1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up/a> or Log In

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Officials tried and failed to give game to Cowboys

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by GoPGo, Dec 15, 2013.

  1. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,694
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings:
    +2,544 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    That was from the reply..I dvr'd the game, and went to that play, paused it and snapped the pic..

    so everyone did see that angle
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. adambr2
    Offline

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,168
    Ratings:
    +757 / 15 / -3
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Why would they have to hurry if it was an incomplete pass? The clock was stopped.

    They had a receiver run out of bounds to stop the clock on the previous play and there was no rush to get the next snap off. They rushed to try to get the next play off for no other reason than knowing that they had gotten away with one and were trying to save it.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  3. adambr2
    Offline

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,168
    Ratings:
    +757 / 15 / -3
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    So maybe I just didn't see it when I went back and looked?
  4. Southpaw
    Offline

    Southpaw Endorphin Junkie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,164
    Location:
    PA
    Ratings:
    +422 / 16 / -4
    Or maybe we need referees that aren't old *** geriatrics.
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. P-E-Z
    Offline

    P-E-Z Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2011
    Messages:
    313
    Ratings:
    +75 / 17 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    2009
    ball clearly moved hands not under it it was good reversal
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  6. Raptorman
    Offline

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,960
    Location:
    Vero Beach, FL
    Ratings:
    +713 / 20 / -11
    Good point. Hadn't thought of that.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. GoPGo
    Offline

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +454 / 77 / -13
    Packer Fan Since:
    1972
    Bert Emmanuel Rule: the ball may contact the ground if it doesn't move in the player's hand. You can't tell from the video whether it moved because of the ground or if it moved because Williams was moving his hand with the ball in it. Either way, the word indisputable, meaning undeniable, does not apply and it should have been left alone. "Probably" isn't the standard to overturn.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. GoPGo
    Offline

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +454 / 77 / -13
    Packer Fan Since:
    1972
    If it was incomplete, there was no need to hurry because the clock was stopped.

    And the side judge needs a seeing eye dog, some shades and a cane.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Smokeychedder
    Online

    Smokeychedder Tailgaiter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2012
    Messages:
    1,134
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +272 / 16 / -7
    Packer Fan Since:
    1962
    The officiating was biased toward Dallas, many calls and non-calls were very evident. I have seen it happen before on many different levels in many different sports. I am proud of the Packers for winning against Dallas and the Officials.

    I would never serve as an official as it is beyond the human eye to see every angle clearly all the time. It is a no win scenario for the official and video does not always show the hidden truth.
  10. buggybill2003
    Online

    buggybill2003 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    2,150
    Ratings:
    +1,163 / 16 / -7
    CLEARLY hit the floor too. And the comment made by another poster was out of order. Questioning another fans loyalty because he wasn`t wearing green/gold glasses and actually called a play as it was. The ball hit the floor AND we WON.
  11. ls1bob
    Offline

    ls1bob Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2013
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    Winterville NC
    Ratings:
    +21 / 2 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1992
    Just wondering. Is this the same official who called offsides instead of a false start that gave them a first down after the int reversal on dallas' last td drive?
  12. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,308 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    Really? Maybe the beverages blurred your vision.
  13. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,308 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    There's an awful lot of complaining here about a call that was reversed in our favor. Even when the system works, some fans want to see conspiracy.

    One thing the NFL needs to clean up is the possession-to-the-ground rule on a catch.

    Here's the rule:

    "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control,the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."

    So, we have Dallas completing a key 3rd. and long late in the game trying to hold the lead. I believe it was the 3rd. and 12 to Bryant for 13 yards with about 4 minutes left. He makes the "catch", turns up field while simultaneously being tackled, and the ball pops out as he contacts the ground. It's ruled a catch, no fumble.

    The commentators question whether it's a fumble. The Packer players are calling for a fumble. MM reaches for his flag but doesn't throw it because the replay shows no fumble. Nobody here, and evidently nobody on the field or calling the game, questioned whether it was a catch.

    The league used to say, for official guidance though not stated in the rules, that the player needs to "complete a football move" first to constitute a catch. Evidently, they don't publicize that guidance any more because of it's vagueness, but it seems to be what the officials go by.

    In the Bryant case, I don't see a completed football move before contacting the ground. I fail to see a difference between this call and the controversial Megatron no-catch call from 2010.

    Then we have the Aikman commentary on the Williams no-INT reversal. He said that it was hard to tell if he had full possession before the tip of the ball hit the ground. That's not an atypical comment. That doesn't matter...the player must have possession to the ground.

    Nobody seems to clearly understands this rule. They should change it to something that makes sense intuitively and can be more clearly understood, applied and reviewable: two feet down with possession anywhere in the field of play is a catch. Whatever happens after than does not affect whether the ball was caught.
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2013
    • Informative Informative x 2
  14. AmishMafia
    Offline

    AmishMafia There's cheese under that hat

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,189
    Location:
    PENDING
    Ratings:
    +1,509 / 52 / -4
    Every team every game thinks they get the short end of the officiating. I am no exception. It seems there were a quite a few holding calls that could have been made on Dallas that weren't. Also saw a few PI calls that could have been made - grabbing a Packer jersey and turning his body. The pass was too this player - so you know the officials have to be looking there.

    And yet Aikmen made comments last week that Packer WRs get away with a lot of pick plays.
  15. AmishMafia
    Offline

    AmishMafia There's cheese under that hat

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,189
    Location:
    PENDING
    Ratings:
    +1,509 / 52 / -4
    I think they are discussing the 'non interception' play. Packer 'caught' the ball but as he tucked it in, the nose touched the ground. The question is, did he have control when the ball touched the ground. Packers challenged the 'no catch' ruling and was not overturned in the Packer favor.
  16. JBlood
    Offline

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,112
    Ratings:
    +692 / 16 / -0
    The refs didn't cause the Packers' failure to show up in the first half, did they? We're lucky to win the game because of the stupidity of the Cowboys and Romo not to run the ball at the tail end of the 4th when they had the lead. I can't remember being as upset as in the first 1/2. Not since Thanksgiving, anyway. I hope the tears that MM said he had trouble holding back were tears of anger.
  17. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,308 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    They're complaining about both calls in this thread. And the final result was correct in both cases.
  18. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,722
    Ratings:
    +1,874 / 48 / -17
    I saw a couple of blatant holds on Daniels. Holding probably occurs on almost every play and it’s hard for the officials to see but what bothered me about those blatant holds was they were in plain view as Daniels had broken through the line and was pursuing the QB while a Cowboy was holding him.

    I disagree with some on the call that Tramon almost intercepted. IMO replays showed it did move as it was touching the ground. I think of this rule as ‘did the ground help the player gain possession’. If part of the ball touches the ground but the ball doesn’t move in the player’s hands, the answer is no. I saw the ball move to help Tramon gain possession of it but it was a close call. Yes, sometimes that isn’t overturned but I’m not going to complain because IMO the right call was incomplete pass. And because of all the cameras at the “game of the week” there was a great shot of it. LTF’s post shows a snapshot of the replay which shows the ball moving.

    The non-call I really could not and still cannot understand is the INT that ended the game:
    That’s exactly right. That official was in the perfect spot to see that catch. If he were toward the middle of the field, Tramon’s body may have blocked him from seeing it. But he was on the sideline and he was in the perfect spot to see that the ball never came close to touching the turf.


    I like the college review better. IMO there’s no reason to have an official on the field look at it when the one in the booth can review it faster and should have a better view of the monitor.
  19. DevilDon
    Offline

    DevilDon Inclement Weather Fan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,391
    Ratings:
    +445 / 15 / -5
    Just going to throw my personal opinion on the officiating: I saw bad calls go both ways.
    I believed and still believed that Tramon's first interception was controlled but bounced off the field. Should not have been overturned since there wasn't evidence to reverse it. The most blatant calls were Neal for encroachment when the OT clearly moved and Tramon's 2nd interception when he wasn't ever within 3 inches of the ground.
    I hate using officiating as a crutch but the Packers won so I feel okay complaining. Some of those calls were egregious.
  20. PackwillBEback
    Offline

    PackwillBEback Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Messages:
    401
    Ratings:
    +31 / 1 / -0
    I'm not a Packers fan for defending officials calls or against their harassment. It wasn't the best officiating, but it wasn't that bad. One can argue that their should have been a DPI or D-Holding call on the very same overturn on replay. Two wrongs don't make a right in officiating, but to say they tried to give the Cowboys the game is awful. You are accusing the officials of cheating, and having no integrity. That's unacceptable to me doing that without evidence.

    Honestly the worst call of the game was that on the very next play, the Encroachment call. RT flinched. That is an automatic all....those are ones officials should never miss because you prepare yourself for those plays, and unlike any other play...Presnap/Snap plays are ones you see more than any other play because the teams line up and the ball is snapped EVERY TIME.
  21. GoPGo
    Offline

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +454 / 77 / -13
    Packer Fan Since:
    1972
    If the guy who made the horrendous INT call at the end of the game was the field judge then the line judge screwed up that false start. If it was the side judge then it was the head linesman that screwed it up. It was the line official on the same side of the field.
  22. GoPGo
    Offline

    GoPGo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    980
    Ratings:
    +454 / 77 / -13
    Packer Fan Since:
    1972
    It was bad. They basically tackled him from behind on one play.

    One I almost forgot. On the punt where we were called for fair catch interference, someone clearly shoved Bush with two hands right on the numbers on the back of his jersey. How much more obvious does that get?

    Deion said it was an INT, so you're probably right.

    That official should be investigated ala Tim Donaghy. I bet 90% of high school officials would have gotten that one right. You can see by the replay that the ball probably never got closer than 6" from the ground. Given the clear view he had, there should be a big red flag on that guy's head. Something about that particular call reeks of the guy having some money on the game or something.

    You can thank Ed Hoculi's ego for that one. He's the main one who threw a hissy fit about being overturned by someone upstairs when they brought replay back.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  23. adambr2
    Offline

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,168
    Ratings:
    +757 / 15 / -3
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    For what it's worth, for all those who are saying it was obviously incomplete, Mike McCarthy said yesterday that he is absolutely sure that Williams had control of the ball and that it should have stood after replay. This is from a guy who almost always holds his tongue on the officiating.
  24. AmishMafia
    Offline

    AmishMafia There's cheese under that hat

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,189
    Location:
    PENDING
    Ratings:
    +1,509 / 52 / -4
    The reasoning at the time is they did not want the decisions being made by an unseen person. They wanted to keep the decisions in the hands of the guys on the field to provide a hands-on and seamless responsibility/control of the game. Well, who cares? I don't know if I heard any fan who feels that way.

    Personally, I would have the master ref in the booth. I would even have them calling down on every call they felt a need to interject on. I would allow instant communication to all the refs on the field, 'Steve, spot the ball 2 feet further, his knee didn't touch" - "Hey Ed, watch #22 - he keeps bumping the WRs downfield."

    I like that the NFL will start a master ref center that can provide input at any time for any game. The original system was established, obviously they did not have the technology. Why not do it now? It can only make things more fair.
    • Like Like x 2
  25. El Guapo
    Offline

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,880
    Location:
    Land 'O Lakes
    Ratings:
    +1,041 / 47 / -2
    Packer Fan Since:
    1976
    This one got glossed over by everyone, but I believe it was Brad Jones dry humping Witten from the moment he broke in his route until the ball bounced off Wittens hand/arm and to Tramon Williams. The refs should have called pass interference which would have nullified any potential interception.

    Additionally, the ball moved slightly when the nose hit the ground. That's an incomplete catch per the rules, whether he is "adjusting" his grip or other.

    There was a second shooter on the grassy knoll.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1

Share This Page