Lions v Packers MNF (1 Viewer)

[The Claymaker]

Yes, that’s all well and good, and sure none of us are psychic, but you can’t look at a 4th quarter where literally every terrible call went against one team and say, “calls have been bad all season & it is what it is” as though both sides were equally effected. they clearly weren’t. 

only one side was effected. And sure, any number of outcomes could have resulted had the Lions not been completely jobbed by the refs, and I’m sure Lions fans are aware of that too. 

but I’d be willing to be that every one of those Lions fans would have preferred to see what *could* have happened, which also includes positive outcomes, instead of being denied the opportunity to see what would have happened had they not be screwed. 

especially at the end where a phantom penalty literally ended the game when they should have at least had 90 seconds to drive down and get a FG. 

cmon man - you’ve seemingly been more reasonable than this in the past in discussions. I know your team benefited but you’ve got to admit the Lions got completely hosed here. 

Please read my posts completely. I have said multiple times the Packers got the breaks and the Lions got jacked. I don’t feel the need to keep apologizing for crap officiating that GB benefited from. 

But I do think saying those things were going to happen is pretty weak. The Lions couldn’t score TDS on us and had about 100 total second half yards. 

Prater was on fire though for sure. 

 

[trader jake]

Id take the issue here that Det would have had all 3 timeouts.  With the sack...they likely take a TO there to save time on the clock rather than let GB run it down before the FG?

Maybe all of that is true.  I believe the larger point being made was there is a butterfly effect to calls made (or not made) throughout any game.

The Packers had a DPI non-call on a wheel route down the left side.  Rodgers threw the ball and it fell to the ground without a receiver on screen.  Replay showed the running back getting pushed 10 yards down field as he was running his route.

It happens every single game.  Heck, these important (game changing?) calls/non-calls happen every drive.  Which is partially why discussing officiating tends to be fruitless and frustrating to all.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Id take the issue here that Det would have had all 3 timeouts.  With the sack...they likely take a TO there to save time on the clock rather than let GB run it down before the FG?

that’s fair. So they have 90 seconds & 2 time-outs to get a FG,

that’s certainly a better & more fair outcome than icing the game for the packers on aN embarrassingly bad blown call. 

Also...the non DPI call you cannot automatically just give the FG there anyway...after that play is unknown, you don't know if Detroit turns the ball over before any FG.
 

as I just said in another post, no, you can’t automatically do that. But they should have had the chance. It was pass interference. It was blatant. The booth was calling it as it happened. It was obvious to everyone except seemingly the guys wearing pinstripes. 

the Lions could have

• fumbled

• thrown a pick

• committed 3 straight penalties backing them out of range

or

• scored a TD

• Kicked a FG

And a myriad of other possible outcomes, all which were denied the Lions and everyone watching at home because the refs absolutely blew it with the non-call on a DPI that had a DB not looking back and tackling a WR - which should absolutely have been a spot foul 1st down. 

instead, non-call kills the drive, the Lions punt. 

seems a little off arguing the many things that could have happened had they not been screwed there, because the important part is they got screwed there. 

What I agree with is the refs were bad and the NFL should get roasted and this and the continued incompetence should force changes with the league.

Agreed. 

 

[sho nuff]

Maybe all of that is true.  I believe the larger point being made was there is a butterfly effect to calls made (or not made) throughout any game.

The Packers had a DPI non-call on a wheel route down the left side.  Rodgers threw the ball and it fell to the ground without a receiver on screen.  Replay showed the running back getting pushed 10 yards down field as he was running his route.

It happens every single game.  Heck, these important (game changing?) calls/non-calls happen every drive.  Which is partially why discussing officiating tends to be a fruitless and frustrating to all.

Happy my team benefitted...and yes, I have said calls happen all the time and job each team.  Rodgers said it best last night...it all seems to even out over the long haul.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Happy my team benefitted...and yes, I have said calls happen all the time and job each team.  Rodgers said it best last night...it all seems to even out over the long haul.

Just not for the Lions. 
 

 

[Foosball God]

From Blakeman on the personal foul:

Tracy Walker Penalty

Question: On the helmet-to-helmet contact with Tracy Walker, it appeared he was going for the ball. Does the defensive back have the right to go for the ball? Does that offset any incidental helmet-to-helmet contact?

Blakeman: "That's a good question, but the reality is, it is strict liability for a defensive player. In this case, he may be going for the ball and not intending to hit the helmet, but when there's helmet contact, it is a foul in that situation."

Question: Even if he had come up with the interception, that doesn't change the ruling in any way?

Blakeman: "Even if he did impact the helmet and then intercepted the ball, it would still have been a foul."

Except it isn't consistently called.  If that were the case then it would just be how it is.  In this case it was called because it was a hard hit and a player was hurt, it is debatable to me* (*armchair doctor) that the helmet to helmet part of the hit was a significant part of the injury, but whatever.  That is the least egregious of all the suspect calls last night imo.

 

[yak651]

Apparently you don't watch Stafford much.  The guy puts together more 4th quarter comebacks than anyone.  What he did earlier has zero bearing on how effective he is in crunch time. 

So he has to be behind to play well?

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

So he has to be behind to play well?

No, but he does play well from behind. 

solid logical fallacy though.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Looked to me like the O-lineman threw his head back to bait the ref, and it worked... TWICE.

Incenting NFL players to flop and act like they do in a soccer match is not the best improvement-of-the-game mechanism.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Apparently you don't watch Stafford much.  The guy puts together more 4th quarter comebacks than anyone.  What he did earlier has zero bearing on how effective he is in crunch time. 

As a % of possible outcomes?  What I mean is hasn't he had more opportunities to do so than say Brees or Brady who tend to have 4th quarter leads.  when you are constantly going into the 4th down you get a lot of opportunities for comebacks. 

Actually, sorry.  The wounds are still open and Stafford has become quite an accomplished Q.B. and a pretty solid guy all around as well.  when he was young and sort of a backwards cap wearing punk I did not like his personality, though I admired his toughness when early on he came back into the game with a separated shoulder to finish a drive.  Now, years alter, well he has does well for himself and I should not doubt that he does have pretty impressive skills.

 

[The Claymaker]

Except it isn't consistently called.  If that were the case then it would just be how it is.  In this case it was called because it was a hard hit and a player was hurt, it is debatable to me* (*armchair doctor) that the helmet to helmet part of the hit was a significant part of the injury, but whatever.  That is the least egregious of all the suspect calls last night imo.

I agree with you and felt it was a bad call live. But just posting what the head official said and why it was called. So by that standard it was correct, but as you said, it’s not consistent. 

 

[TartanLion]

Not that it’s even relevant amongst all the other stuff but I’ve watched that Packers TD a ton of times today and unlike @sho nuff I’m convinced he does have the ball under control and is touched with his knee down at the 1. Maybe wouldn’t have changed much but I find it amazing that it wasn’t even mentioned on review. The broadcasts and referees are usually so all over that one and in instances where it’s just as marginal or even more so

The ball is nestled  and stationary in his groin area against his arm, well before he hits the turf. The second pylon cam shows it clearly 

 

[encaitar]

Maybe all of that is true.  I believe the larger point being made was there is a butterfly effect to calls made (or not made) throughout any game.

The Packers had a DPI non-call on a wheel route down the left side.  Rodgers threw the ball and it fell to the ground without a receiver on screen.  Replay showed the running back getting pushed 10 yards down field as he was running his route.

It happens every single game.  Heck, these important (game changing?) calls/non-calls happen every drive.  Which is partially why discussing officiating tends to be fruitless and frustrating to all.

If you’re talking about the Aaron Jones play go watch it again.  The DE hits him 2 yards past the line of scrimmage with a one armed shove....  perfect defensive play.  That you’re even bringing this play up shows how green and gold your glasses are.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Incenting NFL players to flop and act like they do in a soccer match is not the best improvement-of-the-game mechanism.

Actually I think Flowers employs that technique precisely because it tends to force the head back, the back to arch ,and the O-lineman to lose leverage.  No acting employed, in my mind.  Flowers gets them, deliberately, in that posture as from that posture they are more or less helpless, or as helpless as 300 pound behemoths can be.  If I am wrong and if there was acting, good on the player for thinking of it in the moment, bad for all of us if it catches on because I hate floppers and don't want to watch that become a norm.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Not that it’s even relevant amongst all the other stuff but I’ve watched that Packers TD a ton of times today and unlike @sho nuff I’m convinced he does have the ball under control and is touched with his knee down at the 1. Maybe wouldn’t have changed much but I find it amazing that it wasn’t even mentioned on review. The broadcasts and referees are usually so all over that one and in instances where it’s just as marginal or even more so

The ball is nestled  and stationary in his groin area against his arm, well before he hits the turf. The second pylon cam shows it clearly 

In live action I wondered about that as well.  I also wondered if he had lost control of the ball a split second later if it would have been failure to complete the catch.  Can you be down before you complete the catch?  At any rate, a scoring play and they are reviewed so I did expect maybe a bit more review delay.  It seemed to get glossed over pretty quickly to me.

 

[Foosball God]

Actually I think Flowers employs that technique precisely because it tends to force the head back, the back to arch ,and the O-lineman to lose leverage.  No acting employed, in my mind.  Flowers gets them, deliberately, in that posture as from that posture they are more or less helpless, or as helpless as 300 pound behemoths can be.  If I am wrong and if there was acting, good on the player for thinking of it in the moment, bad for all of us if it catches on because I hate floppers and don't want to watch that become a norm.

Yeah, I don't think the Packer's lineman (Not trying to type that name from memory) was "flopping" there, but it is part of Flower's technique and was not HttF.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Yeah, I don't think the Packer's lineman (Not trying to type that name from memory) was "flopping" there, but it is part of Flower's technique and was not HttF.

Agree it was not HttF.  What it was was HJ*.

* Hose Job.

 

[Insein]

From Blakeman on the personal foul:

Tracy Walker Penalty

Question: On the helmet-to-helmet contact with Tracy Walker, it appeared he was going for the ball. Does the defensive back have the right to go for the ball? Does that offset any incidental helmet-to-helmet contact?

Blakeman: "That's a good question, but the reality is, it is strict liability for a defensive player. In this case, he may be going for the ball and not intending to hit the helmet, but when there's helmet contact, it is a foul in that situation."

Question: Even if he had come up with the interception, that doesn't change the ruling in any way?

Blakeman: "Even if he did impact the helmet and then intercepted the ball, it would still have been a foul."

That's a #### rule then.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I remember a few years back a bad call costing the Packers a home field play off game.  At the time I wondered what that meant for the local economy. I remember looking around and found out it is scores of millions.  Detroit may just have been denied the same.  We will see at the end of the year. That is a lot of damages with no recourse. 

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I remember a few years back a bad call costing the Packers a home field play off game.  At the time I wondered what that meant for the local economy. I remember looking around and found out it is scores of millions.  Detroit may just have been denied the same.  We will see at the end of the year. That is a lot of damages with no recourse. 

Well, thankfully we as taxpayers gifted the Detroit economy billions of dollars back in 2009.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Actually I think Flowers employs that technique precisely because it tends to force the head back, the back to arch ,and the O-lineman to lose leverage.  No acting employed, in my mind.  Flowers gets them, deliberately, in that posture as from that posture they are more or less helpless, or as helpless as 300 pound behemoths can be.  If I am wrong and if there was acting, good on the player for thinking of it in the moment, bad for all of us if it catches on because I hate floppers and don't want to watch that become a norm.

A hand grabbing you pads or curled inside the neck area of your pads does not by itself force your head back.

I think you are right that the move is purposeful as it can certainly give the defender leverage in a central part of the O-linesman's body high enough above center of gravity, and can certainly see how it can lead to the O-linesman bending back.

But there is leaning back, and then there is just plain acting -- the latter of which I believe you can see in the video here at 0:59-1:05.

It was Tessitore, I believe, who actually called out Bakhtiari on this very play for "selling" the illegal hands to the face penalty by flopping. 

Strange overall that you can be called for illegal hands to the face when a hand never touched a face in either of those plays.

 

[sho nuff]

Not that it’s even relevant amongst all the other stuff but I’ve watched that Packers TD a ton of times today and unlike @sho nuff I’m convinced he does have the ball under control and is touched with his knee down at the 1. Maybe wouldn’t have changed much but I find it amazing that it wasn’t even mentioned on review. The broadcasts and referees are usually so all over that one and in instances where it’s just as marginal or even more so

The ball is nestled  and stationary in his groin area against his arm, well before he hits the turf. The second pylon cam shows it clearly 

All scoring plays are reviewed.  

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

A hand grabbing you pads or curled inside the neck area of your pads does not by itself force your head back.

I think you are right that the move is purposeful as it can certainly give the defender leverage in a central part of the O-linesman's body high enough above center of gravity, and can certainly see how it can lead to the O-linesman bending back.

But there is leaning back, and then there is just plain acting -- the latter of which I believe you can see in the video here at 0:59-1:05.

It was Tessitore, I believe, who actually called out Bakhtiari on this very play for "selling" the illegal hands to the face penalty by flopping. 

Strange overall that you can be called for illegal hands to the face when a hand never touched a face in either of those plays.

Maybe so.  Certainly a possibility.

 

[TartanLion]

All scoring plays are reviewed.  

Emm, yes, I know. Apparently.  
 

 

[The Claymaker]

Just FYI if I offended anyone with any post I made I apologize. It’s not my intention, most times when I am posting I am joking around, obviously when it’s your own team in a game like this it’s easy to get heated. 

My personal feeling is we are all entitled to our own opinions whether anyone else agrees or not, it’s just rude to tell someone their opinion is wrong, when it’s just an opinion. No ones is more right to anyone but themselves. Anyway, I’m moving on from this cluster.

 

[sho nuff]

Strange overall that you can be called for illegal hands to the face when a hand never touched a face in either of those plays.

Just a clarification (and not justifying the call...they got it wrong both times ). Contact with the face is not necessary.  Its head face or neck above the frame of the opponent.

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/illegal-use-of-hands-facemask/

 

[sho nuff]

Emm, yes, I know. Apparently.  
 

And he is still pulling the ball into his body as he goes into the end zone.

There is zero question that was a TD

 

[Cowboysfan8]

I remember a few years back a bad call costing the Packers a home field play off game.  At the time I wondered what that meant for the local economy. I remember looking around and found out it is scores of millions.  Detroit may just have been denied the same.  We will see at the end of the year. That is a lot of damages with no recourse. 

I’m sure they made all those millions back when the refs stole the win from Dallas when Dez caught it and they said he didn’t 

 

[BigJim®]

I'd love to see the swapping out of officials right before the next Packer home game a la what was done with jurors when Al Capone was on trial. Imagine the outrage.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Just a clarification (and not justifying the call...they got it wrong both times ). Contact with the face is not necessary.  Its head face or neck above the frame of the opponent.

https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/illegal-use-of-hands-facemask/

Thanks for the clarification.

I amend my statement to:

Strange overall that you can be called for illegal hands to the face when a hand never touched a head, face, or neck above the frame of the opponent in either of those plays.

 

[Go Pack]

that’s fair. So they have 90 seconds & 2 time-outs to get a FG,

that’s certainly a better & more fair outcome than icing the game for the packers on aN embarrassingly bad blown call. 

as I just said in another post, no, you can’t automatically do that. But they should have had the chance. It was pass interference. It was blatant. The booth was calling it as it happened. It was obvious to everyone except seemingly the guys wearing pinstripes. 

the Lions could have

• fumbled

• thrown a pick

• committed 3 straight penalties backing them out of range

or

• scored a TD

• Kicked a FG

And a myriad of other possible outcomes, all which were denied the Lions and everyone watching at home because the refs absolutely blew it with the non-call on a DPI that had a DB not looking back and tackling a WR - which should absolutely have been a spot foul 1st down. 

instead, non-call kills the drive, the Lions punt. 

seems a little off arguing the many things that could have happened had they not been screwed there, because the important part is they got screwed there. 

Agreed. 

The Lions had used up all their timeouts before the last hands to the face penalty.  I was ticked Rodgers threw it away instead of going down and keeping the clock running unless he knew the penalty was on the Lions.  Could have run it down to a minute or so and kicked the FG

(1:45 - 4th) Timeout #3 by DET at 01:45.

3rd & 4 at DET 16

(1:45 - 4th) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep left to J.Kumerow [D.Kennard]. PENALTY on DET-T.Flowers, Illegal Use of Hands, 5 yards, enforced at DET 16 - No Play.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Thanks for the clarification.

I amend my statement to:

Strange overall that you can be called for illegal hands to the face when a hand never touched a head, face, or neck above the frame of the opponent in either of those plays.

 

[Apple Juice]

Happy my team benefitted...and yes, I have said calls happen all the time and job each team.  Rodgers said it best last night...it all seems to even out over the long haul.

Reading your posts make me hate the Packers more than I did previously. Really hoping they get ####ed hard in the playoffs. Cheers. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

The Lions had used up all their timeouts before the last hands to the face penalty.  I was ticked Rodgers threw it away instead of going down and keeping the clock running unless he knew the penalty was on the Lions.  Could have run it down to a minute or so and kicked the FG

(1:45 - 4th) Timeout #3 by DET at 01:45.

3rd & 4 at DET 16

(1:45 - 4th) (Shotgun) A.Rodgers pass incomplete deep left to J.Kumerow [D.Kennard]. PENALTY on DET-T.Flowers, Illegal Use of Hands, 5 yards, enforced at DET 16 - No Play.

Regardless they still got jobbed. 

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I'm just happy it happened on national tv. Believe me, this isn't the first time.

 

[sho nuff]

Reading your posts make me hate the Packers more than I did previously. Really hoping they get ####ed hard in the playoffs. Cheers. 

Thanks? Odd to hate a team more because someone you don't know doesn't have the same take as you.

Good times...

 

[Manster]

I'm surprised Trey Flowers didn't lose it!  Those two calls for hands to the face were HORRIBLE, and instrumental in the Lions losing the game.  

 

[Manster]

What really sucks is even though you can challenge things like PI, they aren't overturning blatant bad calls, so coaches are not going to challenge, even if they know it's the wrong call.  How did we go backwards on all this?

 

[lod001]

What really sucks is even though you can challenge things like PI, they aren't overturning blatant bad calls, so coaches are not going to challenge, even if they know it's the wrong call.  How did we go backwards on all this?

Right here.

 

[Interseptopus]

if they don't call hands to the face GB is still in FG range. 

 

[Dez]

if they don't call hands to the face GB is still in FG range. 

And if they make it Detroit still has 90 seconds to move down in FG range for a kicker who already hit two 50+ yarders on the night.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

And if they make it Detroit still has 90 seconds to move down in FG range for a kicker who already hit two 50+ yarders on the night.

True, lions moved it between the 30s all night.

 

[Interseptopus]

And if they make it Detroit still has 90 seconds to move down in FG range for a kicker who already hit two 50+ yarders on the night.

can play this game all night. hut to say that call lost the lions the game is false 

 

[nysfl2]

That's a #### rule then.

Lost in all this crappy reffing discussion is the ref's response that on a ball that is up for grabs, it is the defender's responsibility to avoid helmet to helmet contact, and just pull back and let the offensive player catch the ball. If that is truly how the rule is written, it may be the worst rule ever. So if the defender has position on the ball, the receiver can dive in with his helmet, make contact with the defender, and draw the flag? 

 

[Shutout]

Umm that rule hurt GB last year several times.  Oh wait...those are forgotten, right?

If it was wrong then and the refs didn't improve after a year then it's even worse now.  We are human. We make mistakes.  But the NFL refs don't seem tolearn from the mistakes.  Instead, they just add additional layers of legislation and hide behind "it's new," or "we are still in the process of evaluating", etc.  

I am not a fan nor hater of either team but as a fan of the NFL, these types of games and these types of actions are the kind that are pushing me away from the sport.  This was big.  It meant a lot and if I cant trust the NFL now, how can I trust that the correct teams even play in the playoffs and potentially become the teams that need to benefit from these kind of rules changes?

 

[Shutout]

Lost in all this crappy reffing discussion is the ref's response that on a ball that is up for grabs, it is the defender's responsibility to avoid helmet to helmet contact, and just pull back and let the offensive player catch the ball. If that is truly how the rule is written, it may be the worst rule ever. So if the defender has position on the ball, the receiver can dive in with his helmet, make contact with the defender, and draw the flag? 

I would "like" this post multiple times if I could.  That type of logic makes me cringe in trying to support a sport I have loved most of my life.

 

[FBG Moderator]

Reading your posts make me hate the Packers more than I did previously. Really hoping they get ####ed hard in the playoffs. Cheers. 

Be way cooler if you come back

 

[Dark Matter]

These game threads should be locked after a certain point, IMO. The emotion, bias and trolling gets to be off the charts ridiculous. Why foster it? 

 

[Mr.Pack]

 at you all

If you think Crosby isn't hitting the 40 yard field goal then you should walk away. The defense was likely going to stop them with 1:30 or so left. Yes, I'm a Packer fan and think both "hands to the face" penalties were bad calls. Deal with it(reference Fail Mary, Jerry Rice fumbled, whatevs we all deal with it). The "maybe PI" was a good no call IMO.

This game came down to the Lions ineptitude and I don't mean this as derogatory in any way. +3 in turnovers, red zone inefficiency and the lack of any sort of running game is why they lost. Someone tell me what the Lions did on offense. Flea flicker on the first drive, ok. Great call. Deep throw on the 2nd drive, ok great call. Was there anything that the Lions did on offense after those 2 plays to instill confidence? Be honest. And did Johnson actually score? I'll give Lions fans that one for one of those bad calls.

The Lions were given the ball inside the 50  3 times and could only muster field goals. Stafford had 265 yards passing, 219 of which came in the first half. Over 100 of that on 2 plays. 

Packers played like poop on offense (undrafted WRs will do that) but settled in on D and took over the game. The Lions are a solid team but have some things to correct to be really good. Week 17 could be for the division

Reality, what a concept

 

[Mr.Pack]

Not that it’s even relevant amongst all the other stuff but I’ve watched that Packers TD a ton of times today and unlike @sho nuff I’m convinced he does have the ball under control and is touched with his knee down at the 1. Maybe wouldn’t have changed much but I find it amazing that it wasn’t even mentioned on review. The broadcasts and referees are usually so all over that one and in instances where it’s just as marginal or even more so

The ball is nestled  and stationary in his groin area against his arm, well before he hits the turf. The second pylon cam shows it clearly 

Well in that picture, yea