NFL Final Play Ruled correct

[packers11]

:roll: :roll: :roll: Unless your name is Tom Brady/ Kurt Warner / Brett Favre or Peyton Manning

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/81383907.html

[Zool]

Wait....what now? What the fuck is incidental face masking? Theres no such thing anymore right?

[Smidgeon]

Yeah, but still nobody's addressing the hand to the face of the QB. Per PFT: (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/pereira-defends-facemask-non-call/)

There's another issue with the play that Pereira doesn't address. Rule 12, Section 2, Article 13(3) plainly states that defenders may not "use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer in the head, neck, or face."

So while the contact between Adams' hand and Rodgers' facemask possibly might have avoided scrutiny (somehow) under Rule 12, Section 2, Article 5 if Rodgers were running with the ball, there's no way around Rule 12, Section 2, Article 13(3) when the guy wearing the helmet in question is a passer.

[SkinBasket]

LOL @ justifying not calling a face mask on a QB being the "correct call" because it was "just a finger" and he didn't "twist or pull." I know they have to try to spin this positively since it was the deciding play in an OT playoff game, but what a pile of wacky horseshit.

[ThunderDan]

That's just horrible. Say you missed it and move on. ARod was on the ground and the ARI player still was incidentally touching his facemask.

[denverYooper]

LOL @ justifying not calling a face mask on a QB being the "correct call" because it was "just a finger" and he didn't "twist or pull." I know they have to try to spin this positively since it was the deciding play in an OT playoff game, but what a pile of wacky horseshit.

I'm with Skin on this one.

[hoosier]

Wait....what now? What the fuck is incidental face masking? Theres no such thing anymore right?

By incidental he means touching that doesn't get penalized. The new rules don't penalize all touching of facemask with 15 yards, just those where the helmet visibly gets jerked around. Otherwise the refs are supposed to let it go.

FWIW, Rodgers's helmet clearly got turned around, the explanation is nothing more than CYA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZCbmc0IIM4

[red]

Wait....what now? What the fuck is incidental face masking? Theres no such thing anymore right?

By incidental he means touching that doesn't get penalized. The new rules don't penalize all touching of facemask with 15 yards, just those where the helmet visibly gets jerked around. Otherwise the refs are supposed to let it go.

FWIW, Rodgers's helmet clearly got turned around, the explanation is nothing more than CYA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZCbmc0IIM4

i don't think that's true hoosier

you can't tough the facemask at all. they didn't get rid of the 5 yard incidental rule. they made the incidental facemask the same as a full blown grab

you can't touch a guys facemask, and you sure as hell can't touch any part of a qb above his shoulders

[pbmax]

Unfortunately, as PFT pointed out, you are not allowed to "incidentally" touch the QB's head either. So if it wasn't one, it was the other. Horrible explanation.

[pbmax]

Please compare helmet nearly riding on Rodgers nose:

http://media.jsonline.com/images/fumble11010.jpg

to the non-facemask position.

http://media.jsonline.com/images/600*583/mjs-packers11_-spt_-lynn_-15-packers11.jpg

images from Journal Sentinel online game photo gallery (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/81102567.html).

[Bossman641]

Wait....what now? What the fuck is incidental face masking? Theres no such thing anymore right?

By incidental he means touching that doesn't get penalized. The new rules don't penalize all touching of facemask with 15 yards, just those where the helmet visibly gets jerked around. Otherwise the refs are supposed to let it go.

FWIW, Rodgers's helmet clearly got turned around, the explanation is nothing more than CYA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZCbmc0IIM4

i don't think that's true hoosier

you can't tough the facemask at all. they didn't get rid of the 5 yard incidental rule. they made the incidental facemask the same as a full blown grab

you can't touch a guys facemask, and you sure as hell can't touch any part of a qb above his shoulders

Hoosier is correct. They changed the rule a year or 2 ago. The refs are now supposed to let "incidental" facemasks go uncalled. Only the 15 yard severe facemask penalty remains.

The explanation is BS, plain and simple. For one, the facemasking was severe. Adams grabbed the facemask and you can easily tell he moved Rodgers' helmet around. For two, you can't hit a QB near the head anyways.

F you NFL

[MichiganPackerFan]

As good as the NFL is in some areas, they have absolutely NO credibility in retrospectively assessing calls. Their exclusive goal is to defend the official's decision: they do not give a shit whether the call was right or not. They will not admit fault unless its of the magnitude of SD-Den last year, and even that was surprising. This is a total PR move so they don't have to say "yeah, we messed up and the wrong team moved on." I am not surprised in the least by their response. It would be nice not to consistently be on the wrong side of the calls for once that's for sure.

[Fosco33]

Strange interpretation - but Pack didn't get robbed or deserve to win.

Even if they gave him 5 yards and a 1st down - can't say they would've won.

If AR doesn't fumble (and gets sacked), it's 4th and long. Packers punt and play 'defense'.

If they ruled it incomplete, it's 4th and 5. Again - punt and 'defense'.


If you play on the road in the playoffs, you have to play strong defense and hope for some breaks. 3 turnovers and no Defense = Loss.

Time to move on.

[Freak Out]

NFL spin doctors are lame.

[hoosier]

Unfortunately, as PFT pointed out, you are not allowed to "incidentally" touch the QB's head either. So if it wasn't one, it was the other. Horrible explanation.

That's not what Pereira says about "incidental" grabbing: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/81383907.html


Here's what Pereira said:

Well, I think you have to look at the rule. We made this adjustment in the rule two years ago and we basically followed college, interestingly enough, and said that we were going to get rid of the incidental grab of the facemask so the grab of the mask that didn't include a pull, a twist or a turn. And that really led us to staying away from the type of grab of the mask that doesn't create the possibility of injury. And that's what you're looking at here.

This is the really the one that fell into that category of being in the incidental grab. Because he takes him down but there's no real pull, no twist. When you look at the others we called earlier in the game...

Agreed that his explanation sucks insofar as it doesn't apply at all to what Adams did to Rodgers. As somebody else suggested, Pereira should have just admitted they blew it and moved on. To my mind it's entirely understandable that the referee is going to be watching the ball to determine fumble vs. tuck and then recovery, and not watching the QBs facemask.

[pbmax]

Unfortunately, as PFT pointed out, you are not allowed to "incidentally" touch the QB's head either. So if it wasn't one, it was the other. Horrible explanation.

That's not what Pereira says about "incidental" grabbing: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/81383907.html


Here's what Pereira said:

Well, I think you have to look at the rule. We made this adjustment in the rule two years ago and we basically followed college, interestingly enough, and said that we were going to get rid of the incidental grab of the facemask so the grab of the mask that didn't include a pull, a twist or a turn. And that really led us to staying away from the type of grab of the mask that doesn't create the possibility of injury. And that's what you're looking at here.

This is the really the one that fell into that category of being in the incidental grab. Because he takes him down but there's no real pull, no twist. When you look at the others we called earlier in the game...

Agreed that his explanation sucks insofar as it doesn't apply at all to what Adams did to Rodgers. As somebody else suggested, Pereira should have just admitted they blew it and moved on. To my mind it's entirely understandable that the referee is going to be watching the ball to determine fumble vs. tuck and then recovery, and not watching the QBs facemask.
Well, this is where the NFL has put itself. While incidental grabbing of the facemask would be legal (though I don't believe applicable in this case) then how does he get around this rule about hitting the QB in the head:


There's another issue with the play that Pereira doesn't address. Rule 12, Section 2, Article 13(3) plainly states that defenders may not "use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer in the head, neck, or face."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/pereira-defends-facemask-non-call/

[hoosier]

Unfortunately, as PFT pointed out, you are not allowed to "incidentally" touch the QB's head either. So if it wasn't one, it was the other. Horrible explanation.

That's not what Pereira says about "incidental" grabbing: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/81383907.html


Here's what Pereira said:

Well, I think you have to look at the rule. We made this adjustment in the rule two years ago and we basically followed college, interestingly enough, and said that we were going to get rid of the incidental grab of the facemask so the grab of the mask that didn't include a pull, a twist or a turn. And that really led us to staying away from the type of grab of the mask that doesn't create the possibility of injury. And that's what you're looking at here.

This is the really the one that fell into that category of being in the incidental grab. Because he takes him down but there's no real pull, no twist. When you look at the others we called earlier in the game...

Agreed that his explanation sucks insofar as it doesn't apply at all to what Adams did to Rodgers. As somebody else suggested, Pereira should have just admitted they blew it and moved on. To my mind it's entirely understandable that the referee is going to be watching the ball to determine fumble vs. tuck and then recovery, and not watching the QBs facemask.
Well, this is where the NFL has put itself. While incidental grabbing of the facemask would be legal (though I don't believe applicable in this case) then how does he get around this rule about hitting the QB in the head:


There's another issue with the play that Pereira doesn't address. Rule 12, Section 2, Article 13(3) plainly states that defenders may not "use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer in the head, neck, or face."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/pereira-defends-facemask-non-call/

I think the official explanation would be that he didn't hit the QB in the face because the QBs facemask got in the way. :lol:

[pbmax]

Unfortunately, as PFT pointed out, you are not allowed to "incidentally" touch the QB's head either. So if it wasn't one, it was the other. Horrible explanation.

That's not what Pereira says about "incidental" grabbing: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/81383907.html


Here's what Pereira said:

Well, I think you have to look at the rule. We made this adjustment in the rule two years ago and we basically followed college, interestingly enough, and said that we were going to get rid of the incidental grab of the facemask so the grab of the mask that didn't include a pull, a twist or a turn. And that really led us to staying away from the type of grab of the mask that doesn't create the possibility of injury. And that's what you're looking at here.

This is the really the one that fell into that category of being in the incidental grab. Because he takes him down but there's no real pull, no twist. When you look at the others we called earlier in the game...

Agreed that his explanation sucks insofar as it doesn't apply at all to what Adams did to Rodgers. As somebody else suggested, Pereira should have just admitted they blew it and moved on. To my mind it's entirely understandable that the referee is going to be watching the ball to determine fumble vs. tuck and then recovery, and not watching the QBs facemask.
Well, this is where the NFL has put itself. While incidental grabbing of the facemask would be legal (though I don't believe applicable in this case) then how does he get around this rule about hitting the QB in the head:


There's another issue with the play that Pereira doesn't address. Rule 12, Section 2, Article 13(3) plainly states that defenders may not "use hands, arms, or other parts of the body to hit the passer in the head, neck, or face."

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/pereira-defends-facemask-non-call/

I think the official explanation would be that he didn't hit the QB in the face because the QBs facemask got in the way. :lol:
This might be the first step in bring back the head slap. Only now it would be the face slap.

[digitaldean]

Nice to see Mike Perreira, head of NFL officiating, in full CYA mode right now. :roll:

Look, main reason we lost is because we handed 17 points to AZ to start the game and the defense couldn't cover or tackle to save their lives.

The refs definitely blew the helmet to helmet on A-Rod, while Warner gets BARELY touched and the laundry is flying everywhere from the zebras.

For a billion dollar/yr. industry, the NFL has a clusterf.... for officiating.

[Guiness]

I don't know about a clusterF for officiating. It's a fast game, and they get most of it right. I tend to side with the opinion that the ref was distracted by the bouncing ball. I'm also of the opinion that they should admit that if he'd seen it, he would've called it. The NFL should have said "he didn't see it, suck it up"

In the picture pbmax posted, Adam's arm was pretty close to fully extended up when he was grabbing the facemask. That's not incidental, he was using it to get a grip.

[SnakeLH2006]

Who cares? This isn't like 4th and 28? Or is it? I threw 2 bottles of Bud over my neighbor's house that day.

I merely shrugged and turned the game off in this debacle. We weren't the better team and WILL be better next year under ARod who might be an MVP shortly.

We lost and didn't deserve to win this game. That much is true. Get over it.

[Gunakor]

Who cares? This isn't like 4th and 28? Or is it? I threw 2 bottles of Bud over my neighbor's house that day.

I merely shrugged and turned the game off in this debacle. We weren't the better team and WILL be better next year under ARod who might be an MVP shortly.

We lost and didn't deserve to win this game. That much is true. Get over it.

Our defense gave up 45 points, therefore we didn't deserve to win. But wait... How many points did the Cardinals defense give up?

Arizona didn't deserve to win this game either, but they did. That's why it's hard to just get over it. Neither team deserved to win that game. Or both deserved to win it. Either way you look at it, the winner was ultimately decided by a missed call on the game winning play. That's tough to get past, especially with the season on the line.

[Guiness]

Who cares? This isn't like 4th and 28? Or is it? I threw 2 bottles of Bud over my neighbor's house that day.

I merely shrugged and turned the game off in this debacle. We weren't the better team and WILL be better next year under ARod who might be an MVP shortly.

We lost and didn't deserve to win this game. That much is true. Get over it.

Our defense gave up 45 points, therefore we didn't deserve to win. But wait... How many points did the Cardinals defense give up?

Arizona didn't deserve to win this game either, but they did. That's why it's hard to just get over it. Neither team deserved to win that game. Or both deserved to win it. Either way you look at it, the winner was ultimately decided by a missed call on the game winning play. That's tough to get past, especially with the season on the line.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it was decided by a missed call.

If the ref makes the call, the Pack still has to either march down the field and score, or punt and stop Arizona. The first is much more likely than the second, of course.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Who cares? This isn't like 4th and 28? Or is it? I threw 2 bottles of Bud over my neighbor's house that day.

I merely shrugged and turned the game off in this debacle. We weren't the better team and WILL be better next year under ARod who might be an MVP shortly.

We lost and didn't deserve to win this game. That much is true. Get over it.

You should have thrown the rest of the bottles too and then bought better beer.

[Gunakor]

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it was decided by a missed call.

If the ref makes the call, the Pack still has to either march down the field and score, or punt and stop Arizona. The first is much more likely than the second, of course.

It was the last play of the game. What may or may not have happened after that play is irrelevant to the point I was making. That missed call was the deciding factor in that game. Had the call been made it certainly would not have been the deciding factor as another play would have been run afterwards.

But because it was missed, and the end result was a game winning TD the other way, I'd say that was the deciding factor. Not the turnovers or the lack of defense, because at the end of 60 minutes of football our blunders were no worse than theirs. Yeah, I know, it should have never gotten to that point. We should have played better, if only we'd have gotten a TD instead of a FG at halftime, yada, yada, yada. And they should have blown us out, but there we were. Tied 45-45 and heading into overtime. Nothing had been decided yet. Nothing was decided until that last play of the game.

The Cardinals deserved to lose that game just as much as we did. We deserved to win just as much as the Cardinals did. And on the last play a missed call decided who got to play another week. It's gonna take a few weeks to get past that and get excited about next season. There's no game on Sunday.

[bobblehead]

I would buy this arguement if I had seen ONE case in the last 2 years of "incidental" contact. Quite the opposite I saw Harris get called for a facemask this year where his hand was LAYING on the mask, not even gripping it.

I also saw a fumble in the open field just this week that was near identical to the GJ endzone "no catch". Now if catching the ball, taking a step and losing it on the way down is a fumble, how is it not a possession long enough to get 7?

I'm not a big conspiracy theorist, but I'm starting to believe the officials have it in for us every time we hit the biggest stages.

[mraynrand]

I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it was decided by a missed call.

If the ref makes the call, the Pack still has to either march down the field and score, or punt and stop Arizona. The first is much more likely than the second, of course.

It was the last play of the game. What may or may not have happened after that play is irrelevant to the point I was making. That missed call was the deciding factor in that game. Had the call been made it certainly would not have been the deciding factor as another play would have been run afterwards.

But because it was missed, and the end result was a game winning TD the other way, I'd say that was the deciding factor. Not the turnovers or the lack of defense, because at the end of 60 minutes of football our blunders were no worse than theirs. Yeah, I know, it should have never gotten to that point. We should have played better, if only we'd have gotten a TD instead of a FG at halftime, yada, yada, yada. And they should have blown us out, but there we were. Tied 45-45 and heading into overtime. Nothing had been decided yet. Nothing was decided until that last play of the game.

The Cardinals deserved to lose that game just as much as we did. We deserved to win just as much as the Cardinals did. And on the last play a missed call decided who got to play another week. It's gonna take a few weeks to get past that and get excited about next season. There's no game on Sunday.

FUCK YEAH! WE WAS ROBBED! GREAT POST.

NOTHING IS WRITTEN!!!!

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd34/CageYue/BWFilms/arabia.jpg