Page 1 of 1
Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:22 pm
by Countertrey
The Green Bay Packers might have turned the game around thanks to quarterback Aaron Rodgers’ ingenuity, catching the Washington Redskins with 12 men on the field. There’s just one problem: The first time he did so, the Packers should have been flagged for illegal motion.
ARGHHHHH!!!!!
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:34 pm
by PAPDOG67
That referee guy they keep around on that channel (his name escapes me) pointed that out at halftime of the game.
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:12 pm
by SkinsJock
The ref is Mike Pereira and he did point this out during the game ...
here some other WTF offensive mistakes to think about ...
http://espn.go.com/blog/washington-reds ... t-redskins
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:50 pm
by Burgundy&Wha?
If Quinton Dunbar's Pass Interference was in fact a PI, then Garcon getting tackled in the end zone by Ha Ha Clinton-Dix before the ball reached him was as well. DJax was hit early somewhere near midfield as well. In Dunbar's case, it was 3rd & 5 inside the 20. Definitely helped Green Bay. That ball was less catchable than either of the two they could've flagged in our favor.
Add to that, how many times did it look like their right tackle moved early? I'd not recorded the game and haven't gone back to confirm, but there were a few times that it looked like he moved before the snap. Those things derail drives, which impact games.
How many flags were thrown on the Pack's offense during that game? Not many, which is interesting considering the quality of personel on their O-Line.
One other thing.... I had to chuckle when Breeland recovered the fumble inside of two minutes to go and the Head Ref, Gene Steratore, motioned Pack ball while walking up from fifteen yards behind the play. No, no presumption of outcome there. Nope, not at all.
I think we all know our team is in need of a few more pieces. However, had the game been called correctly, we had a chance. Unfortunately, we'll never get that chance again and the highlight shows will never talk about those missed calls. The narrative is set. Pack beat a bad team that shouldn't have been there. That's what they'll repeat....
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 4:28 pm
by DarthMonk
Countertrey wrote:The Green Bay Packers might have turned the game around thanks to quarterback Aaron Rodgers’ ingenuity, catching the Washington Redskins with 12 men on the field. There’s just one problem: The first time he did so, the Packers should have been flagged for illegal motion.
ARGHHHHH!!!!!
It did change the complexion of the game. 3rd and 9 was definitely the correct outcome for that snap.
What really set the wrong tone was the failure for DJax to lean in for a TD and our subsequent failure to punch it in.
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 5:11 pm
by KILO
DJax's ignorant me me attitude has cost us at least 2 games!!! When is enough enough??
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:30 pm
by DarthMonk
KILO wrote:DJax's ignorant me me attitude has cost us at least 2 games!!! When is enough enough??
Pretty much now.
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:37 pm
by welch
DarthMonk wrote:Countertrey wrote:The Green Bay Packers might have turned the game around thanks to quarterback Aaron Rodgers’ ingenuity, catching the Washington Redskins with 12 men on the field. There’s just one problem: The first time he did so, the Packers should have been flagged for illegal motion.
ARGHHHHH!!!!!
It did change the complexion of the game. 3rd and 9 was definitely the correct outcome for that snap.
What really set the wrong tone was the failure for DJax to lean in for a TD and our subsequent failure to punch it in.
Agree about Jackson. He seemed to use his body to shield the ball, guarding against a chop-down move by the defender that would have been a turnover and touch-back. OK, prevent turnovers at the 1 yard line, but I wanted Jackson to protect the ball with both hands and dive. Maybe the difference between a pure pass receiver, like Jackson, and any receiver who intends to run with the ball after a catch.
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:14 am
by tribeofjudah
ahhhhhh man sounds like we are crying over spilled milk. We need to get better and kill teams an put them away.
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 1:03 pm
by StorminMormon86
Oh well. Karma took care of them last night.
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:07 am
by DEHog
The question I have (and I know the answer) if all scoring plays are reviewable and the ref clearly sees a infractions of the rules, not a judgment call like PI but a clear infraction like… illegal formation, twelve men on the field…etc..Why not get it right?? The refs where clearly informed about it during the week, did anybody else notice Tom Brady try to do it to the Chiefs and the refs stopped it and said something to the effect of the refs were not set to call the play…never heard that before?
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:31 am
by Countertrey
DEHog wrote:The question I have (and I know the answer) if all scoring plays are reviewable and the ref clearly sees a infractions of the rules, not a judgment call like PI but a clear infraction like… illegal formation, twelve men on the field…etc..Why not get it right?? The refs where clearly informed about it during the week, did anybody else notice Tom Brady try to do it to the Chiefs and the refs stopped it and said something to the effect of the refs were not set to call the play…never heard that before?
Wow... if the play clock is running, the players establish that they are set... how can the refs declare they "were not ready"??? They were on the offense's time!!! They do not have to wait for the refs any more than they have to wait for the defense...
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:16 am
by SkinsJock
I don't have the tape anymore but I think in that instance the refs needed to give the defense an opportunity to replace players because the offense had - the definition of what can be changed and not changed is getting better but it's also very clear that the refs are not going to "make it right" just because it's on tape - during the playoffs this season the refs will be more informed of what is going on through the earpieces
Re: Did this change the whole complexion of the Game?
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:39 am
by DEHog
Countertrey wrote:DEHog wrote:The question I have (and I know the answer) if all scoring plays are reviewable and the ref clearly sees a infractions of the rules, not a judgment call like PI but a clear infraction like… illegal formation, twelve men on the field…etc..Why not get it right?? The refs where clearly informed about it during the week, did anybody else notice Tom Brady try to do it to the Chiefs and the refs stopped it and said something to the effect of the refs were not set to call the play…never heard that before?
Wow... if the play clock is running, the players establish that they are set... how can the refs declare they "were not ready"??? They were on the offense's time!!! They do not have to wait for the refs any more than they have to wait for the defense...
Yea that was my thinking...they set the ball...Strage call??