty always is assessed against whomever comitted it. There is no "limbo" period in which no possession exists. One team always has possession of the ball at a given time until the other team officially gains possession of the ball or relinquishes possession of the ball. On a fumble, the fumbling team has possession until the ball is recovered with control by the other team and the officials acknowledge this.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Davenlr said:


> Because the REFS were obviously wanting Arizona to win. There were several NON CALLS made which would have resulted in Green Bay 1st downs. I am totally disgusted. And I *AM* a Green Bay fan. Playing the same team 3 weeks in a row is BS in the first place.


This is both an immature and emotionally ignorant remark.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I was rooting for the Packers.. but I'm glad they didn't call a facemask on that.

Yes, I believe there were a couple of times that pass interference wasn't called when similar ones were called for the other team... but nothing really outstanding that made me say "that's why they lost".

The facemask happened after the ball had been fumbled (but while it was in the air) and was not a grasping but rather just the defender's hand making momentary incidental contact. Yes, they could have called it... but to have a call like that decide the game would have left a sour taste in my mouth even if it helped the team I was rooting for win.

Probably the non-call that bothered me most was a helmet-to-helmet Arizona defender hitting Rodgers on a play late in the game. He wasn't hurt, but that's the kind of call they've been making about 95% of the time this season, so I was looking for consistency.

BUT... all that said... Neither team really played any defense to speak of... so while it was a FUN (repeat FUN) game to watch... the fact that Arizona won on an actual defensive play seems fitting to me rather than having the coin-toss determine the outcome when neither defense had been spectacular to that point.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Wrong. The ball still belonged to Green Bay--it had not yet been recovered and possessed by Arizona; the penalty would have been a personal foul facemask against Arizona, permitting GB to keep the ball with a 15-yard penalty benefit and automatic 1st down.
> 
> Penalties occur quite often when the ball is fumbled, and the penalty always is assessed against whomever comitted it. There is no "limbo" period in which no possession exists. One team always has possession of the ball at a given time until the other team officially gains possession of the ball or relinquishes possession of the ball. On a fumble, the fumbling team has possession until the ball is recovered with control by the other team and the officials acknowledge this.


I could of swore certain penalties can not be called during a fumble...holding & clipping are two.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

He did kind of grab his mask. lol


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Stewart Vernon said:


> The facemask happened after the ball had been fumbled (but while it was in the air) and was not a grasping but rather just the defender's hand making momentary incidental contact. Yes, they could have called it... but to have a call like that decide the game would have left a sour taste in my mouth even if it helped the team I was rooting for win.


Remember, too, that the incidental 5-yard facemask penalty was removed from the NFL rules. Consequently, when a facemask occurs and a flag is thrown as a result, the penalty is a personal foul and 15-yard assessment. The rule change does not stipulate that an incidental facemask is ignored; however, I do know that an NFL official will now not throw a flag on a facemasking attempt if he believes the offender was not trying to actually grasp and pull the facemask.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

After seeing calls all season long, where players bumped the quarterbacks helmet, the lack of two calls where Rogers obviously had his head hit (one helmet to helmet), the other (hand to helmet) seems rather omittant. With the defense I saw from Green Bay, they deserved to lose. New Orleans could have beat either team tonight, if they brought their defense along. Should be an interesting weekend coming up.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

In the history of the Packer's franchise, according to their "fans" (that's a generous word for the worst sports people in any city in the country), the Packers should have never lost a single game. There is always some lame excuse, the refs or some conspiracy about the NFL fixing games. Its so fricking comical. 

You lost.

Get over it. Accept it. Eat some cheese.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> He did kind of grab his mask. lol


See where the ball is? Fumbled, out of possession, anything goes basically until possession is established.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

Movieman said:


> The most interesting part was that no one was talking about it. Not the announcers and none of the sports shows that I justed tuned to mentioned it.


Because Troy "Hate the Cardinals" Aikman was choking on his own bile trying to figure out while all his cheering for the Packers during the game and attempting to will them to a win didn't work. He was speechless. Which is a good thing when it comes to him. Watch they'll have him "impartially" do the Cowboys v. Vikings game next week.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

ebaltz said:


> See where the ball is? Fumbled, out of possession, anything goes basically until possession is established.


We've already covered this. You are absolutely, totally wrong. Possession still belongs to the Packers, for the ball has not been officially retrieved yet by Arizona. There is no such thing as "anything goes" as you somehow mysteriously believe. A facemask penalty is a facemask penalty regardless of when it occurs.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

Allegations of vast right wing conspiracies in the NFL officiating, without any evidence whatsoever, are irresponsible and childish.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

SamC said:


> Allegations of vast right wing conspiracies in the NFL officiating, without any evidence whatsoever, are irresponsible and childish.


But see, that is all the Packers ever have. It obviously must be some conspiracy because the Packers could never really lose. OMG they are so comical. I love it.


----------



## ebaltz (Nov 23, 2004)

Packer fans, follow your hero's lead:

"Adams appeared to grab Rodgers' facemask on the play, but officials didn't throw a flag. Rodgers didn't complain Monday, saying he was more concerned about his own mistakes.

The NFL issued an explanation of the rule, noting that "twisting, turning or pulling" the facemask is a 15-yard penalty but the penalty for an "incidental" grab of the facemask was eliminated before the 2008 season."​


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Actually, I thought the defender that drove his helmet into Rodgers chin on the previous play was what should have been called.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

ebaltz said:


> In the history of the Packer's franchise, according to their "fans" (that's a generous word for the worst sports people in any city in the country), the Packers should have never lost a single game. There is always some lame excuse, the refs or some conspiracy about the NFL fixing games. Its so fricking comical.
> 
> You lost.
> 
> Get over it. Accept it. Eat some cheese.


Let's not be rude. Next year it could be your team that loses.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> I could of swore certain penalties can not be called during a fumble...holding & clipping are two.


There are certain penalties that can only be called in particular situations or that can't be called in particular situations.

The QB in a passing situation is protected most of the time. Anything hitting his helmet likely is a foul, tho these refs did not call at least a couple of them.

In this instance, Adams had his finger hooked into the grill which has historically been a 15 yarder. A brush of the grill is not.

Now, did this "cause" Green Bay to "lose" the game? Perhaps prematurely, perhaps not. I tend not to get into what if scenarios.

The Packers did not win. They put themselves in a monster hole, played exceptionally well to dig themselves out, and almost won.

Sadness,
Tom


----------



## Fluthy (Feb 9, 2008)

You have to remember the ref that monitors the QB in this situation also needed to watch the ball to see if it was a forward pass or fumble... and it the Cardinals player recovered before it hit the ground, etc. That's a lot of things to pay attention to for one man. Hard to watch what happens to the player after he loses possession of the ball... have to watch the ball in that situation.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

NickFluth said:


> You have to remember the ref that monitors the QB in this situation also needed to watch the ball to see if it was a forward pass or fumble... and it the Cardinals player recovered before it hit the ground, etc. That's a lot of things to pay attention to for one man. Hard to watch what happens to the player after he loses possession of the ball... have to watch the ball in that situation.


Indeed. Tho with the other things he missed on other plays, I am disappointed.

And from the picture we have here, the facemask and ball are both on the same side. Tho the Ref might have been far enough back to be obstructed from seeing the facemask.

Lastly, we all know that on every play there is usually "something" that gets missed.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

Tom, that avatar is out of place. Did you lose a bet to Earl? 

Anyway, I think you're looking at ti the right way. The Pack were given chances to win after coming back to tie and they didn't capitalize.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

bidger said:


> Tom, that avatar is out of place. Did you lose a bet to Earl?
> 
> Anyway, I think you're looking at ti the right way. The Pack were given chances to win after coming back to tie and they didn't capitalize.


Not to Earl, but in a fantasy league. Sunday night it changes to something much better. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## koji68 (Jun 21, 2004)

The Rule Book describes the penalty as follows:

"Penalty: For twisting, turning or pulling the mask: loss of 15 yards. A personal foul. The player may be disqualified if the action is judged by the official(s) to be of a flagrant nature."

The Rule Book describes an approved ruling as it relates to facemask penalties (page 81).

"A.R. 12.12 - Third-and-10 on A30. Runner A1 runs to the A33, where he is tackled by B1, who incidentally grasps A1's facemask on the tackle, but it is not a twist, turn or pull. Ruling: A's ball, fourth-and-seven, on A33. No foul."

http://www.dbstalk.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=2328481

So clearly no foul in this case either. I enjoyed the Cardinals win. :lol:


----------



## HersheyBud (Dec 18, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> Not to Earl, but in a fantasy league. Sunday night it changes to something much better.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


LOL Tom. As a true Bears fan, I knew something wasn't right here...:lol: It was a great game with a "sad" ending.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

NickFluth said:


> You have to remember the ref that monitors the QB in this situation also needed to watch the ball to see if it was a forward pass or fumble... and it the Cardinals player recovered before it hit the ground, etc. That's a lot of things to pay attention to for one man. Hard to watch what happens to the player after he loses possession of the ball... have to watch the ball in that situation.


Normally, fouls involving the QB as victim or perpetrator are called by the Referee (white hat). However, the Umpire has the next best viewpoint, as he is looking directly over the defensive line toward the QB and can/will call a penalty if his Referee cannot see it, which was the case here, as the QB had his back to the Referee and screened him. Note that the Line Judge or Head Linesman may also call penalties involving the QB if they see it.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

I had mixed emotions about this game. I want Aaron Rodgers to do well. After being in Farves shadow for so many years, it was good to see him do well in this game. He has the potential to be an excellent QB. On the other hand, I am amazed every week on how good Curt Warner is. He just does his job every week. No hype, no whining and no controversy.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

lwilli201 said:


> I had mixed emotions about this game. I want Aaron Rodgers to do well. After being in Farves shadow for so many years, it was good to see him do well in this game. He has the potential to be an excellent QB. On the other hand, I am amazed every week on how good Curt Warner is. He just does his job every week. No hype, no whining and no controversy.


It's ok, he's a former Packer too. 

Kurt Warner is amazing for his age. He's gotten better and smarter. And come playoff time, he _still_ can step it up one more notch (or more?)

And I think Aaron Rodgers has the possibility to become that too. Of the 61 minutes of game time, he looked very, very good in 60 of them.  (Just the first half minute and the last half minute--and if he'd connected two plays earlier...) 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## stewdog1 (Sep 6, 2007)

For those who are still complaining about the supposed non-call on the facemask, here is something you are completely missing:

Rodgers intentionally kicked the football after he fumbled which is a penalty. Therefore, let's say that both were called, then they would be offsetting and the TD still scored.

As for the helmet to helmet hit earlier, that could have been called. However, I don't see any of you complaining when GB did the same to Warner earlier in the game that wasn't called. I also didn't hear you complain about the Warner facemask penalty not called either.

Good teams win in spite of the officials. Don't let the officials decide the game.


----------



## steve053 (May 11, 2007)

stewdog1 said:


> For those who are still complaining about the supposed non-call on the facemask, here is something you are completely missing:
> 
> Rodgers intentionally kicked the football after he fumbled which is a penalty. Therefore, let's say that both were called, then they would be offsetting and the TD still scored.
> 
> ...


Hmmmm...intentionally kicked the ball. Where did you get that one from? 

Based on interviews it sounded like Rodgers was pulling the ball down and got hit before he could control the ball with two hands. The ball landed on his leg/foot and bounced up, and the rest is history. If the ball would have hit the ground (before touching Rodgers' leg/foot) it's very possible that the the "Tuck" rule would have been invoked and it would have been GB's ball and 4th down.

If Rodgers would have connected on the 1st play in OT, Jennings would most defintely have scored, game over. But he didn't, the Cards did. Just too bad GB wasn't playing the 1st quarter the same way they played the last 25 minutes.

Props to Kurt Warner, he was on fire the entire game.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

stewdog1 said:


> For those who are still complaining about the supposed non-call on the facemask, here is something you are completely missing:
> 
> Rodgers intentionally kicked the football after he fumbled which is a penalty. Therefore, let's say that both were called, then they would be offsetting and the TD still scored.


Correction here... Even IF you make the leap that Rodgers kicked intentionally... and IF that was called as a penalty + the facemask... Then offsetting penalties would have resulted in a do-over with Green Bay still in possession and replaying the down... because that "kick" and the facemask both took place pre-fumble so Green Bay had possession until after those offsetting penalties.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Msguy said:


> Anyone see the facemask on Aaron Rodgers in Overtime when Arizona supposedly ran the ball in for the winning touchdown? Why wasn't that called?  Just for the record I am NOT a Green Bay fan by any means. Also during the game Arizona got away with many non calls.


I'm with the OP on this one. ALso, how about the helmet to helmet hit on Rodgers that both announces needed 1 second to see and talk about.

Last year, a bad call by the officials cost the Cardinals a Superbowl. There was a front page newspaper photo the next day showing the refs blew it and Pittsburgh won.

This year any one of 4 blatent bad calls cost the Packers their chance at the Superbowl - ESPN talked about those for hours on end...and they were incredibly obvious, so it almost makes one wonder if this was the NFL's way of "evening things out" for last year.

I'm sorry....but those calls could have been made by *any* high school ref, and just one being different woudl have decided the outcome without a doubt. If *any one *goes the other way....Arizona loses.

Having seen this happen repeatedly the past few years for all sorts of NFL games....either the officials are getting incredibly worse in their skills, or else something else is going on....after all....alot of money is at stake.

The evidence each year, regardless of what team is involved, is almost indisputable that the outcomes of these games are "pre-determined".

One NBA ref got caught - does that not mean there aren't more?

Name me one thing involving alot of money that isn't corrupt. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it, and would love to be proven wrong....


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

stewdog1 said:


> Don't let the officials decide the game.


They didn't. Period.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> They didn't. Period.


Hmmm... I guess that 45 minute discussion on ESPN that night and the next day again on how the refs blew repeated calls that affected the outcome of the game was a mirage....


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Last year, a bad call by the officials cost the Cardinals a Superbowl. There was a front page newspaper photo the next day showing the refs blew it and Pittsburgh won.


I sure hope you're not referring to that outstanding catch by Santonio Holmes to win the Super Bowl.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I'm sorry....but those calls could have been made by *any* high school ref, and just one being different woudl have decided the outcome without a doubt. If *any one *goes the other way....Arizona loses.


I agree there were some bad calls... but I can't go so far as to say "any one" and Arizona automatically loses.

Had the Arizona field goal kicker made that short field goal in regulation, they'd have won before the overtime missed penalties came into play.

Had Aaron Rodgers not thrown that interception on the 1st play of the game, Green Bay might have taken control earlier.

It was a 31-10 game in the 3rd quarter... Green Bay jumped back into the game in part due to an onside kick... had the game been closer at that point, the Packers would likely not have onside-kicked and scored twice in a row.

While I agree there were some missed calls... the way NEITHER team played any defense for 3/4 of the game, I find it difficult to hang the loss on any one particular call (or lack thereof).


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Hmmm... I guess that 45 minute discussion on ESPN that night and the next day again on how the refs blew repeated calls that affected the outcome of the game was a mirage....


The mirage is/was ESPN's whining about something of which they are ignorant. The officials did not affect the outcome of the game through "blown repeated calls."

More so than most professional leagues, the NFL is not slow to announce when an official errs in making or not making a correct call. They have yet to announce that the officials who worked that game "blew repeated calls."

ESPN can whine all they want about sports officials, because ESPN is (a) ignorant of the rules and (b) biased against officials.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I agree there were some bad calls... but I can't go so far as to say "any one" and Arizona automatically loses.
> 
> Had the Arizona field goal kicker made that short field goal in regulation, they'd have won before the overtime missed penalties came into play.
> 
> ...


People who whine about sports officials, Stewart, are those fans too ignorant to accept the real reason why a particular team lost. Sports officials are the easiest scapegoat.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> I sure hope you're not referring to that outstanding catch by Santonio Holmes to win the Super Bowl.


He caught the ball allright, however...

The fact is both feet DIDN'T TOUCH the ground in the end zone, and there was no actual touchdown. Game blown.

A photo covering an entire newspaper page the next morning showed clearly that his feet were "stacked" on top of each other, and only one actually touched the ground. Since the photo was produced from a close-up of video of the game, you'd think the refs would have got it right with replay huh?

By the way - I could care less about either team involved last year, so I'm simply pointing out that this kinda stuff happens in key playoff games all the time. With replay, it shouldn't...not when there is clear evidence the wrong call was made.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> He caught the ball allright, however...
> 
> The fact is both feet DIDN'T TOUCH the ground in the end zone, and there was no actual touchdown. Game blown.
> 
> ...


Sorry, but your very admission that he "caught" the ball precludes any possibility that his feet did not both touch the ground. They sure did. It was analyzed six ways to Sunday, and the NFL strongly backed up their officials on that call, as they should have. Both of Holmes's feet did, indeed, touch inbounds. Catch. Game over.

This "stacking" garbage to which you refer is just that--garbage.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Guess I have to check those medical books again...I wasn't aware the hands and feet were connected to each other.


They both go together to define a legal catch. One cannot have a "catch" if both feet are not in bounds. You called it a catch then said one foot was not in bounds. You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Your lack of understanding this, coupled with your innate bias against sports officials, really destroys any credibility you may have had.

Oh, and BTW, there is no such "photo evidence" to which you refer. The NFL has explained and debunked all the "no catch" close-ups that came out after that game.

Anyway... :backtotop

Green Bay lost fair and square. Even their QB, a standup guy, admits they blew it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> Sorry, but your very admission that he "caught" the ball precludes any possibility that his feet did not both touch the ground.


Guess I have to check those medical books again...I wasn't aware the hands and feet were connected to each other. :lol:

The position of a receivers feet when catching the ball is the only thing that matters at that point.


> This "stacking" garbage to which you refer is just that--garbage.


Photo evidence of an error isn't garbage to those who prefer the truth.

P.S....as for this year - the 2 TD's Arizona scored with Larry Fitzgerald pushing off (offensive interference) would have put them back out of field goal range in both cases), and was also stated immediately by both commentators since it was so blatently obvious.

The NFL officating is deteriorating more each year - regardless of which team referenced -it's indefensible.


Lord Vader said:


> Green Bay lost fair and square. Even their QB, a standup guy, admits they blew it.


:lol::lol::lol:

He admitted they lost the game and they should have one, yes.

He's standup enough NOT to call out the officials....perhaps because a big fine would be involved????

Back to Topic - yeah - the facemask is one of 4 blown calls by the refs.

DUH.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Guess I have to check those medical books again...I wasn't aware the hands and feet were connected to each other. :lol:


I'd strongly suggest you learn the rules of a catch in the NFL. This isn't medical school. Your allusion is irrelevant and has NO place in this discussion.



> The position of a receivers feet when catching the ball is the only thing that matters at that point.


You're contradicting yourself. It is NOT a catch until and unless his feet both come down in bounds, which they did.

Again, your double-talk is ridiculous.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> I'd strongly suggest you learn the rules of a catch in the NFL. This isn't medical school. Your allusion is irrelevant and has NO place in this discussion.
> 
> You're contradicting yourself. It is NOT a catch until and unless his feet both come down in bounds, which they did.
> 
> Again, your double-talk is ridiculous.


Funny how everyone on almost every sports program in the country saw this all so clearly.... 

But hey, they could be wrong and you could be right.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)




----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Funny how everyone on almost every sports program in the country saw this all so clearly....
> 
> But hey, they could be wrong and you could be right.


Cripes, now you're exaggerating. 



sigma1914 said:


>


Yup. Looks like a catch as both toes hit the end zone. Next frame, please.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> Cripes, now you're exaggerating.
> 
> Yup. Looks like a catch as both toes hit the end zone. Next frame, please.


Thanks...your photo shoes *one toe *on the ground. Case closed.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

http://www.steelersdepot.com/blog/2...io-holmes-with-2-two-feet-down-for-touchdown/


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Thanks...your photo shoes *one toe *on the ground. Case closed.


Uh, next frame, please. Replay confirmed the catch. The NFL confirmed a catch. What more does someone who blames sports officials for everything need?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> Uh, next frame, please. Replay confirmed the catch. *The NFL confirmed a catch*.


Thank you - *your own photo *confirmed they were wrong.

No more for me to add on the topic now that *you* cleared it up.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> I had mixed emotions about this game. I want Aaron Rodgers to do well.


I like Rodgers OK, but Ted Thompson is a twit!


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Lord Vader said:


> The mirage is/was ESPN's whining about something of which they are ignorant. The officials did not affect the outcome of the game through "blown repeated calls."
> 
> More so than most professional leagues, the NFL is not slow to announce when an official errs in making or not making a correct call. They have yet to announce that the officials who worked that game "blew repeated calls."
> 
> ESPN can whine all they want about sports officials, because ESPN is (a) ignorant of the rules and (b) biased against officials.


"Not slow?" Next week Wednesday is the usual time for those announcements, because that is when Mike Pereira usually answers those questions. Rarely does the NFL make any announcement earlier.

The NFL never states "officials blew repeated calls", that undermines the officials and the game. Officials are graded and corrected completely in private. So don't expect anyone to fall for the argument "The NFL didn't say blew repeated calls." We all know it ain't gonna happen. 

Was this game refereed to the level fans, teams, and the NFL want? My sense is no.

Did that materially affect the outcome? I don't know.

I do know that winning teams know how to win. The Packers are right on that cusp of becoming a truly winning team again. They overcame their start to the season and almost overcame the start of this game (in truly remarkable fashion).

So we stand up, shake hands and say, "next season!" 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

Lord Vader said:


> Uh, next frame, please. Replay confirmed the catch. The NFL confirmed a catch. What more does someone who blames sports officials for everything need?


My personal fave non call








Blocking in the back, no TD before the half. Notice how the video booth has the FLAG bug up.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

machavez00 said:


> My personal fave non call
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for resurrecting that one. 

I'm sure that is "invisible" as well to some folks. :lol:

Regardless of the teams involved...my point is not specific to Arizona this year. That game simply provided the strongest evidence of just how badly NFL officiating has gotten.

The evidence (including your post) is abundant, clear, and actually a sad statement on the league as a whole.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I'm not defending blown calls... I'm just saying that most of them are a stretch to say they absolutely effected the outcome.

One that DID, however, was last year the Denver vs San Diego game where a Cutler lateral was blown dead instead of being a recovery by San Diego.

The reason that one effected the game... was because San Diego had the ball and would have ran out the clock... instead of Denver keeping the ball and scoring.

When something happens in a last second scenario OR final minute when a team has no timeouts to get the ball back... then a blown call absolutely can change the game.

But most games have at least 1 or 2 blown calls somewhere... and it become a real mess when you try to factor all the "what ifs"...

Ok, so what if there were offsetting penalties and Packers kept the ball instead of that fumble-TD? For all we know Ahman Green might fumble the next play OR Rodgers might throw a pick... or maybe they drive down the field and miss a field goal just like Arizona had done in regulation.

There are too many variables to say that a single blown call won that game for Arizona.

And for the record... even though I rooted for the Packers that game... I don't feel they were robbed. It was a clean fumble, and an incidental facemask. Since the league eliminated the "incidental" facemask call, the officials have some leeway on calling those... and in this case, the facemask did NOT cause the fumble... the fumble already happened, and the incidental facemask was not a risk for injury nor did it affect recovery of the fumble (Rodgers was in no position to recover that fumble once it hit his foot).


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Of course the Packers were robbed. Mostly by themselves, possibly by the refs, and somewhat by the excellent play of that traitorous bastad Kurt Warner. :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Stewart Vernon said:


> I'm not defending blown calls... I'm just saying that *most of them are a stretch to say they absolutely effected the outcome*.


I'd agree with you on that statement...but in this case....any one of 3 did.

This was discussed on several programs at length, with replays showing how 2 Arizona TDs should have been nixed, and 2 GB turnovers should have been addressed with Arizona penalties. I read on one site that the NFL actually called in the refs for that game to discuss their performance gaffs.

Moot point now - can't change the game result now - but it still happened.

It taints the league.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

Mike Pereira, Head of NFL Officials, lays down the law.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d815b6f06/Official-Review


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

machavez00 said:


> Mike Pereira, Head of NFL Officials, lays down the law.
> http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d815b6f06/Official-Review


Listened to the entire video twice.

Thanks for sharing.

Clearly the NFL is in cover-your-butt mode.

Incidental facemask...the poor guys head turned and dropped down with enough force to also bring the guy to the ground from the "incidental pull". No wonder the NFL officiating is going in the toilet - their management is blind as a bat.


----------

