Dead Ball Foul

[Harlan Huckleby]

When Clay Matthews got hit after whistle, why did Packers have to decline penalty rather than get 15 yards? The 3rd and 20 play then turns into 3rd and 35, probably game over.

[Bossman641]

When Clay Matthews got hit after whistle, why did Packers have to decline penalty rather than get 15 yards? The 3rd and 20 play then turns into 3rd and 35, probably game over.

I have no idea and I'd love to hear an explanation.

[Bretsky]

I don't think it was a deal ball fould

He either takes the play and down or the 15

[LEWCWA]

yeah that made no sense to me either.

[King Friday]

I don't think it was a deal ball fould

He either takes the play and down or the 15

Why? It was a personal foul, was it not? I can't think of a situation where those are take the play or the yardage...the yardage is always tacked on to the result of the play.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I don't think it was a deal ball fould

ya, but why not? Wilson is down. The offensive player piles on with late hit. That ALWAYS gets 15 tacked on to end of play. Otherwise, an offensive player has nothing to lose by spearing there.

[LEWCWA]

how can it not be dead ball after the play. Wilson was down and he came in and hit him. shouldn't have mattered, how bout you rush the damn qb...

[Harlan Huckleby]

yeah that made no sense to me either.

why did I'm-Joe-this-is-Troy not mention anything? I'm not calling bias, just a strange lack of commentary on obviously strange call.

[King Friday]

why did I'm-Joe-this-is-Troy not mention anything? I'm not calling bias, just a strange lack of commentary on obviously strange call.

Because they are morons?

[pbmax]

Not all late hits are dead ball fouls. Matthews had just landed on Wilson when the O lineman came in.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Not all late hits are dead ball fouls. Matthews had just landed on Wilson when the O lineman came in.

Judgement call, but the hit was not simultaneous with Wilson being down, it was a full second or more later

[HarveyWallbangers]

Just like Lang last week. Should have been 15 yards assessed from the spot. Aikman and Buck didn't even mention the guy jumping offsides on Sherman's interception.

[Freak Out]

It was a nightmare all the way around.

[Bossman641]

Not all late hits are dead ball fouls. Matthews had just landed on Wilson when the O lineman came in.

So then what would it be? 15 yards from the spot of the foul? 15 yards from the LOS?

[red]

yeah i also noted in the game thread that it made absolutely no sense

it should be tacked on at the end of the play, if not you would have cheap shots all over the place on every big loss

[pbmax]

So then what would it be? 15 yards from the spot of the foul? 15 yards from the LOS?

If its not dead ball (and I understand Harv's argument that is was the same as Lang's last week) then either you decline and take the sack for minus 7 and the down OR you take the penalty, the down doesn't move and instead of loss of 7 its loss of fifteen.

I gotta be honest, I would rather take the down away on a sack than accept the penalty and replay the down. But 15 PLUS the sack and down would be ideal.

[Harlan Huckleby]

it should be tacked on at the end of the play, if not you would have cheap shots all over the place on every big loss

right. And just from watching the play and comparing to how it is called routinely, you tack on 15.

I get pbmax's point that if it is a spearing that occurs before end of play, you get a choice. But spearing had no effect on play, Russell was down for at least a second. I'd like to see a replay to confirm my memory.

[King Friday]

I guess the whistle determines a dead ball...even though the ball should've been dead once Wilson was down by contact with Clay Matthews on top of him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I guess the whistle determines a dead ball...even though the ball should've been dead once Wilson was down by contact with Clay Matthews on top of him.

probably so. but that just means we torch a different official's house tonight.

[Bossman641]

As we all suspected it appears the play was called incorrectly


Play: Seahawks offensive lineman J.R. Sweezy penalized for unnecessary roughness in live action
Referee: Tony Corrente
Analysis: With 8:02 remaining in the third quarter, Packers linebacker Clay Matthews sacked Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson for a 15-yard loss. Matthews landed on top of Wilson during the play, at which point Sweezy dove into Matthews' back to peel him off the pile.

Corrente's crew correctly penalized Sweezy, but the Packers declined to enforce. Why? Because Corrente did not rule it a "dead ball foul," which would have tacked the 15-yard penalty on top of the 15-yard sack and led to a second-and-45 situation. Instead, he apparently believed Sweezy hit Matthews before Wilson was down.

Viewed on replay, it's clear Wilson's knee had touched the ground before Sweezy hit Matthews. Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1 directs officials to call the ball dead and the down complete "when a runner is contacted by an opponent and touches the ground with any body part other than his hands or feet. The ball is dead the instant the runner touches the ground."

The Packers should not have been in position to choose between declining the penalty or giving the Seahawks another first-and-15. It's fair to note, of course, that the Packers could have made the call moot had they stopped the Seahawks on an ensuing third-and-19 two plays later.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/158639/inside-slant-jerrell-freemans-hit-on-tom-brady

[ThunderDan]

As we all suspected it appears the play was called incorrectly



http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/158639/inside-slant-jerrell-freemans-hit-on-tom-brady

Excellent, that just makes it better this morning.

[pbmax]

Its just impossible to get a well refereed game at this point. Just keep playing like your hair is on fire.

[gbgary]

i thought it was dead ball too and another 15. oh well.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Heard clip of Mike Pereira on Mike Heller radio show. Pereira said it was clearly a dead ball foul. He said if the play wasn't dead, the action would be no foul at all. So the call really made no sense.

That call was one of 20 plays that could have swung game. But that's how competitive games work.

[digitaldean]

Corrente's crew missed the offsides on the Sherman INT and also this one. They weren't the reason why we lost, but they were missed nonetheless.

[esoxx]

Heard clip of Mike Pereira on Mike Heller radio show. Pereira said it was clearly a dead ball foul. He said if the play wasn't dead, the action would be no foul at all. So the call really made no sense.

That call was one of 20 plays that could have swung game. But that's how competitive games work.

Unacceptable. That was a rudimentary call they butchered. I said in the game thread at the time I had never seen something like that and called it weird.

So where was stubby when the "penalty declined" announcement came? Why not waive the official over for an explanation? Maybe they give it a 2nd thought and properly enforce. But no, nothing.

That ref should be fined for such an easy miss and stubby needs to look in the mirror for what he could have done better too.

You think Belicheat, Carroll, or the like aren't going to question such an obvious miss?

Fail

[Joemailman]

Corrente's crew missed the offsides on the Sherman INT and also this one. They weren't the reason why we lost, but they were missed nonetheless.

The missed offsides was a pretty big deal. Rodgers saw it and thought he had a free play. Good chance he doesn't try that throw without the offsides.

[Bretsky]

Unacceptable. That was a rudimentary call they butchered. I said in the game thread at the time I had never seen something like that and called it weird.

So where was stubby when the "penalty declined" announcement came? Why not waive the official over for an explanation? Maybe they give it a 2nd thought and properly enforce. But no, nothing.

That ref should be fined for such an easy miss and stubby needs to look in the mirror for what he could have done better too.

You think Belicheat, Carroll, or the like aren't going to question such an obvious miss?

Fail



GOTTA AGREE HERE COMPLETELY

[mraynrand]

So where was stubby when the "penalty declined" announcement came?

If you don't know the answer to this question, then you shouldn't run Stubby over the coals for it. Perhaps he tried to question it and the refs blew him off. I too would like to know the answer, but until I do, I'll withhold judgement.

[mraynrand]

The missed offsides was a pretty big deal. Rodgers saw it and thought he had a free play. Good chance he doesn't try that throw without the offsides.

This was a topic of conversation throughout the year, especially at the Dallas tailgate: what happens if Rodgers sees a guy jumping early, but the refs miss it and he chucks up an INT? We were wondering if he'd get burned. And he did. In the most important game.

[Harlan Huckleby]

MM coulda shoulda made a scene. Clock was stopped. Probably Stubby didn't see play well, fault might be with eye in sky.

[pbmax]

Rodgers would have had a TD if he threw that ball to Adams on time, forget the missed call.

[esoxx]

If you don't know the answer to this question, then you shouldn't run Stubby over the coals for it. Perhaps he tried to question it and the refs blew him off. I too would like to know the answer, but until I do, I'll withhold judgement.

It was a rhetoical question. Any HC in that situation is going to be tuned in to what the call is and process it.

It was a glaring bad call regarding lack of enforcement of the penalty. He should have been demanding an explanation before just moving on to the next play.

I don't recognize your authority to not allow me to pass judgement.

[mraynrand]

It was a rhetoical question. Any HC in that situation is going to be tuned in to what the call is and process it.

It was a glaring bad call regarding lack of enforcement of the penalty. He should have been demanding an explanation before just moving on to the next play.

I don't recognize your authority to not allow me to pass judgement.

:)

[woodbuck27]

Not all late hits are dead ball fouls. Matthews had just landed on Wilson when the O lineman came in.

I thought the yards should have been given to the packers after the penalty. The penalty resulted after that sack.

Why then was the penalty declined? Who declined it? Mike McCarthy.

Was this part of MM trying to keep the game 'FUN'.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2015011800/2014/POST20/packers@seahawks#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap30 00000460352&tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

3RD Quarter:

1-15-GB 44 (8:02) 3-R.Wilson sacked at SEA 41 for -15 yards (52-C.Matthews). Penalty on SEA-64-J.Sweezy, Unnecessary Roughness, declined.


See the Highlight.

I swear ... If I was just a casual fan the obvious might come up.

Was this game fixed !?

[ThunderDan]

I thought the yards should have been given to the packers after the penalty. The penalty resulted after that sack.

Why then was the penalty declined? Who declined it? Mike McCarthy.

Was this part of MM trying to keep the game 'FUN'.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2015011800/2014/POST20/packers@seahawks#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap30 00000460352&tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

3RD Quarter:

1-15-GB 44 (8:02) 3-R.Wilson sacked at SEA 41 for -15 yards (52-C.Matthews). Penalty on SEA-64-J.Sweezy, Unnecessary Roughness, declined.


See the Highlight.

I swear ... If I was just a casual fan the obvious might come up.

Was this game fixed !?


Come on Woody, really you are blaming MM on this. You have no idea what was said.

This is how I think it might have went down.

Ref: Coach do you want the penalty or the play?
MM: What??? The hit was after the play it was a dead ball foul.
Ref: The ref who threw the flag said it occurred during the play.
MM: No way, that should be tacked on to the end of the play.
Ref: So, do you want it to be 1st and 30 or 2nd and 30?
MM: We will decline the penalty and make it 2nd down but you know that was after the play was dead.

What else could MM do? Jump up and down and scream at the ref? Hold his breath?

If the ref says the roughness occurred during the play the correct call in that spot is to decline the penalty and take the 15 yard loss on the sack!

[Harlan Huckleby]

If the ref says the roughness occurred during the play the correct call in that spot is to decline the penalty and take the 15 yard loss on the sack!

I understand your giving Mike the benefit of the doubt, your scenario is plausible.

As Pierra pointed out, the hit was legal if it was during the play. It does seem like one ref must have gotten confused and blew it. The next play was run without any evident hoopla or controversy. I think if MM had raised more of a fuss - perhaps calling a timeout if necessary to do it - the refs would have gotten together and fixed a pretty clearly blown call. What we SHOULD have seen on TV was a red-faced McCarthy, jumping up and down and throwing his clipboard into the ground. That might even have gotten the attention of sleepy Troy & Joe.

The excuse I give Large Mike is that his support staff let him down. There was a lot of poor communication throughout game.

[SkinBasket]

There was a lot of poor communication throughout game.

Irony.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Stubby probably had his head in his play-sheet and never saw the play. Instead of talking to the ref, he was probably shouting the next play into Rodgers' helmet.:-|

[ThunderDan]

This is from the rule book"

Article 8(f) states in pertinent part:

"If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily. Although such violent or unnecessary use of the helmet and facemask is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will give special attention in administering this rule to protecting those players who are in virtually defenseless postures . . ." (Emphasis added.)

The ref could have penalized the SEA player for spearing/unnecessary roughness. That penalty can occur during a play.

[ThunderDan]

Stubby probably had his head in his play-sheet and never saw the play. Instead of talking to the ref, he was probably shouting the next play into Rodgers' helmet.:-|

Except we were on D at that point.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Except we were on D at that point.

Ooops!

[Harlan Huckleby]

The ref could have penalized the SEA player for spearing/unnecessary roughness. That penalty can occur during a play.

Right. I didn't see any spearing. Pierra didn't see any spearing.

But regardless of your judgement there, the hit occurred a second (or more) after Russell Wilson was down. There is no reasonable argument that it wasn't a dead ball foul.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Ooops!

Thank God for those adult diapers.

[ThunderDan]

Right. I didn't see any spearing. Pierra didn't see any spearing.

But regardless of your judgement there, the hit occurred a second (or more) after Russell Wilson was down. There is no reasonable argument that it wasn't a dead ball foul.

And I didn't say there was. It is a possibility that is all I am mentioning it for.

If the ref says it is during the play and the play clock is running already what can MM do? What does screaming at the ref do to help the team? The ref wasn't going to change his mind and I am sure had already given MM some sort of explanation of the penalty.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Thank God for those adult diapers.

Hey!!!!! ...I prefer to call them Maxie the Taxi Shock Absorbers.

[pbmax]

Matthews fined $22K for his hit on Wilson (which I still maintain was clearly legal) and caused the Guard on the Seachickens to be fined $8K.

Net loss for him and Packers still.

[woodbuck27]

This is from the rule book"

Article 8(f) states in pertinent part:

"If a player uses any part of his helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) or facemask to butt, spear, or ram an opponent violently or unnecessarily. Although such violent or unnecessary use of the helmet and facemask is impermissible against any opponent, game officials will give special attention in administering this rule to protecting those players who are in virtually defenseless postures . . ." (Emphasis added.)

The ref could have penalized the SEA player for spearing/unnecessary roughness. That penalty can occur during a play.

OK you've arrived and I assume your done with your smoke screen on this one.

The penalty 'in fact' was called and then declined!!

Where is Mike McCarthy on this one? Talking to the Officials about it or planning on the next offensive play or sucking air? Any query in such direction is a smoke screen. It doesn't matter what he did as much as what he didn't do or accomplish for his team on that play.

Mike McCarthy's job is to ensure that there is no way that penalty isn't enforced and Seattle pushed back deeper in their end of the field.

Two plays later Seattle has moved the ball from their 41 yard line (not their 25) down to the Packers 19 and have a first down.

Two ineffective Marshawn Lynch runs (1 yard and -1 yard) and a Russell Wilson incompleted pass and....

Pete Carroll and holder Jon Ryan burn the Packers 'Big time' on the FG fake. The start of something big.

A comeback !

That whole thing is certainly due in part to Mike McCarthy not doing his job by ensuring that Unneccessariy Roughness penalty called on J. R. Sweezy.

[Smidgeon]

I understand your giving Mike the benefit of the doubt, your scenario is plausible.

As Pierra pointed out, the hit was legal if it was during the play. It does seem like one ref must have gotten confused and blew it. The next play was run without any evident hoopla or controversy. I think if MM had raised more of a fuss - perhaps calling a timeout if necessary to do it - the refs would have gotten together and fixed a pretty clearly blown call. What we SHOULD have seen on TV was a red-faced McCarthy, jumping up and down and throwing his clipboard into the ground. That might even have gotten the attention of sleepy Troy & Joe.

The excuse I give Large Mike is that his support staff let him down. There was a lot of poor communication throughout game.

Refs don't change calls in this manner. Once it's been called and the discussion ends, it's in the books. It will be corrected during the week, but it stands for the game.

[Smidgeon]

Matthews fined $22K for his hit on Wilson (which I still maintain was clearly legal) and caused the Guard on the Seachickens to be fined $8K.

Net loss for him and Packers still.

I thought the Matthews hit was legal too, coming in from the side. BUT, the penalty didn't bother me in real time either. He got to put a nice like on the opposing team's QB. Chances are Wilson felt that right up until he started throwing TDs against a vacated secondary in the last 2 minutes.

[Bossman641]

OK you've arrived and I assume your done with your smoke screen on this one.

The penalty 'in fact' was called and then declined!!

Where is Mike McCarthy on this one? Talking to the Officials about it or planning on the next offensive play or sucking air? Any query in such direction is a smoke screen. It doesn't matter what he did as much as what he didn't do or accomplish for his team on that play.

Mike McCarthy's job is to ensure that there is no way that penalty isn't enforced and Seattle pushed back deeper in their end of the field.

Two plays later Seattle has moved the ball from their 41 yard line (not their 25) down to the Packers 19 and have a first down.

Two ineffective Marshawn Lynch runs (1 yard and -1 yard) and a Russell Wilson incompleted pass and....

Pete Carroll and holder Jon Ryan burn the Packers 'Big time' on the FG fake. The start of something big.

A comeback !

That whole thing is certainly due in part to Mike McCarthy not doing his job by ensuring that Unneccessariy Roughness penalty called on J. R. Sweezy.

WB, do you still have the game recorded? What did the official describe the penalty as when he was saying the Packers declined it?

Thanks

[Harlan Huckleby]

Refs don't change calls in this manner. Once it's been called and the discussion ends, it's in the books.

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/cowboys-lions-pass-interference.jpg

[Harlan Huckleby]

What did the official describe the penalty as when he was saying the Packers declined it?

The call was "unnecessary roughness." I remember being a little confused by vagueness.

It is not unusual for refs to conference and pick up flags or otherwise alter calls - at least before the call is announced over PA. This call was never announced until AFTER McCarthy chose to decline penalty. And it happened VERY quickly. MM could have slowed that train down, forced a conference to review timing. He fucked up - or his staff did by not bringing wrong call to boss's attention.

[Bossman641]

It'd be interesting to hear the conversation between the official and MM.

[woodbuck27]

WB, do you still have the game recorded? What did the official describe the penalty as when he was saying the Packers declined it?

Thanks

On that sack by Clay Matthews a flag is thrown.

Troy Aikman is impressed with Clay Matthews movement to pursue Russell Wilson and make that SACK.

Personal comment:

That clutch play by CM III caused an important set back against Seattle. The Seattle offense was moving the ball very well from their own 22 yard line to the Green Bay 39 yard line in four plays. That sack came following a Seattle False Start.

The game announcer announced " Personal Foul Offense Number 64 ... the penalty is declined...the result of the play is ... second down."

[woodbuck27]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/22/clay-matthews-fined-22050-for-blindside-block-on-russell-wilson/

Read the last two paragraphs.

[pbmax]

The penalty 'in fact' was called and then declined!!

Why would you want him to accept the penalty, to make the Packers chances worse?

1. Given how the play was called McCarthy had a choice (play starts as 1st and 15 from the GB 44)

. . a. Take the sack, 2nd down and 30 from the Seattle 41

. . b. Take the penalty and make it 1st and 30 from the Seattle 41

What do he supposed to do?

Also, take note:

2. We have established despite earlier complaints that McCarthy was aware of the penalty and had to communicate to the refs.

3. We have also established McCarthy wasn't selecting the next play since the Packers were on Defense.

[Fosco33]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/22/clay-matthews-fined-22050-for-blindside-block-on-russell-wilson/

Read the last two paragraphs.

Read the comments. Jeez - I knew Seahawks were fair weather fans - but calling for cheap shot counterpunches makes them a bunch of pussies.

Yes, it was an illegal hit and he got both penalized and fined. Agreed that after the hit on Romo, that CM3's image isn't gaining any momentum.

I'm more pissed that Clay was gassed in the 4th Q and that played into the eventual loss. Lack of conditioning in NFCC? Always seems to be injured. For all the hype and plays he does make, I'm not sure the Packers are getting 110% value from his contract.

[pbmax]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/01/22/clay-matthews-fined-22050-for-blindside-block-on-russell-wilson/

Read the last two paragraphs.

2nd and 45 is only a possibility if you think McCarthy can somehow force the refs to change the call. Under what interpretation of rules do you think this is possible?

[smuggler]

Was a bad penalty. Matthews blocked into Wilson's chest. By definition, it's not a penalty. Should not have been flagged and should not have been fined. Rediculous.

If the refs and Seahawks don't want Wilson to get hammered after a turnover, he should take a knee and sit out the rest of the play. Bullshit that they fabricate shit like this.

[Pugger]

Corrente's crew missed the offsides on the Sherman INT and also this one. They weren't the reason why we lost, but they were missed nonetheless.

Of course if the offsides was called correctly there is no telling if we score a TD on that drive or not.

[Pugger]

I thought the Matthews hit was legal too, coming in from the side. BUT, the penalty didn't bother me in real time either. He got to put a nice like on the opposing team's QB. Chances are Wilson felt that right up until he started throwing TDs against a vacated secondary in the last 2 minutes.

IMO the reason Clay was fined is because he hit the QB in the head.

[Smidgeon]

IMO the reason Clay was fined is because he hit the QB in the head.

Oh yeah. Now that you say that, I may have wondered if that was the case when I saw the replay.

I do think it's unfortunate when a player slides into a blow like that. Clay wasn't going for the head, but Wilson is close to being on his knees at the point of contact. Still a technical penalty, but I don't have to like it.

And if Wilson is no longer the QB (i.e. after he throws the INT, he's just a defender like anyone else), does he still get that protection?

[woodbuck27]

Why would you want him to accept the penalty, to make the Packers chances worse?

1. Given how the play was called McCarthy had a choice (play starts as 1st and 15 from the GB 44)

. . a. Take the sack, 2nd down and 30 from the Seattle 41

. . b. Take the penalty and make it 1st and 30 from the Seattle 41

What do he supposed to do?

Also, take note:

2. We have established despite earlier complaints that McCarthy was aware of the penalty and had to communicate to the refs.

3. We have also established McCarthy wasn't selecting the next play since the Packers were on Defense.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2015011800/2014/POST20/packers@seahawks#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap30 00000460352&tab=analyze&analyze=playbyplay

1-15-GB 44 (8:02) 3-R.Wilson sacked at SEA 41 for -15 yards (52-C.Matthews). Penalty on SEA-64-J.Sweezy, Unnecessary Roughness, declined.

Clearly Clay Matthews made the clean sack at the Seattle 41 yard line.

Then Seattle Guard J. Sweezy roughed Clay Matthews. That was more than a bang bang play.

I want Mike McCarthy to fight for what was correct. The results of the Unnecessary Roughness Penalty tacked on to where the ball was after the sack or the Seattle 41 yard line.

I want MM to ensure the officials place the ball at the Seattle 26 yard line.

I want the next play for Seattle to be a 2nd and 23.

2-23-SEA 26 (7:34)


Instead we got this interpretation of what happened after a clean sack at the Seattle 41 and then a clear (Unnecessary Roughness / Personal Foul ...'Pick One') Penalty.

We got the results of that:

2-30-SEA 41 (7:34) (Shotgun) 24-M.Lynch left tackle to GB 48 for 11 yards (42-M.Burnett).

3-19-GB 48 (6:51) (Shotgun) 3-R.Wilson pass deep right to 89-D.Baldwin to GB 19 for 29 yards (52-C.Matthews). Penalty on GB-52-C.Matthews, Illegal Use of Hands, declined.

[Pugger]

Oh yeah. Now that you say that, I may have wondered if that was the case when I saw the replay.

I do think it's unfortunate when a player slides into a blow like that. Clay wasn't going for the head, but Wilson is close to being on his knees at the point of contact. Still a technical penalty, but I don't have to like it.

And if Wilson is no longer the QB (i.e. after he throws the INT, he's just a defender like anyone else), does he still get that protection?

I suppose if it had been Rodgers who got hit like that we wouldn't care for it at all.

[Smidgeon]

I suppose if it had been Rodgers who got hit like that we wouldn't care for it at all.

Fair enough. But it was the opposing QB in a title game. :D

[pbmax]

I want Mike McCarthy to fight for what was correct. The results of the Unnecessary Roughness Penalty tacked on to where the ball was after the sack or the Seattle 41 yard line.

I want MM to ensure the officials place the ball at the Seattle 26 yard line.

I want the next play for Seattle to be a 2nd and 23.

2-23-SEA 26 (7:34)


Instead we got this interpretation of what happened after a clean sack at the Seattle 41 and then a clear (Unnecessary Roughness / Personal Foul ...'Pick One') Penalty.

Call doesn't go the way you want it too.

Want McCarthy to "fix" the call the way it should be called.

When it doesn't happen, blame the coach.

By what rule does McCarthy force the officials to alter the call?

[mraynrand]

Was a bad penalty. Matthews blocked into Wilson's chest. By definition, it's not a penalty. Should not have been flagged and should not have been fined. Rediculous.

If the refs and Seahawks don't want Wilson to get hammered after a turnover, he should take a knee and sit out the rest of the play. Bullshit that they fabricate shit like this.

I agree, but in real time, it sure looks like Wilson got knocked in the head. And it doesn't have to be helmet to helmet to get the call in a blindside block' as it was called. Still, the call is subject to some interpretation, depending on angle of contact etc. It was called because it was the QB and it looked severe. At the time I thought it was legal, but a bit of a cheap shot. Still, it would have been worth the penalty if Matthews knocks him from the game.

Rule:

Article 1 A player of either team may block (obstruct or impede) an opponent at any time, provided that the act is not:
(p) illegal blindside block

Article 9 It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
(8) A player who receives a “blindside” block when the blocker is moving toward his own endline and
approaches the opponent from behind or from the side.
(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him; and
(2) Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body.
Note: The provisions of (2) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a conventional tackle on an opponent.