This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Well I think this particular officiating job needs discussion, not just venting.
I agree, they totally missed the DB slowing down and causing incidental contact.
contact is one thing, pushing off after contact is another, Contact initially was made by both receiver and DB playing the ball. Then White pushed off the defender to make the catch.
It was a good non call. The DB misplayed the pass, had no idea where the ball was, and slowed down to interfere with White. He did push off, but that was after what I think was a penalty on Greer (?). Can't call every one. You should be more upset by the poor tackle after that or the inability to push him OB.
You can't slow down and impede the WRs ability to make a play on the ball, the guy made a bad play. It's over, just point to the shirt in the venting thread and move on.
So you agree, the officiating was absolutely ridiculous.
Yes, the refs have been pretty bad in general this season but at least they're being bad to everyone.
correction, you can make a play on the ball. the Db did not impede White in any way.
We watched different plays.
Maybe if there was a controversial call at the end but the fumble was legit.
You can't grab and push off either, Einstein.
Everything looks like a forearm shiver in slow motion.His hand came up, but it was more a balance/gathering himself thing than anything that would be called a push. That stuff happens on every route. It wouldn't have looked remotely as bad if the defender was even looking or running in the right direction, but he was completely lost.
Please do not sound like the idiot Dolphin fan from last week. Yes I do think it was pass interference but non calls like that happen so often it's not worth commenting on. Henderson gave the same shove off on his catch at the 2. Heck Micheal Irvin made a living off of that play.
They are so close they are touching and then the defender is all of a sudden 3 yds away and has to try and come back towards the sideline? I wonder how he got 3 yds away. It's called a push. Balancing act
It's called skilled WR stops to catch a ball while lost DB stumbles further downfield.
Oh yeah....that's how they called it in the booth too.......I forgot.....sorryThey are so close they are touching and then the defender is all of a sudden 3 yds away and has to try and come back towards the sideline? I wonder how he got 3 yds away. It's called a push. Balancing act
I lost by .25 pts playing against the Saint DEF
that wasn't that bad. defender was completely lost. if he knew where the ball was i might feel different....and yes, that play helped me win. tough to say, though, because game would have turned out different if white doesn't catch that ball. he could have caught another...
Yeah, unfortunately it doesn't work that way. You'd think if you fall on the ball and grab it with an opposing player touching you it would be ruled down. But actually it's whoever comes up with it at the bottom of the pile. It did appear he had it, but obviously some bully took it away. :(
karma
So what you're saying is that Roddy White committed pass interference against the DB after the DB had already committed pass interference with him?It was a good no call. If either party got called for interference, it should have been the DB, who slowed down and impeded Roddy BEFORE locating the ball in flight (which means he can't play the "I was just playing the ball" excuse). Roddy only interfered because he had been interfered with in the first place. If a flag went down, it would have had to go against the Saints DB. Like I said, it was a good no-call.
The rule is that both the WR and the DB have an equal right to the ball once it's in flight. Either party is able to do what they need to do as long as they are playing the ball, not the man. In other words, if the DB is looking at the ball and trying to make a play on it, he has the right to the area he is occupying. If he's just watching the opposing WR and trying to impede his progress by occupying the area between him and where he needs to go, that's pass interference.An example: the DB is ahead of the WR, the ball is overthrown, and both parties see it. The WR has a right to run to where he needs to be to catch the ball, even if it means running through the defender. The defender does NOT have a right to suddenly stop, causing the WR to run into him and both players to fall down, because that's making an effort to impede the man and not making an effort to make a play on the ball. The WR does not have a right to run over the DB and knock them both to the turf, because that's playing the man and not making an effort to make a play on the ball.Another example: the DB is downfield of the WR, but the ball is underthrown. If the DB is watching the ball, he is allowed to drape himself over the WR in an effort to knock the ball down before the WR can secure it. If the DB is *NOT* watching the ball, he cannot touch the wide receiver, because that would be preventing the receiver from making a play on the ball and not making an effort to make a play on the ball.
Even in the basketball rulebook that would be a foul on the defender. If both players are running down the court in basketball, the defensive player cannot cut off the offensive player forcing the contact. Many times(at least in the NBA) they'll just let it go, but it's a foul on the defender if the rulebook is strictly adhered to.
The problem is that there was no clear video evidence that Thomas did come up with it. You could see him corralling it back to his body, but the ball disappears from any camera shot so it's impossible to tell if he regained full control(the ball may have still been moving when the defender got his arm in there). I believe he probably did, but officials aren't supposed to make judgment calls from the replay. It has to be "without a doubt" video evidence.I thought the called fumble on Pierre Thomas was wrong. Clearly, Thomas does lose control, but it appears on replay that he regains possession while on the ground long enough to have it be called a dead play and Saints ball. With all the pushing and grappling, a Falcon comes up with it, and its called a lost fumble. I assumed once PT regained control, even for just one moment, that was enough to call the play down. When the coach challenged, I was sure that it would be Saints ball. Am I missing something?Also want to say, I thought the White TD was a push off, too.
See? Now your "unbiased" opinion of the play makes sense.I lost by .25 pts playing against the Saint DEF
The DB never saw the ball. This was a good "no call".
You mean DeCoud on Brees? That hit was center mast on the chest, that came up under his chin. (and I just watched again, not even close to helmet to helmet).Thought the non-call on the PI for NO's pick six was far worse than the non-call on White's TD, guy was pushed down in the open field and no flag. But, we got beat, that's that, Saints were a better team last night, great play by Vilma to seal the win.The call that sucks more than that one was the one which Atlanta scored their second touchdown. Obvious helmet-to-helmet that wasn't called. Sad part about it is that if the defender would've just slapped Breesus' helmet, a flag would've been thrown. Oh well.Guess I'll just have to be content with the Saints being 7-0.
actually correction on your correction, you can't impede the progress of the WR beyond 5 yards unless it's a the exact same time the ball gets there. so you are wrong.that was clearly pass interference by the DB, and when you say that Roddy put his arms around him, that's called selling the pass interference.now the next part of it was Roddy pushing off, yes that's true.if anything, it was one of the rarest times that you see Pass Interference by DB and WR, but like the refs will ever call that.so with that, there's only one thing left to be said
LOL! Well, the White non-call didn't affect my game, but that last INT sure did. What a weird way to lose a game. The game should have been long over. Reminds me of the Charger/Chief game last year in KC, where San Diego made the improbable comeback and recovered the onside kick..... where Dwayne Bowe supposedly "fumbled" the onside kick? It bounced off his chest with him never actually having possession, yet it was a fumble. That cost me points, and then Vincent Jackson gets like 80 yds and a TD on the subsequent drive after getting practically zilch all day.See? Now your "unbiased" opinion of the play makes sense.I lost by .25 pts playing against the Saint DEF
Recovery of a fumble within the field of play is not a reviewable play. It is specifically in the list of what cannot be reviewed:http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...ost&id=2387 page 110:
So when they did the review, if they saw they had been incorrect about whether he was down by contact or not before the fumble, they could overturn it. But even if they saw he clearly regained possession of the ball, the rules wouldn't allow them to overturn the call on the field as to who ultimately recovered it. I've never understood why that isn't allowed to be reviewed. If you can irrefutably tell that someone regained control, why wouldn't you allow them to overturn it?
Einstein went to bed, figured someone else would post a solid explanation.
