The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

When have you ever heard of a non-QB giving himself up? Ridiculous call! The Cardinals (and vicariously, the Redskins) got robbed.

I cannot believe that the officials did not correct themselves - the TV official should have told them that this was a mistake

I understand the ruling but I cannot believe how costly such a stupid call was

the only good thing is that it might mean that Manning & Coughlin stay in NY for another year - these guys are even more stupid than dumb and dumber

It was the right call. The player gave up and didn't try to advance the ball = play over. #shrug

Now, I don't like the call but it was right. The player should have to wait until he is downed by a defensive player.

It WAS the 'right' call BUT ...

the only people on the field that thought that, were the officials that found a way to interpret what the player did so that his stupidity in thinking he was touched did not result in the Cardinals getting the ball
we can't have that - the NY giants might have lost

Manning obviously thought the player had fumbled

Even the player said he thought he was touched - he did NOT "give himself up"

the rule should not reward stupidity - it was obvious that he let go of the ball and jumped up - the official upstairs could have called down and corrected the error in judgement

no worries here - it was just another bad call

Refs make bad calls all the time. But, that was not a game that should factor in the playoff race. Hope this rule is enforced equally on all teams, Just not the Giants.

flamethrower wrote:Refs make bad calls all the time. But, that was not a game that should factor in the playoff race. Hope this rule is enforced equally on all teams, Just not the Giants.

Since they're in our division, we would have liked the "correct" call.

They need to add to this rule. That even when surrendering, you have to be downed. That only makes it fair.

I agree with your point. surrender then includes being downed works for me. Hopefully the league clarifies this one that way it makes sense.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:It was the right call. The player gave up and didn't try to advance the ball = play over. #shrug

Not at all. He stumbled and fell while trying to make a cut. No way he gave up.

But I agree with the rule change to avert this issue in the future.

Deadskins wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:It was the right call. The player gave up and didn't try to advance the ball = play over. #shrug

Not at all. He stumbled and fell while trying to make a cut. No way he gave up.

But I agree with the rule change to avert this issue in the future.

Ugh, he did. He put the ball on the ground and walked away. He gave up on the play.... Now his reasons for doing so are the issue. He gave up cus he thought he was downed. The refs said the play was over cus he surrendered, which wasn't his intent. Problem is, they look exactly the same. The next problem is, the refs are mind-readers. Solution, u ALWAYS have to be downed by a defensive player for the play to be dead.

Deadskins wrote:When have you ever heard of a non-QB giving himself up? Ridiculous call! The Cardinals (and vicariously, the Redskins) got robbed.

The play is played until the whistle stops. I have not made up my mind because I do not know if they blew the whistle when he was down.

It certainly appears as a bad call but then again, Why else would he stand up and leave the ball on the ground with no effort to recover it if he had not given himself up? Some might argue correctly that the time he stayed on the ground was way too short but the game was in the last few minutes and time was at a premium.

My -GUESS- is:

He tried to give himself up but he did not do it right by sliding with his feet first or staying in the ground for a few seconds.

Difficult to tell how meaningful this play will be in the final standings, heck, or even in this very game with a few minutes left.

RIC, apparently he THOUGHT he was downed but he wasn't. He said as much after the game but I don't remember where I read that. So it was the WRONG call. BUT the issue is that it appears as if he gave himself up, so the official considered it was a surrender.

The NFL needs to state that you can ONLY SURRENDER BY SLIDING FEET FIRST. That'll help this a bit. But they're making so many loop holes for "saftey" that they're allowing more shades of gray in the rules. Idiots.

^^ BINGO - right on CLL - hopefully they do get this clarified

that's the thing - the ref's don't know the intent, but everyone, other than the player, knew for sure that he was not touched
AND that he made a mistake in letting the ball go

I guess what I'm adding is that they have the "replay official" ....
- while the play was 'dead' - they could quickly look at it and determine the actions of the players involved
- player goes down without being touched, gets up and leaves ball on the ground
- the 'correct' ruling could have been made


best thing though is to learn from this ..... hopefully

The problem with saying that this is the "right" call is that offensive players can just run downfield, fall to the ground and leave the ball there. It totally negates the defense and you might as well remove tackling... I mean really, we've all said that before but it's just true in this point.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:RIC, apparently he THOUGHT he was downed but he wasn't. He said as much after the game but I don't remember where I read that. So it was the WRONG call. BUT the issue is that it appears as if he gave himself up, so the official considered it was a surrender.

The NFL needs to state that you can ONLY SURRENDER BY SLIDING FEET FIRST. That'll help this a bit. But they're making so many loop holes for "saftey" that they're allowing more shades of gray in the rules. Idiots.

Or, the player otherwise positively indicates that he is doing so by signaling his intent... much as in a fair catch. So... sliding feet first would do it, as would waving in the air to indicate your intent.

No feet first... no wave... the ball is live.

We've seen stupidity rewarded on several occasions this past weekend... such a not signaling for a fair catch when there is 3 minutes of hang time on a punt... dude... you gonna get plastered.

Countertrey wrote:We've seen stupidity rewarded on several occasions this past weekend... such a not signaling for a fair catch when there is 3 minutes of hang time on a punt... dude... you gonna get plastered.

That's a high kick!

Deadskins wrote:

Countertrey wrote:We've seen stupidity rewarded on several occasions this past weekend... such a not signaling for a fair catch when there is 3 minutes of hang time on a punt... dude... you gonna get plastered.

That's a high kick!

I feel that my point was brilliantly crafted. 4 minutes would have been excessive. backatcha!

Did anyone notice when the whistle was blown on this play? I tried listening for it and if it is true the officials thought he surrendered they should have blown it dead. They blow the whistle when a QB goes feet first all the time.

Play to the whistle. Period. If a receiver/runner releases the ball before he hears the whistle, he has to expect it can be called a fumble. The EXACT same situation occured last year in the New England/San Diego game and the ball went to the defense.

Does it seem that when the league has a close call involving the Giants, someway, somehow it falls in the Giants favor?

As I have noted... the league has taken on the herculean task of protecting idiots from their stupidity... Whistles have no bearing.

I just watched it. While it looks like he was trying to get to the ground to avoid a hit, I don't think it is clear he was giving himself up.

What if he got up and started running, would they have blown the play dead?

I think he went to the ground to get down to save time and avoid a hit and just dropped the ball thinking he was down. He shouldn't be rewarded for being dumb.

Of course the Rams return man shouldn't have been rewarded for being stupid. Getting plastered twice because he was too dumb to fair catch a punt is the price you pay for it. The NFL lets them fair catch the ball to protect themselves, if they chose not to use that protection they deserve to get jacked up.

This isn't the CFL, where there is a "no yards" rule. The point returner has to return every punt, but the coverage team has to let him take a step before they can hit him. I kind of like that rule. No fair catches, but the returners are protected.

Instead you're left to guess if the player didn't have time to "protect" himself or if he went down to "give himself up".

How about this? Stay on the ground until the whistle blows our the D touches you or if you don't want to get on a PR how about you protect yourself by making the Frakin fair catch signal..

I've seen desean jackson stupidly drop the ball before crossing the goal line and the refs say "he gave himself up" and of course there was doug williams "giving himself up" during SB 22. Both should have been fumbles and so should have the VC fumble.

This is really a case of the refs made the 'call' - either way it would have been the 'right' call


I feel they made the call to help the giants

SkinsJock wrote:This is really a case of the refs made the 'call' - either way it would have been the 'right' call


I feel they made the call to help the giants

Well... they ARE the League's team, after all...