NFL.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

pink wrote:

Lions definitely blew it a lot, but I'm bewildered by that call.

I'm bewildered as well. I think there are a couple of things you can make an argument for. Looked like Pettigrew was pushing off on the defenders facemask before the contact (but very slightly). The other thing I can see is that it did hit the Cowboys defender first. Yes he wasn't facing Pettigrew but unlike the typical situation Pettigrew didn't try to run back towards the QB through the contact. He kept fading backward.

That said I can't see why they would throw the flag and then pick it up.

The officiating was shitty all game though. I thought the Lions benefited from a lot of uncalled holds particularly in their screen game. Dallas definitely held the Detroit defensive line a fair number of times uncalled (thought Detroit got away with a fair bit of hands to the face). I will say I'm not super sympathetic overall both because Cotrell's overturn of the Suh suspension was patent bullshit reasoning (though I'm OK with it overall that he played) and (while the correct call) the running into the kicker was just a really lucky stroke for the Lions.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

zephead8 wrote:

hey wassup guys i know i havent really been around lately.

ive never seen anything like that call to pick up the flag. its not even like it was close. like clearly a pass interference. the whole not turning around thing to play the ball is one thing and i dont always agree it should be called. but he also had his hands all over the dude. then that primadonna dez comes on the field and throws a fit which should have been a penalty on top. if that's not a "NFL wants the cowboys to win" call then i dont know what is. i understand the lions did not play well in the second half but i really dont think the cowboys would have won that game. lets also note the cowboys played just as poorly if not worse in the first half than detroit was in the second. basically dont wanna hear the bullshit "one call didn't decide the game"

divisional round:

pats-27, ravens-20 (nervous about this game)
broncos-44-colts-20 (not even gonna be remotely close)

seahawks-26 carolina-14 (i could not care less about this game)
packers-34 cowboys-27 (Romo interception on last drive)

R.I.P. Stuart Scott

RIP Stuart Scott for sure.

Anyway the first half for the Cowboys turned on the absurd lucky break of running into the kicker so I don't feel like Detroit was particularly more deserving. Detroit whipped the Cowboys up front with their defensive line though

zephead8 · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:05 am

I knew people were gonna say "well the cowboys had a lot calls go poorly against them too" ya no shit. But thats not the point. The call was made, correctly. It was absolutely pass interference and id really like someone to explain why it wasnt. So much so that you need to reverse the call

pgm · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:15 am

corrections wrote:

pink wrote:

Lions definitely blew it a lot, but I'm bewildered by that call.

I'm bewildered as well. I think there are a couple of things you can make an argument for. Looked like Pettigrew was pushing off on the defenders facemask before the contact (but very slightly). The other thing I can see is that it did hit the Cowboys defender first. Yes he wasn't facing Pettigrew but unlike the typical situation Pettigrew didn't try to run back towards the QB through the contact. He kept fading backward.

That's literally the only argument that it wasn't PI, but it wasn't even that cut and dry. He started to make movements toward the ball (his momentum had slowed going back) and he likely would have been able to make a play for the ball without the interference. Poor call.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

zephead8 wrote:

I knew people were gonna say "well the cowboys had a lot calls go poorly against them too" ya no shit. But thats not the point. The call was made, correctly. It was absolutely pass interference and id really like someone to explain why it wasnt. So much so that you need to reverse the call

Watch the replay again. Pettigrew initiated contact to the defender and with the defender's facemask (as in he was at least committing an illegal hands to the face penalty and possibly a personal foul). Sorry not going to feel too bad. The officials fucked up in announcing the call before they were ready. The Head Linesman overruled the guy who made the call. The big problem here is that the NFL uses all star crews so none of these guys worked with eachother all year. That's fucking stupidity but the NFL is nothing if not stupid.

pgm · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:59 am

Here's the thing with the hands to the face. They almost never call that particular play on the receiver. But the DB making that play gets called 9 times out of 10 easily. In a situation like that if there was no call, we could debate it. But there's just no excuse for reversing the call after the announcement when it was basically the right call.

corrections · **Joined:** Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:11 pm **Posts:** 27988

pgm wrote:

Here's the thing with the hands to the face. They almost never call that particular play on the receiver. But the DB making that play gets called 9 times out of 10 easily. In a situation like that if there was no call, we could debate it. But there's just no excuse for reversing the call after the announcement when it was basically the right call.

OK so what? The Head linesman (who has the authority) thought the contact was incidental after a tipped ball. So he said pick it up. It's just a bizarre situation. If Pettigrew is also committing a foul I really don't care

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

zephead8 wrote:

I knew people were gonna say "well the cowboys had a lot calls go poorly against them too" ya no shit. But thats not the point. The call was made, correctly. It was absolutely pass interference and id really like someone to explain why it wasnt. So much so that you need to reverse the call

The common wisdom is did he turn his head around or not, but that only matters if he's directly impeding the player's effort to get the ball. As Crx said Pettigrew didn't go towards the ball, and the defender had his hands up so there was no pushing or grabbing.

Now reversing the call is another story. If they threw it then picked it up that's one thing, it happens. But after announcing it to the crowd and assessing the penalty, you can't just reverse the call like that.

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

pgm wrote:

corrections wrote:

pink wrote:

Lions definitely blew it a lot, but I'm bewildered by that call.

I'm bewildered as well. I think there are a couple of things you can make an argument for. Looked like Pettigrew was pushing off on the defenders facemask before the contact (but very slightly). The other thing I can see is that it did hit the Cowboys defender first. Yes he wasn't facing Pettigrew but unlike the typical situation Pettigrew didn't try to run back towards the QB through the contact. He kept fading backward.

That's literally the only argument that it wasn't PI, but it wasn't even that cut and dry. He started to make movements toward the ball (his momentum had slowed going back) and he likely would have been able to make a play for the ball without the interference. Poor call.

Without the defender's body in the way sure, but it's not a penalty to have your body between the defender and the ball.

pgm · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2015 2:50 am

Eric J wrote:

Without the defender's body in the way sure, but it's not a penalty to have your body between the defender and the ball.

It is if you make contact with the receiver without trying to make a play for the ball, though.

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

Actually watch the following vine and the guy makes the point that the defender couldn't turn his head because of the illegal hands to the face:

https://vine.co/v/OdD5hWMBK2q

pgm · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:35 am

His hand was off his face while the ball was in the air and the defender never made an effort to turn his head. There are other factors, sure, but it's still a bad call.

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

Pete Morelli on why he reversed the call:

Quote:

"The back judge threw his flag for defensive pass interference. We got other information from another official from a different angle that thought the contact was minimal and didn't warrant pass interference. He thought it was face guarding. The information came and then the officials got together a little bit later after it was given to me, the first information. It probably would've been smoother if we got together."

Given how contact is usually called you would expect it to be a penalty, but really about half of PI calls aren't warranted in the first place. People react to any contact by the defender as if it's PI when that's not nearly the case according to the rule book.

Eric J · **Joined:** Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:07 am **Posts:** 7010

pgm wrote:

His hand was off his face while the ball was in the air and the defender never made an effort to turn his head. There are other factors, sure, but it's still a bad call.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTsYW4SHcpI[/youtube]

There's about .3 seconds between when Pettigrew lets go of the facemask and the ball arrives. If both players are making illegal contact a no call is the right call.

joe c · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:35 am

I would agree with the no PI call if officials were consistent with shit like this, but there have been many PI calls throughout the season where barely any contact was made, the defender was trying to make a play on the ball, and got called for PI. Due to this, I do not agree with reversing the call.

I downloaded a couple Super Bowls a couple weeks ago (78, 85, and 91 I believe) and what a different game.

NFL.

Who is online