Skins vs. Cowboys game thread

[dieselhog]

I watched this live in the UK which means I switched off at 5.30am.

At least we now know that Brunell can still play and that Gardner found his game.

D was good for the most part.

There were a lot of positives we went from giving up 7 TO's to none.

You have to start building somewhere. I think we will be back on track next week.

[That Guy]

theyy need to brush up on how to not f#$% up a no huddle... that's where all the TOs got burnt...

[Gmanc711]

You know, I've been bored the past few days. I dont start school again until next monday, I only have to work Wendsday and Friday this week, so outside of working out, I've been really bored. So I've poped in a few of the games I taped this year ( I stopped taping around the GB Game.)

Anyways, I'm watching the Cowboys/Skins from MNF. The pass interference call (1st) just occured, and I felt inclined to reinterate just how bad of a call that really was. I also wanted to bring into question, if you guys think there should be a rule change concerning reviewing questionable calls. Do you think a coach should be able to challenge a penalty, if , say, its a questionable Personal Foul or Pass Interference penalty, which could really change the outcome of the game? After watching that again, I'm 100% positive it would have been overturned and therefore the difference in the game. I hate to beat a dead horse, but its the offseason, and were all bored, so I was just wondering if its a rule you would like to see adressed this offseason, even if it could come back to bite us in the ass?

[Daseal]

I think it should. You only have two challenges so it's not like it will prolong the game. These plays will only be challenged if they are sure they'll be overturned, seeing as how it's often an opinion it will be hard to get them overturned. However, I think the biggest two are PI and Down by contact. Those rules need to be examined.

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by Daseal

I think it should. You only have two challenges so it's not like it will prolong the game. These plays will only be challenged if they are sure they'll be overturned, seeing as how it's often an opinion it will be hard to get them overturned. However, I think the biggest two are PI and Down by contact. Those rules need to be examined.

Here's the problem with challenging either of those two. Down by contact is usually a whistle issue. Once the whistle blows, play is over. You can't escape that - the players can't continue to hit after the whistle blows on the chance that the whistle was inadvertant, or injuries will skyrocket.

PI is a bit more thorny. Much like holding (which occurs on every play), some inappropriate contact between the receiver and defender occurs nearly every time. Whether it's a chuck after five yards, or contact before the head is turned, something happens. We have isolated one play out of thousands that happen over the season where pass interference shouldn't have been called; no one - Cowboy, Redskin, or neutral observer disputes that. But if that door is opened for poor calls, is it also going to be opened for no-calls? A bad call like this one happens, but not as frequently as the no-calls.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by BrudLee

Here's the problem with challenging either of those two. Down by contact is usually a whistle issue. Once the whistle blows, play is over. You can't escape that - the players can't continue to hit after the whistle blows on the chance that the whistle was inadvertant, or injuries will skyrocket.

PI is a bit more thorny. Much like holding (which occurs on every play), some inappropriate contact between the receiver and defender occurs nearly every time. Whether it's a chuck after five yards, or contact before the head is turned, something happens. We have isolated one play out of thousands that happen over the season where pass interference shouldn't have been called; no one - Cowboy, Redskin, or neutral observer disputes that. But if that door is opened for poor calls, is it also going to be opened for no-calls? A bad call like this one happens, but not as frequently as the no-calls.

I would have you say you open the door to that as well. You go back to this very game, and there was a no-call on Newman gaurding Gardner, where he grabed his shoulder and it was slight, but it was very obvoius that it was the difference in the ball hitting Gardner's hands (Who knows if he would have caught it, but with the night he had, he probolby would have.), and him not getting there. You see, I think if you stick with the 2 challenge (3 if they are right) rule, this is somthing that wouldnt get out of control. You would only see coaches disputing this on plays that could be the difference in the game (I.e, PI in the endzone.) So I would say you open it up to both. I mean hell, if you want too, I think all penalties should be reviewable. People would be all up in arms and say it slows down the game, but if you keep the 2 challenge rule, they would rarley challenge these things. However, these crappy calls happen, so I think its somthing you have to put in instant replay. I really think it could have made a difference in at least 2, proboly more of our games this season, and all over the league could have changed the outcomes of games.

Officals have to stop deciding games. I get pissed off whenever I see it now, even if its the Eagles/Cowboys, and an officall makes a bullsh*t call against them, I'm just like "WTF, why do these guys get to decide the game".

[BrudLee]

But they would still be deciding the games. Just slower.

Say you throw the challenge flag for a PI no-call. Contact was made as the defender was turning around to play the ball, but before he had finished. Is that Pass Interference? Or the defender was playing the ball, but contact was intentional and agressive. By definition, is that Pass Interference? How can the referee determine intent?

Say you are down two scores with three minutes to go. Just heave-ho, and throw the red flag before the missed pass stops bouncing. There was contact somewhere, and you might get your call.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by BrudLee

But they would still be deciding the games. Just slower.

Say you throw the challenge flag for a PI no-call. Contact was made as the defender was turning around to play the ball, but before he had finished. Is that Pass Interference? Or the defender was playing the ball, but contact was intentional and agressive. By definition, is that Pass Interference? How can the referee determine intent?

Say you are down two scores with three minutes to go. Just heave-ho, and throw the red flag before the missed pass stops bouncing. There was contact somewhere, and you might get your call.

Great point Brud! Let's face it...the game of football is played by humans, coached by humans, viewed by humans, and of course officiated by humans. Humans are flawed.....

I would say if the refs penalize a team in an obvious situation where there should have been NO penality, then maybe the refs need to have their pay docked or something. Or on a positive note, the better and more honest the officials call a game, reward them. This is probably already in place, but the reward system right now is flawed because I did noticed a large amount of bad penalities...

I don't believe penality calls should be reviewed though...the game is already slowed down enough with reviews of a different nature.

[Gmanc711]

Thats a good point Brud. I guess you'd really have to sit down and think about it, and put certian previsions in there or somthing.